The Supreme Court made the right decision by not taking this case before it's heard by the Court of Appeals.
It allows more arguments to be made and heard, creating a larger body of knowledge surrounding the case before it goes to the SC. Very little new information or lines of reasoning are made when a case goes to the SC, rather the Court passes judgement on decisions and arguments made in the lower courts.
This decision preserves 200 or so years of judicial protocol where the SC is the *last* court of appeals, in which they hear only cases that merit there attention. They could very well decide *not* to hear this case if they believe the Court of Appeals came to the right decision. This is a process the entire Judicial system would be extremely reluctant to tinker with.
Finally, If the SC would bypass the Court of Appeals, then they would open themselves to a huge increase in their caseload and diminish the value and impact of the lower courts.
Just because the could take a case directly, doesn't mean they have to.
The biggest source of mis-management is the concept of the IT department. It isolates the resources and people working on them into the basement, keeping them away from the "decision makers", who then rely on overhyped news, magazines, and venders rather than their own experts. Tech workers have no recourse when unrealistic expectations are heaped upon them if the "IT chief" is two or three levels below the CEO. Often the IT chief is a senior techie who's new to the world of management, catching up on political and managerial skills.
The solution is to integrate, rather than separate, the IT functions into leadership, product planning, marketing, etc... Bring in the engineers early to planning and marketing lets them begin working on solutions sooner. Having more IT personnel work with leadership lets them pitch more creative and doable ideas to the CEO. This gives upper management a more realistic outlook on their companies capabilities, creates a broader sense of misson among all workers. Most importantly it yield intangible rewards such as a greater sense of accomplishment among all staffers, not just the geeks.
LS technology could become another revenue stream if they apply it properly. By the 2004 Olympics, LS should be sufficiently evolved to rival TV broadcast. Now instead of having a single channel with predetermined broadcasts, there could be channels dedicated to each sport and country. If they want to get fancy they could use a customizable portal.
Revenue could be brought in by subscription or advertisement. The ad model will most likely succeed, since subscription on cableTV was tried a couple Olympiads ago and failed miserably
The only issue I see with this will be NBC and other TV broadcaster, and if their broadcast rights will cover only TV or all broadcast. Of course, NBC itself could setup the portal...
The possibilities are wide open.
So instead of the Nike IBM McDonald Disney Olympics on NBC, you'll have the Microsoft IBM RealAudio Intel Olympics on Yahoo!
I guess Microsoft is assuming you have a *.DOC capable application (in other words, an MS wordprocessor) to read about updates to your operating system license. Hmmm....
1. Does internet access enhance a library's purpose? Some would argue that a library should have access to as many sources of information as possible, while others state that internet access detract from other more established sources (ie books, journals, periodicals...)
2. Does the library's role include restricting access to information? This question has been around long before the internet. For instance, should minors be allowed to read the Karma Sutra or the Anarchist Cookbook? Do other organizations (such as the AFA and FRC) have the right to determine what is put on the shelves? Can you or your child be denied access to works such as "Huckleberry Finn", "Fahenheit 451", "Heather has Two Mommies"?
3. If libraries are tasked with controlling accesss, how do they go about it? Working within a budget, how do they pay for it? Software may be the first solution, but it can be rendered ineffective. Can a library actively monitor usage and still respect the user's right to privacy?
... is "AutoFlame" software.
Why waste time and emotion responding to some knucklehead's diatribe? Just invoke the AutoFlame utility, which would spit out an editable response that you could send.
Of course it would be customizable with user defined settings for Hatred, Bile, Profanity, IQ level, Grammar, and Insult. Now that would be progress!
450g heat sink! What'll they do for the laptop crowd, a built-in R134 refrigeration unit or a liquid nitrogen sprayer?
Both will add a manageable 20 pounds; however one will suck the battery dry in 4 minutes, the other could spill and crack your legs off like toothpics.
Take the isolated caffiene gene, possibly make it 1000x powerful, splice it into some harmless E. Coli (the type that lives in your gut). Grow a huge batch of the stuff, then dump it into your enemy's water supply.
