I listened to the NPR segment also. The expert who was being interviewed believed that the US and Australia could provide these materials with little impact on the environment, but the cost would require this to be largely subsidized by the governments. The widespread usage in consumer and defense department applications could make this a reality however, if China became aggressive in denying supplies.
The embers are still smoldering from the ooxml debacle. Microsoft supports proprietary standards, not open ones. Until that changes, I don't trust them with a majority market share in anything.
When I was an intern, I worked briefly at an outpatient infectious disease clinic that primarily treated illicit IV drug abusers. These were genuinely good people that had too little regard for their own bodies. One of hospitals that I work at currently has a methadone clinic nearby, and while we don't have any affiliation there, we often admit patients for other medical reasons. Many people are surprised to learn that a large percentage of this patient population are not unmotivated high school dropouts, but rather former working professionals, some having been quite well off, and even nurses, physicians, and occasionally pharmacists--all being people who are well trained in the danger that controlled substances pose. These people lose everything: their jobs, their careers, their families, their independence, their health and too frequently, their lives. Addiction is a very complex behavior that no one fully understands. It's been postulated that many of us are unknowingly predisposed to addictive behavior, though we haven't been exposed to an event to trigger it's onset. There's an issue of public heath here too and I think the legalization of the sale or possession of illicit narcotics stops short of seeing that.
Net neutrality is not the same as government censorship. In fact, it's sort of the opposite of that--net neutrality at its core is simply the prevention of traffic discrimination. Internet access should simply mean access to the internet, and one's access to content shouldn't depend on the ISP carrying the data. Online anonymity is a different issue and separate from net neutrality, unless we have an Internet Overhaul Bill, which is entirely possible.
The Taliban refused to cooperate in handing over Bin Laden, demanding proof and a trial, in spite of Bin Laden claiming responsibility for ordering the 9/11 attack. Instead, the Taliban supported Bin Laden, defending him in Tora Bora. The US hoped to castrate Al Qaeda's abilty to communicate, train terrorists, and carry out future attacks. This couldn't be accomplished if the Taliban continued to be sympathetic to the organization. It's a much different situation than Iraq, despite the connection that the Bush administration tried to make.
If such a change happened, I'd imagine there would be alternate rendering paths, just as you can fall back to xrender right now; old hardware likely won't be left out.
Just to add to this, the IAEA had previously cleared Iraq, only to find following Operation Desert Storm that Saddam had a surprisingly active nuclear weapons program. There was a lot of fear about what we didn't know and he heightened the awareness of this when he kicked UN weapons inspectors out. In retrospect, it appears that he did this as a bluff to Iran, to prevent provocation on the possibility that Iraq might soon have nuclear capability. In reality, intelligence at the time was actually refuting this possibility, that the claim that Iraq sought uranium from Niger was not authentic (in fact, forged), and Iraq posed little threat outside their immediate neighbors. The Bush administration sought to discredit this, hence the Valarie Plame scandal, the "smoking gun".
If the USPS were a publicly held company, this would have happened a long time ago. They also probably would have diversified into digital services as well.
It's true. With midterm elections looming, incumbents need to give the appearance that they are working hard for their constituents. They believe voters have poor long term memory. Blumenthal isn't very popular as an AG here in CT--he's quite fond of himself and is particularly aggressive toward issues with little impact on CT voters. He's under scrutiny right now for accepting campaign contributions from tobacco lobbyists again; he was one of the principle figures behind the landmark settlement. Oh, and he's running for a seat in the Senate too.
If you want to pay for something completely add free, I think you'll be disappointed with the bill you receive for it. We lament advertising and targeted advertising especially, but it offsets the cost of publishing magazines, newspapers, and websites, the prices of tickets to events, and the cost of carrying cable channels. Video games have been the exception in media and entertainment. Instead of dismissing the idea, consider a good implementation of in-game advertising that could allocate more resources to developers to make games cheaper and better.
I believe that the act that was passed following Exxon Valdez allows unlimited penalties if gross negligence is proven to be the cause of a disaster, which appears to be in this case in the Gulf. Raising the liability cap may only be political saber rattling.
I think this is a partly a result of the midterm elections; officials need to give the appearance that they are working hard for their constituents. Voters tend to suffer from long term memory loss. The other side to this is Blumenthal, who's not universally popular in CT for being a bit too rhetorical and somewhat hypocritical. He has been particularly aggressive towards easy targets, namely the tobacco industry, with which he brokered the $200B settlement, and was then later found to have accepted campaign contributions from that same industry.
