I always thought this was an interesting idea. Here's a link to some pics of rotary rocket. The rocket uses helicopter-like blades to slow re-entry and thus is it a reusable rocket. Unfortunately, the company went bankrupt beginning of last year. However, I have heard a rumour that someone has bought up the company and plans on reviving the technology.
The fair user may find it more difficult to engage in certain fair uses with regard to electronic books, but nevertheless, fair use is still available.
I'm sick of that argument. It's just not valid, if you make something "difficult" enough, people won't do it. And if people won't do it, it's equivalent to banning it. That it could be done "in theory" or by "people who are willing to put in extra effort" is irrelevant.
In fact, all laws work on a relative disincentive principle... most people would rather avoid breaking the law than possibly landing in jail. In this case, most people would rather not exercise the full extent of their fair use than put in the effort to sidestep the DMCA. There is no difference, the DMCA "silencing effect" is an affront to free speech. I think the fact that a person intelligent enough to become a judge used this argument shows he has ulterior motives.
Re:Sometimes smaller is not better
on
Sony PCG-U1
·
· Score: 2
Check the links I provided in my post. The solution I offered has the portability of pda/laptop/tablets (in fact, I would argue they are more portable) while still maintaining and even exceeding the ergonomics of a desktop workstation. It's the best of both worlds, whereas where we seem to be going with these small desktops is the worst of both worlds, with progressively worse display and input devices.
I think wearable computers are the future of computing, and they are available today. The problem with this mini laptop is that they have just mindlessly scaled down a device that was barely comfortable to use in the first place. To make an interface that is usable at that size, you have to change more than just its scale.
Sometimes smaller is not better
on
Sony PCG-U1
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
The guy is typing with his thumbs! And the icons look pinhead-size. This is all very neat how we can shrink things smaller and smaller, but... ergonomics anyone? How about keeping your eyesight past your 20's?
I think the whole PDA/Tablet PC/Subnotebook thing is in general pretty silly. For general use they are horrible. Better to get something like the Hitachi WIA with an input device like the Twiddler and keep your wrists and eyes healthy.
Climate - The condition of a place in relation to various phenomena of the atmosphere, as temperature, moisture, etc., especially as they affect animal or vegetable life.
Sorry to fall back to dictionary definitions, but this sure sounds like weather to me. Maybe averaged on a longer time scale, but it's still quite obviously a chaotic system. We've found loose correlations with sunspots, deforestation, etc.. but even very large trends like the "little ice age" of 1500AD are unexplained and most likely chaotic. If we can't explain hundreds of years of pronounced trends, I don't see how we can do anything with the relatively uneventful last 50 years.
If it wasn't, we'd have accurate forecasts up a few months in advance. As it is, I find forecasts are routinely wrong about even tomorrow's weather. What happened to the hole "butterfly flapping its wings in Singapore affects the weather in Kansas" thing? I don't see how initial conditions would tell them much, I bet even random quantum events have a very strong influence on weather models over 50 years. I'd put the odds of success for this distributed computing project around the same as SETI.
You're right, I'll qualify my previous statement: it's not spyware that's the problem, it's misrepresentation of the software. So the unethical part of the coding might be as simple as having a misleading splash screen or terms & conditions page. (or packaging spyware along with another unrelated product without alerting the user)
I agree that just coding or distributing spyware without the intention of using it unethically should not be regulated in any way.
If you actually want to stop being made to do unethical coding projects, there's needs to be laws that ban those sort of things. Like a "no spyware bill" or something. This probably already falls under bills that attempt to protect people's privacy.
Personally I think if a company is intending on invading your privacy they should be forced to display a *short* *readable* warning (ie. not legalese) that tells the user what they are about to do. Hiding something in a 30 page privacy policy is no different than not mentioning it at all, even lawyers don't read those things!
Re:I thought amphibians were disappearing?
on
The Plague of Frogs
·
· Score: 2
I can't seem to find anything online either. (although sometimes I just really can't find what I'm looking for using google) It was all over the papers for a while. Here's the only online reference I could find:
http://www.crd.bc.ca/parks/parkelk.htm
It mentions "giant bullfrogs." I'm not sure if it's the same frog, but it sounds like it is. They are humongous. And by the way, "duck" should be "ducklings" in my original post. It still takes a big frog to eat a duckling.
Re:I thought amphibians were disappearing?
on
The Plague of Frogs
·
· Score: 2
Try Elk lake on Vancouver Island. They have lots of them. Oh, and correction, duck=ducklings. Still, a frog that eats ducklings is a site to behold!
I thought amphibians were disappearing?
on
The Plague of Frogs
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Amphibians, particularly frogs, are supposed to be an indicator species for pollution. From all accounts I've read they are dying off in great numbers around the world. Maybe because the live near the surface of the water, they are more sensitive to things like acid rain?
