Someone has probably already crafted a similar version in a distant private or military research lab anyway. Its better that it got out and fixes are prepared.
Actually various independently crafted versions may be different enough that a "cure" for one is ineffective against another.
Filesharing is not synonymous with copyright infringement. For example a host could put up torrents of Linux ISOs. So advertising support for file sharing and kicking off folks engaged in copyright violations are not mutually exclusive. I am not saying this ISP is doing so in the best possible manner, just that advertising filesharing does not imply they are going to look the other way regarding copyright violations.
Isn't the whole point of academic research the free and open sharing of knowledge? But universities obtain patents then sell exclusive licenses to them, despite the research generally being done at taxpayer expense.
The licensing can be done is a way that favors the taxpayers as well. For example the University of California is quite aggressive about patenting discoveries and licensing the patents. The terms of the licensing is far more favorable if you are a startup or small rather than a large established corporation, if you are local, etc. I'm not sure but there may also be consideration for companies that support research at the university or employ its students.
Half the fees collected go to the UC system in general and one quarter to the department that made the discovery. The remaining quarter to the researchers who made the discovery.
The poles may be where water is found now, however there are signs of running water elsewhere on Mars. So the search for fossilized remains is not limited to the poles. I think the expectations for finding life today is pretty low. What is more plausible is that life existed in a distant era when water more distributed across the surface and Mars had more of an atmosphere. So landing near appropriately aged rocks may be more useful, or maybe where the geography suggests that water had once flowed.
I don't believe they are going to find signs of life on the surface, past or present. Millions of years of sand storms would have erased any surface signs. They need to look for caves or drill or just go to the polar ice cap and be done with it.
Not all rock capable of bearing fossils would have been exposed during that entire timeframe. I believe the probe contains tools to "dig" a little into rocks to get past outer layers affect by erosion and surface chemistry. It seems to be a matter of finding just the right rock, not unlike hear on earth.
Questions of the nature "is nuclear power safe?" seem more political than scientific. Shouldn't the question really be "is this nuclear reactor design (including its associated fueling, storage and waste handling) safe?
No, that's only a part of the question. At least as important is the question: "Do we trust the power companies to responsibly run a nuclear plant without compromising safety for cutting costs?"
Of course not. That's why the industry is heavily regulated and monitored. And in the case of the US gov't nuclear power generation may actually be one of those instances where the gov't knows what it is doing. The US Navy may have more experience than anyone else out there.
They could send one of these to Titan to discover once and for all if that moon could ever be settled
but they wont because some scifi of the 1940-60's has beaten it into everyone's skull that Mars is the only place to go in the universe, meanwhile we cant spend a dime on titan, that would just be stupid
Yep, there must be some conspiracy behind electing to send our "first" probes to a closer, more habitable and larger destination.:-)
You are wrong on two counts:
Calcium is not created somehow by biological processes, at best it would be extracted from the atmosphere. Also carbon is more common, are you sure you don't confuse the two?
The chemical element with the least energy is iron.
Therefore, if everything reached the least energy state due to nuclear fusion and fission, everything would be iron, not calcium, and it would be really really difficult to generate energy from it by fusion or fission.
Isn't iron where the fusion reactions of stars stop and they "explode"?
Questions of the nature "is nuclear power safe?" seem more political than scientific. Shouldn't the question really be "is this nuclear reactor design (including its associated fueling, storage and waste handling) safe?
Lets try to take some of the emotion and politics out of the issue. If someone asked you "are cars safe?", wouldn't you want to know which car? Different car designs offer a wide range of safety. Not just due to cost compromises, size/weight and design goals, but also due to when it was designed. Materials, technology, scientific understanding, computer modeling, etc have greatly improved our capabilities over recent decades. I wouldn't feels safe in any race car from the 1940s driving at 100 mph wearing a leather helmet, however I would feel safe doing so in many higher end passenger cars today. Maybe a recent reactor design is far more safe than say some 1960s soviet design?
Science and engineering are making great advances in solar, wind, tidal, etc. Aren't they also making great advances in the area of nuclear?
"Keep in mind that while a degree demonstrates some level of knowledge in a particular field, it also demonstrates the ability to complete a long, boring and bureaucratic process. There is value in the later."
But anyone is capable of this, seriously.
However some people have a hard time finishing what they start, even very gifted people. The key word in the earlier post is "complete". The college grad demonstrated the ability to finish what they start.
There are a lot of students that go to uni purely for the lifestyle, and to avoid going straight into employment.
