It is almost sad to see the professional journalism dying - or at least having the traditional roles it took in society go the way of the dinosaurs. 15 years from now, the news market will be a much different place, and I hope we figure out a way to have integrity and accountability in the new model. I do find it odd though that some industries who fail to adapt get government funds while others, who could arguably provide a public service, are left out to dry.
Since the advent of the internet and the laws governing it and how it affects copyright, the government has passed laws which turn the judicial system into an arm of major corporations.
Copyright needs to be protected - as a photographer I know this well. However, the rights of the populous must also be protected: isn't that ostensibly the role of government?
This is interesting. but not wholly surprising. Bacteria exist in basically every part of the world, including areas even a "reasonable" person might find incredible. NASA clean rooms have turned up a lot of exotic, unique bacteria which defy common sense (like bacteria who live solely on aluminum IIRC). So, UV resistant bacteria in the stratosphere is nifty in that they confirmed it exists, but isn't revolutionary.
I'm glad the EFF is doing this. I haven't submitted any FOIA requests, but having heard tales of the bureaucratic mess it involves, I am not particularly excited to as well. The fact that the EFF is making this information which now has freedom more accessible can only be applauded.
This is yet another example of the jobs which we rely on everyday but don't give much thought to. Also, this make me really think there is a great job out there to fit everyone. (When the economy improves that is.)
Corporations controlling insects and using them for vaccine delivery could also have the same legal implications of genetically engineered crops.
I can just see something reminiscent of Monsanto vs. Schmeiser happening now: "Mosquitos on your property are breeding with out vaccine-carrying mosquitos. This violates our intellectual property. Give us money!"
There is just so much that could go wrong with this scenario.
But when a fleet of equipment/vehicles/whathaveyou stays in service for decades, it is usually getting repairs, maintenance, and upgrades to help it stay useful. I know the shuttles are maintained, but the cost of this may be starting to get too high.
Considering that there have only been 5 shuttles made for spaceflight and 2 of them have been destroyed, I think age is a factor that needs to be considered, even if the two causes for shuttle disasters were not directly related to age.
With all technology comes the responsibility to use it wisely. I can see the point in allowing service via Facebook as an option of last resort - as mostly a symbolic gesture when trying to get in touch with someone particularly elusive. As a first resort? No way.
"We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works." -- Douglas Adams
As more people and companies adopt FOSS, more people will get experience using and administering such systems. Some will excel, some won't. I'm sure there are inept sysadmins in charge of *nix systems now and there will always continue to be.
If Linux does see more widespread adoption, more software developers will support it with proprietary software that is only on Windows/Mac/both now. Sure, we'll lose some of the advantages of FOSS, but Linux will be more usable. More adoption, whatever the reason, will spur more development for both proprietary systems and FOSS; at this point, I don't think anybody will argue against innovation or jobs.
You are remembering correctly: it didn't, but it did do atmospheric flights for testing purposes. Also, at one point they were considering outfitting it for space flight after the loss of the Challenger but chose to build Endeavour from leftover parts instead due to cost. With the possibility it had (or has) of being outfitted for space, I think it warrants inclusion when talking about the family of space shuttles for statistical purposes in some categories.
Getting old? Shuttles are old - the Discovery alone is 25 years old and the Enterprise first flew in 1977. Hopefully the next generation of spacecraft will be able to last as long (or longer) in a very reliable fashion.
I think that most people would agree with you right now considering the economy. The only reason this is news-worthy at all is that Microsoft is the primary beneficiary and the mention of their name alone seems to make everything controversial.
When I first read the title, it made it seem like the UK was going to have ISPs just block all P2P traffic, in my mind a possibility considering the UK's position on internet snooping and censorship combined with the fact that smaller networks (like universities) routinely block all P2P traffic, legal or otherwise.
I don't agree with the punishments being handed out by the ISPs, but what if the restriction was part of a court-imposed penalty? Perhaps lawyers could argue to get the P2P blocking imposed in exchange for dropping some stiff financial penalties? I'm not a lawyer, and I'm sure those filing the suits would want the P2P blocking on top of everything else, but there could be a potential less-negative thing out of this if it is used instead of other penalties.
I don't agree with internet restriction, especially with how the UK is handling it, but if someone IS violating copyright using P2P and it is shown to be such in court, I don't see a problem with this.
It seems from reading at least some of the above comments that people almost view Google as a public service and that it is wrong for them to restrict the people from utilizing all of their features. However, Google is a private company and can do as they will.
Isn't it entirely possible that this huge influx of users was just costing them too much money on a fringe service that they didn't really care that much about anyway? If that is the case, I wouldn't blame them for removing it.
Back in July '08 the New York Times ran an article on the possibilities of science being "Titled Nined" because congress and women's groups seemed to like the idea (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/science/15tier.html).
What studies have found though is that even among mathematically inclined girls at younger ages, they still tend to prefer the "softer" sciences or other fields. I think that this study shows the natural extension of that.
In the end, the NYTimes article states that, in the end, the mathematically inclined girls they followed and surveyed as career-adults were just as content with their careers and did not have a pay difference from men.
Whatever the end result is on the authenticity of either of these portraits, it seems every portrait shares the basic physical traits that we collectively think of as "Shakespeare". Moreover, from what I can tell they seem to be in line with his bust in Holy Trinity Church which was erected not terribly long after his death. It seems to me that if any of these portraits/busts/etc. had been far from the mark, there would have been some sort of protest from the people who knew him when he was alive (or commissioned the work).