I'm not talking about REM sleep either. I'm talking about REM as a unit of radiation exposure. Last year, there was some interesting information written about the Apollo program, coinciding with the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing. You can Google for the exact numbers but the total radiation exposure for each Apollo mission was approximately equivalent to a CT scan. The command module was designed to protect the crews to within a narrow range of exposure and data has shown it to be successful at that. A moon base would require more shielding, but again, radiation shouldn't be a logistical problem to the degree that resource management would be. Getting back to robotics, it certainly makes sense for deep space probes and short-term data gathering rovers, but for a nearby space base, the manned-space mission advocates have a point. It isn't a much different situation than if we built the ISS and decided to staff it only with robots. It could still depend on the type of research done there, but robots can only do what they were designed to do, and I'm not only thinking of self-repair but as a broad limitation overall.
I agree. Although for driving, there are traffic signals that at least indicate what you should and should not be doing. There is not an equivalent on the internet for this, and there is a lot of free legal content intermixed with the illegal stuff. It may seem obvious to./ readers but most people on the net aren't privy to the distinction. Furthermore, this measure still doesn't distinguish the user committing the crime from the registrant of the hardware/ip that the crime was committed with.
I interpreted that figure as the annual operating costs. The rover development alone would probably exceed that--wiki cites the mars rovers costing $820M USD and that was just for two machines. This is a much more ambitious endeavor.
The amount of exposure in REMs during the Apollo missions was extraordinarily low in contrast to the common misconception that it wasn't. There are many reasons for manned colonization and exploration being less practical than robotic missions, but radiation exposure shouldn't be one of them. In fact, in terms of technical hurdles, it should be one of the easier to overcome.
I think one of the arguments in favor of manned space flight is adaptability. Robotics are limited to what their design specifications allow them to do. For example, the Spirit rover is a wonderful machine, but it can't repair itself or free its wheels. Humans can react instantaneously to unanticipated and catastrophic circumstances and succeed.
I disagree with the idiot remark. Routers aren't pre-configured out of the box for wireless security by default or with a randomly generated root password. It seems like common sense for/. readers, but there are a lot of smart people (and not so smart people as well) that just don't have a clue about how stuff like this works.
We don't know the details of the terms, but we do know from the complaint filed in Delaware that Nokia offered to license the technology based on either a per patent fee or one fee for the pool, in addition to interest. Reportedly, it was Apple that offered cross-licensing using UI and multitouch patents as compensation, presumably in place of fees and fines. Nokia rejected this, likely because these patents probably don't have much intrinsic value and could be invalidated as they are based on software implementations. The handset business is a lucrative one, and Apple has made billions from the technology developed by companies like Nokia and Motorola, apparently without contributing anything back to it. It's a difficult situation because we need private companies to research and develop revolutionary technology, and we need unified standards that all competitors can implement, but that's capitalism and that necessitates that companies become compensated for millions or billions USD of private capital spent in the process.
I don't really see why this is necessary. Canonical already sells the Fluendo codec pack in their store, and packages can be purchased online directly from Fluendo as well. It could have been left to the user to decide to purchase a license or not.
This is true. I remember reading a something Monty wrote a little while back about the challenges of improving Theora. He stated that they actually know how to improve the efficiency and performance of the codec, but in having to avoid potential patented algorithms, they had to choose less desirable methods in many cases.
The point is that Microsoft hasn't and won't openly disclose the 235 or so patents that they hold and Linux supposedly violates. It's not relevant whether the general public knows what the patents are, but rather that Microsoft threatens hardware integrators instead of approaching Linux kernel developers about what can be done to fix this. Racketeering is Microsoft's strategy for dealing with Linux, evidently, because they could put an end to all of this and prevent it from reoccurring really easily.
Thanks, I read that somewhere before though. If tablet media devices provide a large market base, I'm sure Disney will monetize that opportunity. But Blu-Ray didn't cause a massive release of classic titles. Instead Disney is gradually releasing DVD+Blu-Ray combo packs over a period of what has now turned out to be years several and counting. That's what my comment was in reference to; we'll be able to buy or rent Beauty and the Beast (for example) when Disney wants us to. I suspect this is a calculated marketing process, which Steve wouldn't have much influence over.
But Apple doesn't have to buy ARM to do this. They can design their own chips based on the ARM architecture to the specs they need, just as other current licensees do. They can't steer the ISA where they would want it to go, but that doesn't limit the freedom and control they have in their ARM chips anyway, in contrast to their relationship with Intel.