Well in that case the grad has demonstrated the ability to find some balance between work and partying to the extent that they can perform to some minimum expected standard on the "work" side of life. That can also be of value to an employer. Its not like people who love to party stop because they get a job, either the high school grad or the college grad.:-)
I actually worked full time whilst doing a second degree...
You are preaching to the choir. Through undergrad and two graduate degrees I worked, and graduated debt free with real world experience (the later also provided a useful filter to evaluate what was being taught in lectures). To be clear I am not advocating requiring a degree, just suggesting that there are rational motivations.
I am just offering an alternative as to how a display can be made to appear blurry, one that has a much more dramatic effect than analog vs digital. A standard VGA resolution coming up blurry is just an example that many people have probably seen. I am not trying to explain the Dell web page.
Maybe Dell is comparing the VGA port of onboard graphics vs. DVI/HDMI of a discrete card. I do notice a difference between VGA and DVI on a 17" monitor.
If the monitor is a flat panel and its native resolution is not VGA, or an exact multiple of VGA, then the image can appear blurry. Every play an old fixed resolution 640x480 game on a modern flat panel?
Of course, it's hard to feel bed for someone who can't get a job based on their BA degree in 'History', or 'art lit'. Seriously, their great programs, but how many time have you seen 'History' major wanted listed on craigslist?
All degree holders are employable, just not necessarily in their fields of study. I once sat in on a presentation named something like careers for history majors. Basically the speaker said that many jobs require a 4-year degree, any degree will do. Typically these are entry level managements jobs.
Keep in mind that while a degree demonstrates some level of knowledge in a particular field, it also demonstrates the ability to complete a long, boring and bureaucratic process. There is value in the later.
This is a tax-supported state school, although probably one of the more expensive ones.
"In 2011-12, public four-year colleges charge, on average, $8,244 in tuition and fees for in-state students. The average surcharge for full-time out-of-state students at these institutions is $12,526. Private nonprofit four-year colleges charge, on average, $28,500 per year in tuition and fees." http://www.collegeboard.com/student/pay/add-it-up/4494.html
I can't find the link right now but when room and board is considered I believe the average cost of a 4-year college or university is $13 per year.
You apparently see government as a destabilizing force in the market, causing uncertainty. I would say that government is actually the key stabilizing force in the market.
That is a very simplistic outlook.
Good governmental policies implemented by good government officials can be stabilizing.
Good or bad governmental policies implemented by bad government officials can be destabilizing.
I am describing a piece of OS vendor bundleware. It's not "just another random app". Of course Apple sets the tone for their platform just like Microsoft does.
And none of that changes the fact that Mac OS X is based upon BSD. The traditional *nix interface (console, X) is a secondary and optional user interface.
If MacOS were really a Unix, then iMovie would not care whether my video came directly from the camera or if it took a trip on another platform first. The fact that MacOS is built on top of a Unix does not make it Unix.
No. You are describing an application program. An application program can behave in any manner that the developer wants regardless of what the tradition of the platform is.
Google's business model is collecting and selling information.
Not true. Google's business model is collecting users and selling some advertising. They do not sell personal information, and there is no way for advertisers to get access to your anonymised profile.
Still not true. Google's business model is collecting users and information about these users, and selling some targeted advertising based upon their user profiles and/or the information (web, email, social network, etc) that they are currently viewing.
Very little *nix software cares if one has a monolithic kernel or not. X11 may not be the native Mac GUI but X11 is fully supported by Apple.
"With its UNIX foundation, OS X can run many UNIX tools and environments, including X11. Available for every Mac, X11 allows you to run applications using the X Window System graphical user interface. It provides a complete X Window System implementation based on open source software and includes a suite of standard X11 display server software, client libraries, developer toolkits, and utilities such as xterm. And X11 applications in OS X offer features such as minimizing windows to the Dock and copying and pasting between X11 and OS X applications." http://www.apple.com/macosx/apps/all.html#x11
AMD is always considered before negotiating prices with Intel. Flirting with AMD before choosing Intel is a pretty common practice, even for those who planned on going with Intel all along.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone has probably already crafted a similar version in a distant private or military research lab anyway. Its better that it got out and fixes are prepared.
Actually various independently crafted versions may be different enough that a "cure" for one is ineffective against another.
So Trademark law isn't designed to take World War I into account? Ya know, it was kind of a big deal.
Neither is patent law. Bayer lost aspirin. The US Army stopped paying royalties to Mauser over the "infringing" M1903 Springfield rifle.
Comments owned by the poster.
The GP referenced the file in its entirety and that is copyright geeknet.