So why all the frogs? Hawaii... also Australia has also had a heck of a time with frogs, and in BC we've had a problem with huge frogs (the tadpoles are the size of your fist, and mature frogs so big they have been eating the ducks!) Just seems like contradictory evidence to me, maybe some species are heartier than others?
With Bill Joy's alarmist speil about nanobots replicating out of control, this is hardly good PR for nanotech. I mean, viruses? We're talking about the most evil self-replicating things we can find, throw them in with nanotech and it doesn't exactly make a good association.
Now I'm not particularly worried about these custom virii infecting humans, particularly if they're using virii that don't infect multicellular organisms (like the very cool bacteriophage virus). I think the laymen will, however, and the last thing I want to see if governments restricting nanotech the way they are clamping down on biotech.
A smart company would just take their office to go see the matinee and lose 2 hours of productivity and the price of admission rather than lose an entire day for a bunch of "sick" workers. It's not like anything gets done in the afternoon anyways.
I still can't find that site selling tshirts and computer monitors to display this "new color." It was very funny. Google is great sometimes, but other times it's just hopeless.
They invented this new color. The Max Headroom guys would look at it astounded while the camera was always on the other side of their computer monitor so you couldn't see it. How could you invent a new colour on an RGB monitor??? Funny stuff, that show is great.
Then one day I found out that they really have found a new color! Hrm, I can't seem to find the link though, anyone have it? You can even buy T-shirts in the new colour;-) Can't wait until mine arrives...
What do covering up the start button and installation have to do with one another? I really don't understand why you need to prevent installation just to avoid having the Start button obscured. Couldn't you just make the windows task bar Always-On-Top? Or just disallow anything to be drawn there while not in fullscreen mode?
His argument is pretty weak for the VP of a major corporation. Hopefully the court sees through it.
You're right about pet medicine, however the purpose of that is still to maximize profit by minimizing consumer surplus. The same principle applies to movie theatres, where they charge less for seniors and children than for adults... even though they use up the same number of seats, and even when they could fill all the seats with higher-paying adults! Its sounds a little counter intuitive, but it does maximize the profits of the theatre.
If a similar principle existed in the case of the AIDS drugs, the drug companies would use it to their advantage. In fact, there is another good example of consumer surplus that sounds similar to this case. Often in rural communities (and especially before massive regulation in the US), doctors would charge patients based on how much they could afford. Basically, the same kind of thing we'd all like our health care system to be now, except it happened all on its own with no state funds or regulation whatsoever. It would be interesting to know why that's not the case here.
Although remember also that thousands of people would die had there never been high enough motivation to develop these drugs in the first place. I'm actually thinking maybe extending the patent until *double* the trial costs are recouped would be a better idea. Breaking even is hardly a suitable reward for such an important discovery, and as much as we wish it weren't so, a lot of great things are invented solely for the money.
Just looking at the advances that were achieved during scientific competitions (particularly in aviation) shows the power money has over scientific progress.
I'm not a huge fan of patents, but drug patents are one of the few types of patents that make sense. Why do we need patents? To subsidize the cost of innovation. And the cost of innovation is often steep, it has always been much easier to ripoff someone's idea than develop it yourself. Often times, the inventor doesn't profit at all from his invention. (see Xerox->Apple->Windows)
For pharamceutical companies, the cost to develop drugs is high, not just because of all the trial and error involved (although rational drug design does help), but because of all the FDA-mandated trials involved. The patent system, as far as I know, is the only system that has been developed to offset the costs of getting a drug FDA-approved.
Its not like a software patent, where the costs of innovation are mostly pizza and Jolt. I would like to see a better system for compensating drugs companies for the money they put into getting a drug approved, but I have not seen one. Maybe instead granting drugs patents for a set number of years, we could grant them based on the time it takes to recoup the trial costs? At least then we could minimize the damage done by granting a monopoly on a life-saving substance.
I think average speed is more relevant. The woman who was hit was not hit at top speed. Remember that for many senior citizens even slipping on some ice can be life-threatening. And while you may be able to get 30mph on your mountain bike, most people average around 10mph. From what i understand, on a Segway everyone will be cruising around at 12mph. Even at the same speed, the segway packs more momentum.
In my hometown, and older woman was killed when hit by a mountain bike. In fact, this has happened multiple times. And mountain bikes are not allowed on the sidewalk. Segways are heavier and faster than mountain bikes, this just seems really dangerous to me.
