Transfer the US Internet back to the NSF. All of it. All fibre, all routers, all switches.
The vendors don't give a shit about their customers, the laws or their employees. So a sensible, mature, rational society should do without the vendors.
It has a very elongated orbit. At any given point in time, it is between those two distances. Even the Earth doesn't have a circular orbit, indeed nothing does.
Depends. If you go by structure and intrinsics, it might well be a planet. If you go by extrinsics, it's a dwarf planet. The definition of a comet has nothing to do with the shape of the orbit.
Super Earth includes all rocky planets that should have become gas giants but aren't. (About 1.2 Earth masses.) I'm not completely sure how much smaller than that it goes, but Earth doesn't become a Super Earth every time a meteor storm adds mass, so there is a range of masses that constitute Earth mass.
String theory is falsifiable and could easily be tested by experiments.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the Americans for not building the supercollider in the right place and then not building it at all.
After which, blame a few string theorists for ignoring supergravity and abusing its proponents.
But nothing stops you from testing some predictions of string theory today and building the supercollider in an appropriate location so that you can test the remainder down the road.
The main impediment to testing string theory is the crowd believing without evidence that it cannot be done. Scientists worth a damn should stop listening to them. Science isn't a democracy.
Knowing the result beforehand tends to devalue the experiment.
If you want results, you base your theories on observation, not your observations on theory.
DARPA understands this, at least as well as any militarist agency can. They don't want confirmation bias, they want results. Only way to get them is by looking.
Are they looking for positive results? They shouldn't be looking for anything, they should be comparing observation with prediction. All results, whether there's a match or not, have major scientific implications. The implications merely differ according to outcome.
Some of the scientists are skeptical, they want evidence. This, too, is the correct approach. Cynicism, which also arises, is not. The difference is that a cynic doesn't care about evidence or models, they're convinced of the outcome in advance.
Cynicism is the enemy of science. It's actually the enemy of many things, but in this case it is the enemy of science.
Skepticism is how we distinguish sounding good from being useful. It is essential.
QI sounds excellent, doesn't involve hyper-invisible particles and offers a simple explanation. But none of those mean it is right. As Fred Hoyle loved to point out, the only valid thing in science is prediction. You must predict and test with an eye to falsifying. Nothing else matters.
And it must continue to do so. So all of the indirect attempts to study dark matter via hot filaments of regular matter must produce results QI can explain as well or better. If dark matter produces more testable predictions that turn out correct, it is the more useful even if it is actually wrong.
I am not keen on MOND because, as with dark matter, there are galaxies which don't fit the model. Theories which only apply selectively or at weekends are probably wrong. However, QI has some interesting aspects and should be tested properly rather than cynically dismissed.
It's one of the slowest in the world - Britain has faster and I swear they still use cans and string - and one of the most expensive, whilst also being one of the most restrictive.
Comcast gets away with shutting down rivals by cutting their cables. Does anyone think you'd get away with that in Europe?
Verizon ignores an agreement on unlimited traffic in an emergency, placing lives at risk. I don't care about excuses and I don't care if they don't like Monday's. Deliberately placing state and federal workers in danger is what the beltway sniper did.
California isn't even making a dent in this, California is only drawing a line and saying things can't get worse in a few rather restricted ways. If California was serious, it would build a municipal Internet and damn the corporate sector. What's the Fed going to do, invade?
The Fed's have the right to regulate, but chose not to do so. The FCC has repeatedly stated the Internet is outside their jurisdiction and Congress refused to pass any laws rescinding that. Bush drew up an executive order eliminating Federal controls. Don't blame California for exploiting this.
Slashdot Mirror
Transfer the US Internet back to the NSF. All of it. All fibre, all routers, all switches.
The vendors don't give a shit about their customers, the laws or their employees. So a sensible, mature, rational society should do without the vendors.
It's a planet. Some fools designate it a dwarf planet, but a dwarf planet is still a planet.
It has a very elongated orbit. At any given point in time, it is between those two distances. Even the Earth doesn't have a circular orbit, indeed nothing does.
Depends. If you go by structure and intrinsics, it might well be a planet. If you go by extrinsics, it's a dwarf planet. The definition of a comet has nothing to do with the shape of the orbit.
No, Goblin would not orbit the new planet, it orbits the sun, therefore it is not a moon. That it is gravitationally affected is irrelevant.
Super Earth includes all rocky planets that should have become gas giants but aren't. (About 1.2 Earth masses.) I'm not completely sure how much smaller than that it goes, but Earth doesn't become a Super Earth every time a meteor storm adds mass, so there is a range of masses that constitute Earth mass.