The "but you can use torrent to share Linux ISOs too" argument won't go very far in court.
However when combined with "we disconnected clients identified as copyright violators" it will likely go much farther.
Also, this HTML document is a file and Slashdot is sharing it.
That's OK. The copyright notice at the bottom of this page indicates that slashdot (well, its parent corp) holds the rights. :-)
Filesharing is not synonymous with copyright infringement. For example a host could put up torrents of Linux ISOs. So advertising support for file sharing and kicking off folks engaged in copyright violations are not mutually exclusive. I am not saying this ISP is doing so in the best possible manner, just that advertising filesharing does not imply they are going to look the other way regarding copyright violations.
Isn't the whole point of academic research the free and open sharing of knowledge? But universities obtain patents then sell exclusive licenses to them, despite the research generally being done at taxpayer expense.
The licensing can be done is a way that favors the taxpayers as well. For example the University of California is quite aggressive about patenting discoveries and licensing the patents. The terms of the licensing is far more favorable if you are a startup or small rather than a large established corporation, if you are local, etc. I'm not sure but there may also be consideration for companies that support research at the university or employ its students.
Half the fees collected go to the UC system in general and one quarter to the department that made the discovery. The remaining quarter to the researchers who made the discovery.
The poles may be where water is found now, however there are signs of running water elsewhere on Mars. So the search for fossilized remains is not limited to the poles. I think the expectations for finding life today is pretty low. What is more plausible is that life existed in a distant era when water more distributed across the surface and Mars had more of an atmosphere. So landing near appropriately aged rocks may be more useful, or maybe where the geography suggests that water had once flowed.
I don't believe they are going to find signs of life on the surface, past or present. Millions of years of sand storms would have erased any surface signs. They need to look for caves or drill or just go to the polar ice cap and be done with it.
Not all rock capable of bearing fossils would have been exposed during that entire timeframe. I believe the probe contains tools to "dig" a little into rocks to get past outer layers affect by erosion and surface chemistry. It seems to be a matter of finding just the right rock, not unlike hear on earth.
No, that's only a part of the question. At least as important is the question: "Do we trust the power companies to responsibly run a nuclear plant without compromising safety for cutting costs?"
Of course not. That's why the industry is heavily regulated and monitored. And in the case of the US gov't nuclear power generation may actually be one of those instances where the gov't knows what it is doing. The US Navy may have more experience than anyone else out there.
They could send one of these to Titan to discover once and for all if that moon could ever be settled
but they wont because some scifi of the 1940-60's has beaten it into everyone's skull that Mars is the only place to go in the universe, meanwhile we cant spend a dime on titan, that would just be stupid
Yep, there must be some conspiracy behind electing to send our "first" probes to a closer, more habitable and larger destination. :-)
You are wrong on two counts: Calcium is not created somehow by biological processes, at best it would be extracted from the atmosphere. Also carbon is more common, are you sure you don't confuse the two?
The chemical element with the least energy is iron. Therefore, if everything reached the least energy state due to nuclear fusion and fission, everything would be iron, not calcium, and it would be really really difficult to generate energy from it by fusion or fission.
Isn't iron where the fusion reactions of stars stop and they "explode"?
Questions of the nature "is nuclear power safe?" seem more political than scientific. Shouldn't the question really be "is this nuclear reactor design (including its associated fueling, storage and waste handling) safe?
Lets try to take some of the emotion and politics out of the issue. If someone asked you "are cars safe?", wouldn't you want to know which car? Different car designs offer a wide range of safety. Not just due to cost compromises, size/weight and design goals, but also due to when it was designed. Materials, technology, scientific understanding, computer modeling, etc have greatly improved our capabilities over recent decades. I wouldn't feels safe in any race car from the 1940s driving at 100 mph wearing a leather helmet, however I would feel safe doing so in many higher end passenger cars today. Maybe a recent reactor design is far more safe than say some 1960s soviet design?
Science and engineering are making great advances in solar, wind, tidal, etc. Aren't they also making great advances in the area of nuclear?
"Keep in mind that while a degree demonstrates some level of knowledge in a particular field, it also demonstrates the ability to complete a long, boring and bureaucratic process. There is value in the later."
But anyone is capable of this, seriously.
However some people have a hard time finishing what they start, even very gifted people. The key word in the earlier post is "complete". The college grad demonstrated the ability to finish what they start.
There are a lot of students that go to uni purely for the lifestyle, and to avoid going straight into employment.
