Thanks all for the replies. I get it now -- ebay. Technically I gather the car is worth $30,000 retail minus the opportunity costs of your time in parting it out. But gosh, it sure is nice to operate in a world where your rights are respected.
I keep waiting for all the "true" libertarians and "true" conservatives to come out on the side of individual rights -- my mistake I guess.
For example, it's well-known that a car that costs $15,000 has got $30,000 worth of parts in it.
Huh? How can that be? Can you cite some sources? I have to assume a $15,000 car has less than $15,000 worth of labor, parts, and marketing costs in it.
The main directory at Los Alamos National Laboratory is (well, look it up, let's not/. them) but it is in the 505 area code.
I called. I asked for Angela Taylor's direct number. They have never heard of Angela Taylor. I asked if she might be at another facility. They said that if she was, she would be listed in their directory.
Angela, you should call human resources. Perhaps you've been riffed and you haven't been told yet.
This computer system, including all related equipment, networks and network devices (specifically including Internet access), are provided only for authorized U.S. Government use. DoD computer systems may be monitored for all lawful purposes, including to ensure that their use is authorized, for management of the system, to facilitate protection against unauthorized access, and to verify security procedures, survivability and operational security. Monitoring includes active attacks by authorized DoD entities to test or verify the security of this system. During monitoring, information may be examined, recorded, copied and used for authorized purposes. All information, including personal information, placed on or sent over this system may be monitored. Use of this DoD computer system, authorized or unauthorized, constitutes consent to monitoring of this system. Unauthorized use may subject you to criminal prosecution. Evidence of unauthorized use collected during monitoring may be used for administrative, criminal or adverse action. Use of this system constitutes consent to monitoring for these purposes.
Unauthorized attempts to upload or change information, prevent or limit access, or otherwise violate the intended purpose of this web site are strictly prohibited and may be punishable under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986.
This notice is embedded into X-45 and all UCAV ROMs. All X-45s are distributed with three platoons of lawyers. This and the DMCA should do.
Why do I think you're trolling? Cause your post was so mean spirited. Maybe it just had too much attitude in it.
Friedman has never spoken ill of the net, just because it's the net. It's not his domain. He has never said the hate is due to the internet. You're putting words in his mouth. My read is that he loves the ideal of the net. He wants to encourage education, knowledge, and communication. But he is pointing out that the net is just technology, you can't solve all political/social problems with technology, and sometimes a piece of technology comes with its own problems.
All he did, as someone here has already pointed out, is make the exact same point as Douglas Adams made 20 years back.
Well they weigh several tons. One article said they would leave a crater. My body typically reacts violently when craters appear in it. (And that hasn't regularly occurred for 15 years now...)
Here's a recent speech (real player) by Designer William McDonough. Very interesting how he moved to sustainable architectures and sustainable ecosystems. It wasn't his first inclination, but fear of a negligence lawsuit moved him in that direction.
Sustainable technology sounds like pie in the sky, but he has really focused on using things that work, and he understands the economic realities.
He does think that we have the wrong metric of prosperity.
His speech starts at 3:56, and listen especially to 4:45 into the speech. 5:45 talks right to your point about the lunacy of using technologies that will require 100,000 of cleanup.
And I challenge anyone to listen to the first 2 1/2 minutes and be able to turn the rest of his speech off.
Also contains interesting quotes from/.'s favorite president, Thomas Jefferson.
Screw Bull, there were many other ways for him to keep his research and projects alive than by whoring himself to Hussein.
His lack of morals, judgment, his illegal selling of arms to South Africa, his building of a delivery mechanism (artillery pieces, supergun, improved scuds) for weapons of mass destruction for Hussein,.... This guy was begging to be assasinated, and I am glad that someone tossed him the alms he was asking for.
And consider that we are seeing this in hindsight, in which he successfully installed the mod and eluded detection. CalTrans seems to approve.
Imagine if he had been caught, say 3/4's the way through. Would the the highway patrol have recognized his excellent implementation and allowed him to proceed? Would CalTrans still give him a grudging if reluctant approval? Or would they have trashed his materials and thrown him in jail or fined him?
It's not sufficient for members of society to have a more constructive attitude, it's also necessary to have institutions that can appreciate that attitude, and even have a sense of humor.
I think that's part of the statement of this hack.