Slashdot Mirror
I always thought this was an interesting idea. Here's a link to some pics of rotary rocket. The rocket uses helicopter-like blades to slow re-entry and thus is it a reusable rocket. Unfortunately, the company went bankrupt beginning of last year. However, I have heard a rumour that someone has bought up the company and plans on reviving the technology.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
The fair user may find it more difficult to engage in certain fair uses with regard to electronic books, but nevertheless, fair use is still available.
... most people would rather avoid breaking the law than possibly landing in jail. In this case, most people would rather not exercise the full extent of their fair use than put in the effort to sidestep the DMCA. There is no difference, the DMCA "silencing effect" is an affront to free speech. I think the fact that a person intelligent enough to become a judge used this argument shows he has ulterior motives.
I'm sick of that argument. It's just not valid, if you make something "difficult" enough, people won't do it. And if people won't do it, it's equivalent to banning it. That it could be done "in theory" or by "people who are willing to put in extra effort" is irrelevant.
In fact, all laws work on a relative disincentive principle
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
Check the links I provided in my post. The solution I offered has the portability of pda/laptop/tablets (in fact, I would argue they are more portable) while still maintaining and even exceeding the ergonomics of a desktop workstation. It's the best of both worlds, whereas where we seem to be going with these small desktops is the worst of both worlds, with progressively worse display and input devices.
I think wearable computers are the future of computing, and they are available today. The problem with this mini laptop is that they have just mindlessly scaled down a device that was barely comfortable to use in the first place. To make an interface that is usable at that size, you have to change more than just its scale.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
The guy is typing with his thumbs! And the icons look pinhead-size. This is all very neat how we can shrink things smaller and smaller, but... ergonomics anyone? How about keeping your eyesight past your 20's?
I think the whole PDA/Tablet PC/Subnotebook thing is in general pretty silly. For general use they are horrible. Better to get something like the Hitachi WIA with an input device like the Twiddler and keep your wrists and eyes healthy.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
Climate - The condition of a place in relation to various phenomena of the atmosphere, as temperature, moisture, etc., especially as they affect animal or vegetable life.
Sorry to fall back to dictionary definitions, but this sure sounds like weather to me. Maybe averaged on a longer time scale, but it's still quite obviously a chaotic system. We've found loose correlations with sunspots, deforestation, etc.. but even very large trends like the "little ice age" of 1500AD are unexplained and most likely chaotic. If we can't explain hundreds of years of pronounced trends, I don't see how we can do anything with the relatively uneventful last 50 years.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon
If it wasn't, we'd have accurate forecasts up a few months in advance. As it is, I find forecasts are routinely wrong about even tomorrow's weather. What happened to the hole "butterfly flapping its wings in Singapore affects the weather in Kansas" thing? I don't see how initial conditions would tell them much, I bet even random quantum events have a very strong influence on weather models over 50 years. I'd put the odds of success for this distributed computing project around the same as SETI.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
You're right, I'll qualify my previous statement: it's not spyware that's the problem, it's misrepresentation of the software. So the unethical part of the coding might be as simple as having a misleading splash screen or terms & conditions page. (or packaging spyware along with another unrelated product without alerting the user)
I agree that just coding or distributing spyware without the intention of using it unethically should not be regulated in any way.
If you actually want to stop being made to do unethical coding projects, there's needs to be laws that ban those sort of things. Like a "no spyware bill" or something. This probably already falls under bills that attempt to protect people's privacy.
Personally I think if a company is intending on invading your privacy they should be forced to display a *short* *readable* warning (ie. not legalese) that tells the user what they are about to do. Hiding something in a 30 page privacy policy is no different than not mentioning it at all, even lawyers don't read those things!
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
I can't seem to find anything online either. (although sometimes I just really can't find what I'm looking for using google) It was all over the papers for a while. Here's the only online reference I could find:
http://www.crd.bc.ca/parks/parkelk.htm
It mentions "giant bullfrogs." I'm not sure if it's the same frog, but it sounds like it is. They are humongous. And by the way, "duck" should be "ducklings" in my original post. It still takes a big frog to eat a duckling.
Try Elk lake on Vancouver Island. They have lots of them. Oh, and correction, duck=ducklings. Still, a frog that eats ducklings is a site to behold!
Amphibians, particularly frogs, are supposed to be an indicator species for pollution. From all accounts I've read they are dying off in great numbers around the world. Maybe because the live near the surface of the water, they are more sensitive to things like acid rain?
So why all the frogs? Hawaii... also Australia has also had a heck of a time with frogs, and in BC we've had a problem with huge frogs (the tadpoles are the size of your fist, and mature frogs so big they have been eating the ducks!) Just seems like contradictory evidence to me, maybe some species are heartier than others?
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
With Bill Joy's alarmist speil about nanobots replicating out of control, this is hardly good PR for nanotech. I mean, viruses? We're talking about the most evil self-replicating things we can find, throw them in with nanotech and it doesn't exactly make a good association.