Result: The bacteria spreads throughout the population, including their leadership and military forces. Anyone who catches it runs the buzz from hell, sleep becomes impossible. After a week or so of sleep depravation, high stress, and fatigue, the majority of the population, including the military, collapses.
Similar possibilities exist with psycho-active components of marijuana, opiates, mushrooms, tobacco, etc. You could even isolate the gene in wine and beer bacteria that creates alcohol...
You make some huge assumptions in support of your points:
1. "Such civilizations [KT-II] are resistant to almost all hazards on galactic scales and will thus be the dominant form of life in galaxies."
All civilizations will always have to deal with self-generated hazards such as war (between themselves and other "alien" races), environmental degradation, and political strife. The greater their technology, the more terrible their weapons could become. You mention nanotechnology as a conduit to upward transition, yet there are scenarios, such as those presented in Kurtzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines", where flawed nanotechology could wipe out the planet, or deliberately designed nanotech weapons that could selectively destroy organisms based on genome.
No civilization is immune from self-destruction or competition with others.
2. "KT-II civilizations survive for trillions of years."
Given the universe is 8-12 billion years old, that's a pretty bold statement!
2. "Intentional communications generally occurs between entitites of approximately the same capacity. As we are at the sub-worm level in comparison to KT-II civilizations, they will not be directing communications at us."
Are you stating that If a KT-II civilization is aware of our existence, then they likely won't attempt to communicate with us? And although they might not communicate with us, we won't intercept any of there transmissions? Let me propose a scenario: Suppose there is a KT-I civilization on the path towards KT-II, that is grappling with the question "is there life out there?" To solve the answer, suppose they set up a listening system to catch wayward transmissions. Furthermore, they also decide to "talk" to the cosmos by blasting EM energy at likely candidates. What would the chances be that they could chose an enhabited system that was similarly listening? Another statement you make that could be clarified is why should we be listening in the MHz region?
3. "The fact that KT-II civilizations can each build billions of lunar diameter telescopes makes rationalizations for interstellar travel difficult (why go "there" when you can "watch" there?)"
In a universe dominated by KT-II's, none will have the desire to conquest, travel, colonize?
The laptop market looks just like the desktop market did before the arrival of the Athlon: high end performance meant "Intel Inside", while AMD would barely compete at the lower end. Currently, a 750 MHz laptop costs 3 to 4 time more than a comparably equiped desktop (yes, the flat screen and HD also drive up the price). Hopefully the arrival of the Corvette/Mustang from AMD and the Transmeta Crusoe will spark a performance and price war similar to the race we just saw between the PIII and the Athlon. And just like in that race, the consumer will be the ultimate winner.
According to the design specs, Tempest fit into 30K. Nowadays three times that much is used rendering Lara Croft's left boob. 30 years later, I still play Tempest for hours, long after I've conquered and forgotten most modern games.
The descriptions doesn't do the games justice. It's like describing the Mona Lisa as "pretty girl, hands on lap, unusual smile". These games had a Zen-like simplicity that is timeless. "Concept artwork, world ideas and sketches" would be wasted on these games. They don't need them, they are perfect on their own.
Lets start by comparing apples to apples: the Honda Insight vs the Civic HX. We can assume both cars will have similar reliability, insurance, maintenance, etc... Data: (taken from Edmunds.com) Insight MSRP=$18880; Fuel mileage: 61cty/70hwy -> avg mileage=66 mpg HX MSRP=$13500; Fuel mileage: 35cty/43hwy -> avg mileage=39 mpg Assumptions: Price of gas (G)= $2.00/gallon, miles driven per year (M) = 15000 mi/yr, ignore other costs (maintenance, insurance, etc.) Calculations: Price difference (dP) = $18880-$13500 = $5380 Insight annual fuel cost (Fi) = G*M/66mpg = $455/yr HX annual fuel cost (Fh) = G*M/39mpg = $769/yr Bottom line: dP/(Fh-Fi) = 17.13 years At 15,000 miles per year and $2.00/gallon, it would take a little over 17 years to recoup the price difference in fuel economy savings. (I suppose YMMV would be a horrible pun) Other factors: The HX can carry 4 or 5 passengers and 850 lbs, the Insight is a strict 2 seater with a 350lb limit. Coolness factor - Insight: 9/10 (Geek God) - would be a 10/10 (Total Geek God) if you could boot slackware on the ECU HX: 1/10 (dorkmobile)
Slashdot Mirror
It allows more arguments to be made and heard, creating a larger body of knowledge surrounding the case before it goes to the SC. Very little new information or lines of reasoning are made when a case goes to the SC, rather the Court passes judgement on decisions and arguments made in the lower courts.