Slashdot Mirror
I listened to the NPR segment also. The expert who was being interviewed believed that the US and Australia could provide these materials with little impact on the environment, but the cost would require this to be largely subsidized by the governments. The widespread usage in consumer and defense department applications could make this a reality however, if China became aggressive in denying supplies.
The embers are still smoldering from the ooxml debacle. Microsoft supports proprietary standards, not open ones. Until that changes, I don't trust them with a majority market share in anything.
Oddly, IBM isn't mentioned. Because of Lotus Symphony, they have an interest in this too.
When I was an intern, I worked briefly at an outpatient infectious disease clinic that primarily treated illicit IV drug abusers. These were genuinely good people that had too little regard for their own bodies. One of hospitals that I work at currently has a methadone clinic nearby, and while we don't have any affiliation there, we often admit patients for other medical reasons. Many people are surprised to learn that a large percentage of this patient population are not unmotivated high school dropouts, but rather former working professionals, some having been quite well off, and even nurses, physicians, and occasionally pharmacists--all being people who are well trained in the danger that controlled substances pose. These people lose everything: their jobs, their careers, their families, their independence, their health and too frequently, their lives. Addiction is a very complex behavior that no one fully understands. It's been postulated that many of us are unknowingly predisposed to addictive behavior, though we haven't been exposed to an event to trigger it's onset. There's an issue of public heath here too and I think the legalization of the sale or possession of illicit narcotics stops short of seeing that.
Net neutrality is not the same as government censorship. In fact, it's sort of the opposite of that--net neutrality at its core is simply the prevention of traffic discrimination. Internet access should simply mean access to the internet, and one's access to content shouldn't depend on the ISP carrying the data. Online anonymity is a different issue and separate from net neutrality, unless we have an Internet Overhaul Bill, which is entirely possible.
The Taliban refused to cooperate in handing over Bin Laden, demanding proof and a trial, in spite of Bin Laden claiming responsibility for ordering the 9/11 attack. Instead, the Taliban supported Bin Laden, defending him in Tora Bora. The US hoped to castrate Al Qaeda's abilty to communicate, train terrorists, and carry out future attacks. This couldn't be accomplished if the Taliban continued to be sympathetic to the organization. It's a much different situation than Iraq, despite the connection that the Bush administration tried to make.
This is exactly what 4.5 is apparently addressing.
If such a change happened, I'd imagine there would be alternate rendering paths, just as you can fall back to xrender right now; old hardware likely won't be left out.
Just to add to this, the IAEA had previously cleared Iraq, only to find following Operation Desert Storm that Saddam had a surprisingly active nuclear weapons program. There was a lot of fear about what we didn't know and he heightened the awareness of this when he kicked UN weapons inspectors out. In retrospect, it appears that he did this as a bluff to Iran, to prevent provocation on the possibility that Iraq might soon have nuclear capability. In reality, intelligence at the time was actually refuting this possibility, that the claim that Iraq sought uranium from Niger was not authentic (in fact, forged), and Iraq posed little threat outside their immediate neighbors. The Bush administration sought to discredit this, hence the Valarie Plame scandal, the "smoking gun".
If the USPS were a publicly held company, this would have happened a long time ago. They also probably would have diversified into digital services as well.
It's true. With midterm elections looming, incumbents need to give the appearance that they are working hard for their constituents. They believe voters have poor long term memory. Blumenthal isn't very popular as an AG here in CT--he's quite fond of himself and is particularly aggressive toward issues with little impact on CT voters. He's under scrutiny right now for accepting campaign contributions from tobacco lobbyists again; he was one of the principle figures behind the landmark settlement. Oh, and he's running for a seat in the Senate too.
If you want to pay for something completely add free, I think you'll be disappointed with the bill you receive for it. We lament advertising and targeted advertising especially, but it offsets the cost of publishing magazines, newspapers, and websites, the prices of tickets to events, and the cost of carrying cable channels. Video games have been the exception in media and entertainment. Instead of dismissing the idea, consider a good implementation of in-game advertising that could allocate more resources to developers to make games cheaper and better.
I believe that the act that was passed following Exxon Valdez allows unlimited penalties if gross negligence is proven to be the cause of a disaster, which appears to be in this case in the Gulf. Raising the liability cap may only be political saber rattling.
I think this is a partly a result of the midterm elections; officials need to give the appearance that they are working hard for their constituents. Voters tend to suffer from long term memory loss. The other side to this is Blumenthal, who's not universally popular in CT for being a bit too rhetorical and somewhat hypocritical. He has been particularly aggressive towards easy targets, namely the tobacco industry, with which he brokered the $200B settlement, and was then later found to have accepted campaign contributions from that same industry.