In the end, we will never know exactly what he looks like, but we do have a pretty good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
It is almost sad to see the professional journalism dying - or at least having the traditional roles it took in society go the way of the dinosaurs. 15 years from now, the news market will be a much different place, and I hope we figure out a way to have integrity and accountability in the new model. I do find it odd though that some industries who fail to adapt get government funds while others, who could arguably provide a public service, are left out to dry.
This new, unexpected knowledge astounds me. I'm so glad they fund studies like this and the ones to determine why prisoners attempt to escape prison.
Since the advent of the internet and the laws governing it and how it affects copyright, the government has passed laws which turn the judicial system into an arm of major corporations.
Copyright needs to be protected - as a photographer I know this well. However, the rights of the populous must also be protected: isn't that ostensibly the role of government?
This is interesting. but not wholly surprising. Bacteria exist in basically every part of the world, including areas even a "reasonable" person might find incredible. NASA clean rooms have turned up a lot of exotic, unique bacteria which defy common sense (like bacteria who live solely on aluminum IIRC). So, UV resistant bacteria in the stratosphere is nifty in that they confirmed it exists, but isn't revolutionary.
I'm glad the EFF is doing this. I haven't submitted any FOIA requests, but having heard tales of the bureaucratic mess it involves, I am not particularly excited to as well. The fact that the EFF is making this information which now has freedom more accessible can only be applauded.
This is yet another example of the jobs which we rely on everyday but don't give much thought to. Also, this make me really think there is a great job out there to fit everyone. (When the economy improves that is.)
Corporations controlling insects and using them for vaccine delivery could also have the same legal implications of genetically engineered crops.
I can just see something reminiscent of Monsanto vs. Schmeiser happening now: "Mosquitos on your property are breeding with out vaccine-carrying mosquitos. This violates our intellectual property. Give us money!"
There is just so much that could go wrong with this scenario.
But when a fleet of equipment/vehicles/whathaveyou stays in service for decades, it is usually getting repairs, maintenance, and upgrades to help it stay useful. I know the shuttles are maintained, but the cost of this may be starting to get too high.
Considering that there have only been 5 shuttles made for spaceflight and 2 of them have been destroyed, I think age is a factor that needs to be considered, even if the two causes for shuttle disasters were not directly related to age.
With all technology comes the responsibility to use it wisely. I can see the point in allowing service via Facebook as an option of last resort - as mostly a symbolic gesture when trying to get in touch with someone particularly elusive. As a first resort? No way.
"We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that works." -- Douglas Adams
As more people and companies adopt FOSS, more people will get experience using and administering such systems. Some will excel, some won't. I'm sure there are inept sysadmins in charge of *nix systems now and there will always continue to be.
If Linux does see more widespread adoption, more software developers will support it with proprietary software that is only on Windows/Mac/both now. Sure, we'll lose some of the advantages of FOSS, but Linux will be more usable. More adoption, whatever the reason, will spur more development for both proprietary systems and FOSS; at this point, I don't think anybody will argue against innovation or jobs.
You are remembering correctly: it didn't, but it did do atmospheric flights for testing purposes. Also, at one point they were considering outfitting it for space flight after the loss of the Challenger but chose to build Endeavour from leftover parts instead due to cost. With the possibility it had (or has) of being outfitted for space, I think it warrants inclusion when talking about the family of space shuttles for statistical purposes in some categories.
Getting old? Shuttles are old - the Discovery alone is 25 years old and the Enterprise first flew in 1977. Hopefully the next generation of spacecraft will be able to last as long (or longer) in a very reliable fashion.
I think that most people would agree with you right now considering the economy. The only reason this is news-worthy at all is that Microsoft is the primary beneficiary and the mention of their name alone seems to make everything controversial.
When I first read the title, it made it seem like the UK was going to have ISPs just block all P2P traffic, in my mind a possibility considering the UK's position on internet snooping and censorship combined with the fact that smaller networks (like universities) routinely block all P2P traffic, legal or otherwise.
I don't agree with the punishments being handed out by the ISPs, but what if the restriction was part of a court-imposed penalty? Perhaps lawyers could argue to get the P2P blocking imposed in exchange for dropping some stiff financial penalties? I'm not a lawyer, and I'm sure those filing the suits would want the P2P blocking on top of everything else, but there could be a potential less-negative thing out of this if it is used instead of other penalties. I don't agree with internet restriction, especially with how the UK is handling it, but if someone IS violating copyright using P2P and it is shown to be such in court, I don't see a problem with this.
It seems from reading at least some of the above comments that people almost view Google as a public service and that it is wrong for them to restrict the people from utilizing all of their features. However, Google is a private company and can do as they will.
Isn't it entirely possible that this huge influx of users was just costing them too much money on a fringe service that they didn't really care that much about anyway? If that is the case, I wouldn't blame them for removing it.
Back in July '08 the New York Times ran an article on the possibilities of science being "Titled Nined" because congress and women's groups seemed to like the idea (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/15/science/15tier.html).
What studies have found though is that even among mathematically inclined girls at younger ages, they still tend to prefer the "softer" sciences or other fields. I think that this study shows the natural extension of that.
In the end, the NYTimes article states that, in the end, the mathematically inclined girls they followed and surveyed as career-adults were just as content with their careers and did not have a pay difference from men.
Whatever the end result is on the authenticity of either of these portraits, it seems every portrait shares the basic physical traits that we collectively think of as "Shakespeare". Moreover, from what I can tell they seem to be in line with his bust in Holy Trinity Church which was erected not terribly long after his death. It seems to me that if any of these portraits/busts/etc. had been far from the mark, there would have been some sort of protest from the people who knew him when he was alive (or commissioned the work). In the end, we will never know exactly what he looks like, but we do have a pretty good idea.