Now I'm not particularly worried about these custom virii infecting humans, particularly if they're using virii that don't infect multicellular organisms (like the very cool bacteriophage virus). I think the laymen will, however, and the last thing I want to see if governments restricting nanotech the way they are clamping down on biotech.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
While everyone else is getting brain cancer, I've been wearing my Aluminum Foil Deflector Beanie for years.
Just a myriad of uses for these things...
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
A smart company would just take their office to go see the matinee and lose 2 hours of productivity and the price of admission rather than lose an entire day for a bunch of "sick" workers. It's not like anything gets done in the afternoon anyways.
Here is is! The new color website:
Squant
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
It appears discovering new colors is a common TV phenomenon. Here's another reference:
Bleen
I still can't find that site selling tshirts and computer monitors to display this "new color." It was very funny. Google is great sometimes, but other times it's just hopeless.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
They invented this new color. The Max Headroom guys would look at it astounded while the camera was always on the other side of their computer monitor so you couldn't see it. How could you invent a new colour on an RGB monitor??? Funny stuff, that show is great.
;-) Can't wait until mine arrives...
Then one day I found out that they really have found a new color! Hrm, I can't seem to find the link though, anyone have it? You can even buy T-shirts in the new colour
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
- 1 el cheapo Dreamcast for your local walmart with dreamcast linux installed
- 1 inexpensive little TV (you've probably got one in your garage)
- 1 spare ide drive -- I've got one sitting on my desk
- Plywood and paint
And as a bonus, you can play Sonic the Hedgehog on it!Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
What do covering up the start button and installation have to do with one another? I really don't understand why you need to prevent installation just to avoid having the Start button obscured. Couldn't you just make the windows task bar Always-On-Top? Or just disallow anything to be drawn there while not in fullscreen mode?
His argument is pretty weak for the VP of a major corporation. Hopefully the court sees through it.
Websurfing done right! StumbleUpon
You're right about pet medicine, however the purpose of that is still to maximize profit by minimizing consumer surplus. The same principle applies to movie theatres, where they charge less for seniors and children than for adults... even though they use up the same number of seats, and even when they could fill all the seats with higher-paying adults! Its sounds a little counter intuitive, but it does maximize the profits of the theatre.
If a similar principle existed in the case of the AIDS drugs, the drug companies would use it to their advantage. In fact, there is another good example of consumer surplus that sounds similar to this case. Often in rural communities (and especially before massive regulation in the US), doctors would charge patients based on how much they could afford. Basically, the same kind of thing we'd all like our health care system to be now, except it happened all on its own with no state funds or regulation whatsoever. It would be interesting to know why that's not the case here.
Consumer Surplus: it's your friend.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon
Although remember also that thousands of people would die had there never been high enough motivation to develop these drugs in the first place. I'm actually thinking maybe extending the patent until *double* the trial costs are recouped would be a better idea. Breaking even is hardly a suitable reward for such an important discovery, and as much as we wish it weren't so, a lot of great things are invented solely for the money.
Just looking at the advances that were achieved during scientific competitions (particularly in aviation) shows the power money has over scientific progress.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon
I'm not a huge fan of patents, but drug patents are one of the few types of patents that make sense. Why do we need patents? To subsidize the cost of innovation. And the cost of innovation is often steep, it has always been much easier to ripoff someone's idea than develop it yourself. Often times, the inventor doesn't profit at all from his invention. (see Xerox->Apple->Windows)
For pharamceutical companies, the cost to develop drugs is high, not just because of all the trial and error involved (although rational drug design does help), but because of all the FDA-mandated trials involved. The patent system, as far as I know, is the only system that has been developed to offset the costs of getting a drug FDA-approved.
Its not like a software patent, where the costs of innovation are mostly pizza and Jolt. I would like to see a better system for compensating drugs companies for the money they put into getting a drug approved, but I have not seen one. Maybe instead granting drugs patents for a set number of years, we could grant them based on the time it takes to recoup the trial costs? At least then we could minimize the damage done by granting a monopoly on a life-saving substance.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon
Yes, it is that ridiculous.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon
I think average speed is more relevant. The woman who was hit was not hit at top speed. Remember that for many senior citizens even slipping on some ice can be life-threatening. And while you may be able to get 30mph on your mountain bike, most people average around 10mph. From what i understand, on a Segway everyone will be cruising around at 12mph. Even at the same speed, the segway packs more momentum.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon
In my hometown, and older woman was killed when hit by a mountain bike. In fact, this has happened multiple times. And mountain bikes are not allowed on the sidewalk. Segways are heavier and faster than mountain bikes, this just seems really dangerous to me.
Websurfing: The Next Generation - StumbleUpon