This decision preserves 200 or so years of judicial protocol where the SC is the *last* court of appeals, in which they hear only cases that merit there attention. They could very well decide *not* to hear this case if they believe the Court of Appeals came to the right decision. This is a process the entire Judicial system would be extremely reluctant to tinker with.
Finally, If the SC would bypass the Court of Appeals, then they would open themselves to a huge increase in their caseload and diminish the value and impact of the lower courts.
Just because the could take a case directly, doesn't mean they have to.
The solution is to integrate, rather than separate, the IT functions into leadership, product planning, marketing, etc... Bring in the engineers early to planning and marketing lets them begin working on solutions sooner. Having more IT personnel work with leadership lets them pitch more creative and doable ideas to the CEO. This gives upper management a more realistic outlook on their companies capabilities, creates a broader sense of misson among all workers. Most importantly it yield intangible rewards such as a greater sense of accomplishment among all staffers, not just the geeks.
LS technology could become another revenue stream if they apply it properly. By the 2004 Olympics, LS should be sufficiently evolved to rival TV broadcast. Now instead of having a single channel with predetermined broadcasts, there could be channels dedicated to each sport and country. If they want to get fancy they could use a customizable portal. Revenue could be brought in by subscription or advertisement. The ad model will most likely succeed, since subscription on cableTV was tried a couple Olympiads ago and failed miserably
The only issue I see with this will be NBC and other TV broadcaster, and if their broadcast rights will cover only TV or all broadcast. Of course, NBC itself could setup the portal...
The possibilities are wide open.
So instead of the Nike IBM McDonald Disney Olympics on NBC, you'll have the Microsoft IBM RealAudio Intel Olympics on Yahoo!
2. Does the library's role include restricting access to information? This question has been around long before the internet. For instance, should minors be allowed to read the Karma Sutra or the Anarchist Cookbook? Do other organizations (such as the AFA and FRC) have the right to determine what is put on the shelves? Can you or your child be denied access to works such as "Huckleberry Finn", "Fahenheit 451", "Heather has Two Mommies"?
3. If libraries are tasked with controlling accesss, how do they go about it? Working within a budget, how do they pay for it? Software may be the first solution, but it can be rendered ineffective. Can a library actively monitor usage and still respect the user's right to privacy?
For more information, checkout (groan) The American Library Association
... is "AutoFlame" software.
Why waste time and emotion responding to some knucklehead's diatribe? Just invoke the AutoFlame utility, which would spit out an editable response that you could send.
Of course it would be customizable with user defined settings for Hatred, Bile, Profanity, IQ level, Grammar, and Insult. Now that would be progress!
450g heat sink! What'll they do for the laptop crowd, a built-in R134 refrigeration unit or a liquid nitrogen sprayer?
Both will add a manageable 20 pounds; however one will suck the battery dry in 4 minutes, the other could spill and crack your legs off like toothpics.
Take the isolated caffiene gene, possibly make it 1000x powerful, splice it into some harmless E. Coli (the type that lives in your gut). Grow a huge batch of the stuff, then dump it into your enemy's water supply.
Result: The bacteria spreads throughout the population, including their leadership and military forces. Anyone who catches it runs the buzz from hell, sleep becomes impossible. After a week or so of sleep depravation, high stress, and fatigue, the majority of the population, including the military, collapses.
Similar possibilities exist with psycho-active components of marijuana, opiates, mushrooms, tobacco, etc. You could even isolate the gene in wine and beer bacteria that creates alcohol...