Since I can't contribute (except for bug reports) to Mozilla, I dislike appearing critical, but I wish it were a bit more obvious and configurable what is happening with these Advanced Scripting options. (Or if I could configure them on a site by site basis.)
Yes, I am a TV Junkie. I find tvguide.com invaluable, but tvguide.com uses popups to show a closer look of each show: closer = window.open("", "CloserLook", opts); closer.focus();
On Mozilla 0.9.9 the only thing I allow JavaScript to do is to "Open a link in a new Window". This lets me use TV Guide, and keeps almost all other popups away. On Mozilla 1.0RC1, I have to enable "Open unrequested windows". Yikes, if I want my TV Guide popups, I also get all the other pop ups in the world.
So I am still not sure what I need to be doing to get TV Guide to work once more while keeping the junk popups away
I use Mozilla and have it configured through the Advanced preferences not to pop things up. How do I block OnClose or other specific elements of JavaScript?
The residents won't benefit from less traffic and smog when all those tourists no longer need to drive, taxi, or bus from casino to casino.
And we all know that none of the maids, dealers, cashiers, plumbers, sysadmins, network engineers, programmers, waiters, entertainers, cooks, shopkeepers, bookkeepers, bookies, ticket takers, ushers, security guards, hairdressers, bankers, rental car agents, travel agents, or whomever that work in the casinos, restaurants, shops, stores, banks, or any of the businesses near the monorail are going to be using the monorail.
This is the largest of three monorails they are building (although they say 4 miles, not 8). What's cool is that two of the three are for systems to get around downtown, not just for a system to get you to the airport parking lot.
Unfortunately, the careers page doesn't reveal any openings. Sigh, this is the sort of socially responsible project that so many aerospace companies were to turn to after the cold war ended.
Free Solar Energy or Oil for Unocal and Texaco?
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2
Oh gosh no. It makes perfect sense. We all know that the war against Afghanistan is to provide American Oil Companies with a pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan". The photo is just one reporter behind enemy lines at Disney trying to get the truth out.
I don't mind bias. Everyone has their bias. Not everyone will admit their biases. It's better to read knowing the author's bias than to read a piece without knowing the author's bias.
Even folks that strive for objectivity are still biased. Much of the time, when you see a "pro" statement balanced by the "anti" statement, that's not being objective and it's not being neutral, that's sloppy reporting.
And that's the lesson of Heisenberg, Hunter S. Thompson, Global Warming and the whole post modern movement.
For many many years, to commercialize a piece of technology, NASA (and the rest of the Feds) would license (sell) the rights to that technology to companies. This is a great revenue stream.
When the Government creates a piece of software they hold the copyright to, they should both GPL it, and then turn around and sell it to Microsoft/Oracle/Genentech/Boeing with a proprietary compatible license.
For lots of dough.
Good for researchers, good for corporations, and triple plus good for taxpayers.
So why was the parent of this comment modded as flamebait? It is a completely verifiable anecdote involving an occasion when the govt, industry, IP as in intellectual property, and taxpayer funds collided.
So tell me how that was flamebait so I can better post in the future.
I won't disagree with you entirely, but granting a GPL license may actually help promote commerce in certain circumstances.
In 1989 I worked for Inference. Inference sold a well regarded LISP based expert system shell (ART). It cost a lot of money and ran on very expensive workstations. NASA came along and cloned it with a C application (CLIPS) that was released into the public domain (if I recall correctly.). In many ways, CLIPS was the death of ART, and various competitors came along that incorporated CLIPS and competed in sales against ART. So in similar ways, NASA and taxpayer dollars killed off the main product of the privately held company that developed the initial technology.
Was it "fair" for NASA to clone ART in that manner? I dunno. It wasn't kind to our paychecks, but that may be irrelevant.
If CLIPS has been released with a GPL, I think both taxpayer and Inference's private investors would have been served. Inference would not have to worry about competitors being given taxpayer software that allowed them to so quickly catch up with our efforts, and the taxpayers would have been able to benefit by having the code released in a way that brought the high tech ART into schools, research institutes, and to anyone willing to comply with the GPL.
It's late my time, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.
My point is that they have launched seven TDRS satellites in the past, and so for safety's sake each of those launches, must have had various mission abort strategies that entail a landing with a TDRS on board. Emergency landings at KSC, at Easter Island, Edwards, White Sands, etc. And I bet there are abort to orbit scenarios in which they still can't ditch their payload and so have to land with it eventually.