Prediction is the only valid form of science.
Relativity had been predicted by maths for 50 years at that point.
Nobody thought it fringe because it brought physics in line with maths. You no longer needed some strange exceptionalism.
String theory is falsifiable and could easily be tested by experiments.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the Americans for not building the supercollider in the right place and then not building it at all.
After which, blame a few string theorists for ignoring supergravity and abusing its proponents.
But nothing stops you from testing some predictions of string theory today and building the supercollider in an appropriate location so that you can test the remainder down the road.
The main impediment to testing string theory is the crowd believing without evidence that it cannot be done. Scientists worth a damn should stop listening to them. Science isn't a democracy.
Knowing the result beforehand tends to devalue the experiment.
If you want results, you base your theories on observation, not your observations on theory.
DARPA understands this, at least as well as any militarist agency can. They don't want confirmation bias, they want results. Only way to get them is by looking.
Are they looking for positive results? They shouldn't be looking for anything, they should be comparing observation with prediction. All results, whether there's a match or not, have major scientific implications. The implications merely differ according to outcome.
String theory is falsifiable. It is important that it be tested.
QI is falsifiable and now will be tested.
Skepticism is vital in the process of falsification.
Cynicism is a major impediment and humanity would prosper if the useless third of the population was sent in a B Ark to Mars.
Some of the scientists are skeptical, they want evidence. This, too, is the correct approach. Cynicism, which also arises, is not. The difference is that a cynic doesn't care about evidence or models, they're convinced of the outcome in advance.
Cynicism is the enemy of science. It's actually the enemy of many things, but in this case it is the enemy of science.
Skepticism is how we distinguish sounding good from being useful. It is essential.
QI sounds excellent, doesn't involve hyper-invisible particles and offers a simple explanation. But none of those mean it is right. As Fred Hoyle loved to point out, the only valid thing in science is prediction. You must predict and test with an eye to falsifying. Nothing else matters.
And it must continue to do so. So all of the indirect attempts to study dark matter via hot filaments of regular matter must produce results QI can explain as well or better. If dark matter produces more testable predictions that turn out correct, it is the more useful even if it is actually wrong.
I am not keen on MOND because, as with dark matter, there are galaxies which don't fit the model. Theories which only apply selectively or at weekends are probably wrong. However, QI has some interesting aspects and should be tested properly rather than cynically dismissed.
It's one of the slowest in the world - Britain has faster and I swear they still use cans and string - and one of the most expensive, whilst also being one of the most restrictive.
Comcast gets away with shutting down rivals by cutting their cables. Does anyone think you'd get away with that in Europe?
Verizon ignores an agreement on unlimited traffic in an emergency, placing lives at risk. I don't care about excuses and I don't care if they don't like Monday's. Deliberately placing state and federal workers in danger is what the beltway sniper did.
California isn't even making a dent in this, California is only drawing a line and saying things can't get worse in a few rather restricted ways. If California was serious, it would build a municipal Internet and damn the corporate sector. What's the Fed going to do, invade?
It's called MPLS and that's how they've provided corporate networks for years.
The Fed's have the right to regulate, but chose not to do so. The FCC has repeatedly stated the Internet is outside their jurisdiction and Congress refused to pass any laws rescinding that. Bush drew up an executive order eliminating Federal controls. Don't blame California for exploiting this.
Then you've not read the CoC. Why should I care about the misinformed opinion of someone posting FUD?
The GPL is a virus. There is no central owner in the sense of copyright law.
Moderation isn't GPLed.
IANAL and nobody else here is. Not even PJ is a lawyer. Checking with a lawyer is.. . Logical, if you don't want to make claims in ignorance.
But, then, I can see ignorance is the preferred state these days.
The CoC basically states what Linus has said, nothing more and nothing less.
Then you've not read the CoC. Might help if you're going to oppose it.
The GPL has always been overtly political. If you use FSF software, it is because of their politics.
The CoC actually forbids politics being a consideration. If you don't want politics, you want the CoC. Your choice.
Not really.
This is about the kernel, not distros.
Most packages can be substituted without impact, the bulk of projects are disposable.
So, no, you don't seem to understand either the issue discussed or the disposable nature of the supplemental projects.
As I've said before here, RTFM.
SJW, as applies to free software, is a meritocracy.
You don't want a meitocracy? Go develop your own kernel.
The OSI represents open source.
The FSF represents free software.
The right wing support open sores.