You make some huge assumptions in support of your points:
1. "Such civilizations [KT-II] are resistant to almost all hazards on galactic scales and will thus be the dominant form of life in galaxies."
All civilizations will always have to deal with self-generated hazards such as war (between themselves and other "alien" races), environmental degradation, and political strife. The greater their technology, the more terrible their weapons could become. You mention nanotechnology as a conduit to upward transition, yet there are scenarios, such as those presented in Kurtzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines", where flawed nanotechology could wipe out the planet, or deliberately designed nanotech weapons that could selectively destroy organisms based on genome.
No civilization is immune from self-destruction or competition with others.
2. "KT-II civilizations survive for trillions of years."
Given the universe is 8-12 billion years old, that's a pretty bold statement!
2. "Intentional communications generally occurs between entitites of approximately the same capacity. As we are at the sub-worm level in comparison to KT-II civilizations, they will not be directing communications at us."
Are you stating that If a KT-II civilization is aware of our existence, then they likely won't attempt to communicate with us? And although they might not communicate with us, we won't intercept any of there transmissions? Let me propose a scenario: Suppose there is a KT-I civilization on the path towards KT-II, that is grappling with the question "is there life out there?" To solve the answer, suppose they set up a listening system to catch wayward transmissions. Furthermore, they also decide to "talk" to the cosmos by blasting EM energy at likely candidates. What would the chances be that they could chose an enhabited system that was similarly listening? Another statement you make that could be clarified is why should we be listening in the MHz region?
3. "The fact that KT-II civilizations can each build billions of lunar diameter telescopes makes rationalizations for interstellar travel difficult (why go "there" when you can "watch" there?)"
In a universe dominated by KT-II's, none will have the desire to conquest, travel, colonize?
The laptop market looks just like the desktop market did before the arrival of the Athlon: high end performance meant "Intel Inside", while AMD would barely compete at the lower end. Currently, a 750 MHz laptop costs 3 to 4 time more than a comparably equiped desktop (yes, the flat screen and HD also drive up the price). Hopefully the arrival of the Corvette/Mustang from AMD and the Transmeta Crusoe will spark a performance and price war similar to the race we just saw between the PIII and the Athlon. And just like in that race, the consumer will be the ultimate winner.
According to the design specs, Tempest fit into 30K. Nowadays three times that much is used rendering Lara Croft's left boob. 30 years later, I still play Tempest for hours, long after I've conquered and forgotten most modern games.
The descriptions doesn't do the games justice. It's like describing the Mona Lisa as "pretty girl, hands on lap, unusual smile". These games had a Zen-like simplicity that is timeless. "Concept artwork, world ideas and sketches" would be wasted on these games. They don't need them, they are perfect on their own.
Lets start by comparing apples to apples: the Honda Insight vs the Civic HX. We can assume both cars will have similar reliability, insurance, maintenance, etc... Data: (taken from Edmunds.com) Insight MSRP=$18880; Fuel mileage: 61cty/70hwy -> avg mileage=66 mpg HX MSRP=$13500; Fuel mileage: 35cty/43hwy -> avg mileage=39 mpg Assumptions: Price of gas (G)= $2.00/gallon, miles driven per year (M) = 15000 mi/yr, ignore other costs (maintenance, insurance, etc.) Calculations: Price difference (dP) = $18880-$13500 = $5380 Insight annual fuel cost (Fi) = G*M/66mpg = $455/yr HX annual fuel cost (Fh) = G*M/39mpg = $769/yr Bottom line: dP/(Fh-Fi) = 17.13 years At 15,000 miles per year and $2.00/gallon, it would take a little over 17 years to recoup the price difference in fuel economy savings. (I suppose YMMV would be a horrible pun) Other factors: The HX can carry 4 or 5 passengers and 850 lbs, the Insight is a strict 2 seater with a 350lb limit. Coolness factor - Insight: 9/10 (Geek God) - would be a 10/10 (Total Geek God) if you could boot slackware on the ECU HX: 1/10 (dorkmobile)