So yeah, I am betting that if they can launch with one then they can configure a mission in which they can land with one. Land that is, assuming there are no dangerous fuel leaks.
Yes, and depending on which website you visit, the shuttle has launched up to seven of these tdrs satellites (but I don't know if any were of the same weight as this one). If it can safely launch one, then I have to assume that (ignoring fuel leaks) it can land with one.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks all for the replies. I get it now -- ebay. Technically I gather the car is worth $30,000 retail minus the opportunity costs of your time in parting it out. But gosh, it sure is nice to operate in a world where your rights are respected.
I keep waiting for all the "true" libertarians and "true" conservatives to come out on the side of individual rights -- my mistake I guess.
Huh? How can that be? Can you cite some sources? I have to assume a $15,000 car has less than $15,000 worth of labor, parts, and marketing costs in it.
The main directory at Los Alamos National Laboratory is (well, look it up, let's not /. them) but it is in the 505 area code.
I called. I asked for Angela Taylor's direct number. They have never heard of Angela Taylor. I asked if she might be at another facility. They said that if she was, she would be listed in their directory.
Angela, you should call human resources. Perhaps you've been riffed and you haven't been told yet.
Why do I think you're trolling? Cause your post was so mean spirited. Maybe it just had too much attitude in it.
Friedman has never spoken ill of the net, just because it's the net. It's not his domain. He has never said the hate is due to the internet. You're putting words in his mouth. My read is that he loves the ideal of the net. He wants to encourage education, knowledge, and communication. But he is pointing out that the net is just technology, you can't solve all political/social problems with technology, and sometimes a piece of technology comes with its own problems.
All he did, as someone here has already pointed out, is make the exact same point as Douglas Adams made 20 years back.
I'll watch this post throughout the day. It's either a troll, or just envy, and it will be interesting to see at what point the moderators catch on.
Will it still be modded a 5 by 5:00? I bet not.
Well they weigh several tons. One article said they would leave a crater. My body typically reacts violently when craters appear in it. (And that hasn't regularly occurred for 15 years now...)
Sustainable technology sounds like pie in the sky, but he has really focused on using things that work, and he understands the economic realities.
He does think that we have the wrong metric of prosperity.
His speech starts at 3:56, and listen especially to 4:45 into the speech. 5:45 talks right to your point about the lunacy of using technologies that will require 100,000 of cleanup.
And I challenge anyone to listen to the first 2 1/2 minutes and be able to turn the rest of his speech off.
Also contains interesting quotes from /.'s favorite president, Thomas Jefferson.
Screw Bull, there were many other ways for him to keep his research and projects alive than by whoring himself to Hussein.
.... This guy was begging to be assasinated, and I am glad that someone tossed him the alms he was asking for.
His lack of morals, judgment, his illegal selling of arms to South Africa, his building of a delivery mechanism (artillery pieces, supergun, improved scuds) for weapons of mass destruction for Hussein,
And consider that we are seeing this in hindsight, in which he successfully installed the mod and eluded detection. CalTrans seems to approve.
Imagine if he had been caught, say 3/4's the way through. Would the the highway patrol have recognized his excellent implementation and allowed him to proceed? Would CalTrans still give him a grudging if reluctant approval? Or would they have trashed his materials and thrown him in jail or fined him?
It's not sufficient for members of society to have a more constructive attitude, it's also necessary to have institutions that can appreciate that attitude, and even have a sense of humor.
I think that's part of the statement of this hack.
Home pedal power via bicycle generators was written of in Harry Harrison's Make Room, Make Room (aka Soylent Green). Edward G. Robinson pedaled away throughout the movie" to generate the home power.
Yes, I am a TV Junkie. I find tvguide.com invaluable, but tvguide.com uses popups to show a closer look of each show:
closer = window.open("", "CloserLook", opts);
closer.focus();
On Mozilla 0.9.9 the only thing I allow JavaScript to do is to "Open a link in a new Window". This lets me use TV Guide, and keeps almost all other popups away. On Mozilla 1.0RC1, I have to enable "Open unrequested windows". Yikes, if I want my TV Guide popups, I also get all the other pop ups in the world.
So I am still not sure what I need to be doing to get TV Guide to work once more while keeping the junk popups away
I use Mozilla and have it configured through the Advanced preferences not to pop things up. How do I block OnClose or other specific elements of JavaScript?