I'm not talking about REM sleep either. I'm talking about REM as a unit of radiation exposure. Last year, there was some interesting information written about the Apollo program, coinciding with the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 landing. You can Google for the exact numbers but the total radiation exposure for each Apollo mission was approximately equivalent to a CT scan. The command module was designed to protect the crews to within a narrow range of exposure and data has shown it to be successful at that. A moon base would require more shielding, but again, radiation shouldn't be a logistical problem to the degree that resource management would be. Getting back to robotics, it certainly makes sense for deep space probes and short-term data gathering rovers, but for a nearby space base, the manned-space mission advocates have a point. It isn't a much different situation than if we built the ISS and decided to staff it only with robots. It could still depend on the type of research done there, but robots can only do what they were designed to do, and I'm not only thinking of self-repair but as a broad limitation overall.
I agree. Although for driving, there are traffic signals that at least indicate what you should and should not be doing. There is not an equivalent on the internet for this, and there is a lot of free legal content intermixed with the illegal stuff. It may seem obvious to ./ readers but most people on the net aren't privy to the distinction. Furthermore, this measure still doesn't distinguish the user committing the crime from the registrant of the hardware/ip that the crime was committed with.
I interpreted that figure as the annual operating costs. The rover development alone would probably exceed that--wiki cites the mars rovers costing $820M USD and that was just for two machines. This is a much more ambitious endeavor.
The amount of exposure in REMs during the Apollo missions was extraordinarily low in contrast to the common misconception that it wasn't. There are many reasons for manned colonization and exploration being less practical than robotic missions, but radiation exposure shouldn't be one of them. In fact, in terms of technical hurdles, it should be one of the easier to overcome. I think one of the arguments in favor of manned space flight is adaptability. Robotics are limited to what their design specifications allow them to do. For example, the Spirit rover is a wonderful machine, but it can't repair itself or free its wheels. Humans can react instantaneously to unanticipated and catastrophic circumstances and succeed.
I disagree with the idiot remark. Routers aren't pre-configured out of the box for wireless security by default or with a randomly generated root password. It seems like common sense for /. readers, but there are a lot of smart people (and not so smart people as well) that just don't have a clue about how stuff like this works.
We don't know the details of the terms, but we do know from the complaint filed in Delaware that Nokia offered to license the technology based on either a per patent fee or one fee for the pool, in addition to interest. Reportedly, it was Apple that offered cross-licensing using UI and multitouch patents as compensation, presumably in place of fees and fines. Nokia rejected this, likely because these patents probably don't have much intrinsic value and could be invalidated as they are based on software implementations. The handset business is a lucrative one, and Apple has made billions from the technology developed by companies like Nokia and Motorola, apparently without contributing anything back to it. It's a difficult situation because we need private companies to research and develop revolutionary technology, and we need unified standards that all competitors can implement, but that's capitalism and that necessitates that companies become compensated for millions or billions USD of private capital spent in the process.
I don't really see why this is necessary. Canonical already sells the Fluendo codec pack in their store, and packages can be purchased online directly from Fluendo as well. It could have been left to the user to decide to purchase a license or not.
This is true. I remember reading a something Monty wrote a little while back about the challenges of improving Theora. He stated that they actually know how to improve the efficiency and performance of the codec, but in having to avoid potential patented algorithms, they had to choose less desirable methods in many cases.
The point is that Microsoft hasn't and won't openly disclose the 235 or so patents that they hold and Linux supposedly violates. It's not relevant whether the general public knows what the patents are, but rather that Microsoft threatens hardware integrators instead of approaching Linux kernel developers about what can be done to fix this. Racketeering is Microsoft's strategy for dealing with Linux, evidently, because they could put an end to all of this and prevent it from reoccurring really easily.
Thanks, I read that somewhere before though. If tablet media devices provide a large market base, I'm sure Disney will monetize that opportunity. But Blu-Ray didn't cause a massive release of classic titles. Instead Disney is gradually releasing DVD+Blu-Ray combo packs over a period of what has now turned out to be years several and counting. That's what my comment was in reference to; we'll be able to buy or rent Beauty and the Beast (for example) when Disney wants us to. I suspect this is a calculated marketing process, which Steve wouldn't have much influence over.
But Apple doesn't have to buy ARM to do this. They can design their own chips based on the ARM architecture to the specs they need, just as other current licensees do. They can't steer the ISA where they would want it to go, but that doesn't limit the freedom and control they have in their ARM chips anyway, in contrast to their relationship with Intel.