Well in that case the grad has demonstrated the ability to find some balance between work and partying to the extent that they can perform to some minimum expected standard on the "work" side of life. That can also be of value to an employer. Its not like people who love to party stop because they get a job, either the high school grad or the college grad. :-)
I actually worked full time whilst doing a second degree ...
You are preaching to the choir. Through undergrad and two graduate degrees I worked, and graduated debt free with real world experience (the later also provided a useful filter to evaluate what was being taught in lectures). To be clear I am not advocating requiring a degree, just suggesting that there are rational motivations.
I am just offering an alternative as to how a display can be made to appear blurry, one that has a much more dramatic effect than analog vs digital. A standard VGA resolution coming up blurry is just an example that many people have probably seen. I am not trying to explain the Dell web page.
Maybe Dell is comparing the VGA port of onboard graphics vs. DVI/HDMI of a discrete card. I do notice a difference between VGA and DVI on a 17" monitor.
If the monitor is a flat panel and its native resolution is not VGA, or an exact multiple of VGA, then the image can appear blurry. Every play an old fixed resolution 640x480 game on a modern flat panel?
Of course, it's hard to feel bed for someone who can't get a job based on their BA degree in 'History', or 'art lit'. Seriously, their great programs, but how many time have you seen 'History' major wanted listed on craigslist?
All degree holders are employable, just not necessarily in their fields of study. I once sat in on a presentation named something like careers for history majors. Basically the speaker said that many jobs require a 4-year degree, any degree will do. Typically these are entry level managements jobs.
Keep in mind that while a degree demonstrates some level of knowledge in a particular field, it also demonstrates the ability to complete a long, boring and bureaucratic process. There is value in the later.
From utexas.edu:
Estimated Total Cost of Undergraduate Education (Fall 2010 - Spring 2011) Texas resident on-campus $23,596 - 24,936 Texas resident off-campus $23,734 - 25,074 Non-resident on-campus $35,776 - 45,960 Non-resident off-campus $35,914 - 46,098
This is a tax-supported state school, although probably one of the more expensive ones.
"In 2011-12, public four-year colleges charge, on average, $8,244 in tuition and fees for in-state students. The average surcharge for full-time out-of-state students at these institutions is $12,526. Private nonprofit four-year colleges charge, on average, $28,500 per year in tuition and fees."
http://www.collegeboard.com/student/pay/add-it-up/4494.html
I can't find the link right now but when room and board is considered I believe the average cost of a 4-year college or university is $13 per year.
You apparently see government as a destabilizing force in the market, causing uncertainty. I would say that government is actually the key stabilizing force in the market.
That is a very simplistic outlook.
Good governmental policies implemented by good government officials can be stabilizing.
Good or bad governmental policies implemented by bad government officials can be destabilizing.
I am describing a piece of OS vendor bundleware. It's not "just another random app". Of course Apple sets the tone for their platform just like Microsoft does.
And none of that changes the fact that Mac OS X is based upon BSD. The traditional *nix interface (console, X) is a secondary and optional user interface.
If MacOS were really a Unix, then iMovie would not care whether my video came directly from the camera or if it took a trip on another platform first. The fact that MacOS is built on top of a Unix does not make it Unix.
No. You are describing an application program. An application program can behave in any manner that the developer wants regardless of what the tradition of the platform is.
Google's business model is collecting and selling information.
Not true. Google's business model is collecting users and selling some advertising. They do not sell personal information, and there is no way for advertisers to get access to your anonymised profile.
Still not true. Google's business model is collecting users and information about these users, and selling some targeted advertising based upon their user profiles and/or the information (web, email, social network, etc) that they are currently viewing.
Very little *nix software cares if one has a monolithic kernel or not. X11 may not be the native Mac GUI but X11 is fully supported by Apple.
"With its UNIX foundation, OS X can run many UNIX tools and environments, including X11. Available for every Mac, X11 allows you to run applications using the X Window System graphical user interface. It provides a complete X Window System implementation based on open source software and includes a suite of standard X11 display server software, client libraries, developer toolkits, and utilities such as xterm. And X11 applications in OS X offer features such as minimizing windows to the Dock and copying and pasting between X11 and OS X applications."
http://www.apple.com/macosx/apps/all.html#x11
While gcc is available Apple Xcode development tools for Mac OS X and iOS are actually using Clang.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clang
The AMD chips had a significantly better GPU, at the cost of a slightly slower CPU (which is a good tradeoff).
In the context of something like a MacBook Air power consumption is a far greater factor than CPU or GPU performance.
AMD is always considered before negotiating prices with Intel. Flirting with AMD before choosing Intel is a pretty common practice, even for those who planned on going with Intel all along.