Oh indeedily doo, it's for the tourists.
The residents won't benefit from less traffic and smog when all those tourists no longer need to drive, taxi, or bus from casino to casino.
And we all know that none of the maids, dealers, cashiers, plumbers, sysadmins, network engineers, programmers, waiters, entertainers, cooks, shopkeepers, bookkeepers, bookies, ticket takers, ushers, security guards, hairdressers, bankers, rental car agents, travel agents, or whomever that work in the casinos, restaurants, shops, stores, banks, or any of the businesses near the monorail are going to be using the monorail.
Here's a page (framed, mozilla unfriendly, slow jsp)
from the principal contractor, Bombardier.
This is the largest of three monorails they are building (although they say 4 miles, not 8). What's cool is that two of the three are for systems to get around downtown, not just for a system to get you to the airport parking lot.
Unfortunately, the careers page doesn't reveal any openings. Sigh, this is the sort of socially responsible project that so many aerospace companies were to turn to after the cold war ended.
Oh gosh no. It makes perfect sense. We all know that the war against Afghanistan is to provide American Oil Companies with a pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan". The photo is just one reporter behind enemy lines at Disney trying to get the truth out.
Hope all you west coast /. subscribers had a good evening.
I don't mind bias. Everyone has their bias. Not everyone will admit their biases. It's better to read knowing the author's bias than to read a piece without knowing the author's bias.
Even folks that strive for objectivity are still biased. Much of the time, when you see a "pro" statement balanced by the "anti" statement, that's not being objective and it's not being neutral, that's sloppy reporting.
And that's the lesson of Heisenberg, Hunter S. Thompson, Global Warming and the whole post modern movement.
Welcome to 2002.
For many many years, to commercialize a piece of technology, NASA (and the rest of the Feds) would license (sell) the rights to that technology to companies. This is a great revenue stream.
When the Government creates a piece of software they hold the copyright to, they should both GPL it, and then turn around and sell it to Microsoft/Oracle/Genentech/Boeing with a proprietary compatible license.
For lots of dough.
Good for researchers, good for corporations, and triple plus good for taxpayers.
The Fresh Air interview on April 11 with Journalist Jeffrey Rosen is worth a listen.
So why was the parent of this comment modded as flamebait? It is a completely verifiable anecdote involving an occasion when the govt, industry, IP as in intellectual property, and taxpayer funds collided.
So tell me how that was flamebait so I can better post in the future.
I won't disagree with you entirely, but granting a GPL license may actually help promote commerce in certain circumstances.
In 1989 I worked for Inference. Inference sold a well regarded LISP based expert system shell (ART). It cost a lot of money and ran on very expensive workstations. NASA came along and cloned it with a C application (CLIPS) that was released into the public domain (if I recall correctly.). In many ways, CLIPS was the death of ART, and various competitors came along that incorporated CLIPS and competed in sales against ART. So in similar ways, NASA and taxpayer dollars killed off the main product of the privately held company that developed the initial technology.
Was it "fair" for NASA to clone ART in that manner? I dunno. It wasn't kind to our paychecks, but that may be irrelevant.
If CLIPS has been released with a GPL, I think both taxpayer and Inference's private investors would have been served. Inference would not have to worry about competitors being given taxpayer software that allowed them to so quickly catch up with our efforts, and the taxpayers would have been able to benefit by having the code released in a way that brought the high tech ART into schools, research institutes, and to anyone willing to comply with the GPL.
We apologise for the fault in the thanks loop. Those responsible have been sacked.
Thank you, møøse bites Kan be pretty nasti...
We apologise again for the fault in these acknowledgements. Those responsible for sacking the people who have just been sacked have been sacked.
It's late my time, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.
My point is that they have launched seven TDRS satellites in the past, and so for safety's sake each of those launches, must have had various mission abort strategies that entail a landing with a TDRS on board. Emergency landings at KSC, at Easter Island, Edwards, White Sands, etc. And I bet there are abort to orbit scenarios in which they still can't ditch their payload and so have to land with it eventually.
So yeah, I am betting that if they can launch with one then they can configure a mission in which they can land with one. Land that is, assuming there are no dangerous fuel leaks.
Yes, and depending on which web site you visit, the shuttle has launched up to seven of these tdrs satellites (but I don't know if any were of the same weight as this one). If it can safely launch one, then I have to assume that (ignoring fuel leaks) it can land with one.