I guess the whole Pirate Bay issue introduced them to the wonderful world of corporate bribery.
I like many aspects of US culture, but I do wish the US would stop spreading all aspects of its culture to the rest of the world.
(That's meant as a joke, not flamebait. Well, perhaps it's not entirely a joke...)
In really cold weather regular touch screens would probably freeze up and stop working from the cold. So an ice touch screen would be perfect, especially for a cold place such as Finland. Well, at least for part of the year.
Do you think the elves who work for Santa Claus at the North Pole would be interested in this?
What about arctic/desert/jungle explorers? They tend to be not be too old (due to the rigours of the environments they traverse) and they're often researchers.
I think Disney does deserve the right to Mickey Mouse. Why?
Because Walt Disney (the man) invented Mickey. Disney (the man) wanted his invention to be owned by Disney (the business). That was his prerogative, as the inventor and thus the owner of Mickey. Now Disney (the business) owns Mickey. Simple as that.
Sure Disney is a big, successful business. Good for them. And if you want something like Mickey, then go and invent your own character.
Compare that to knowledge, and my tune changes. In my view, no one has the right to prevent other people from using knowledge.
Knowledge is typically gained from discovery. The very act of discovery implies that there is prior art. Some prior art is found freely occurring in nature (ex. useful organic compunds, processes) while other prior art (such as sorting algorithms) is worked out by clever people. Either way, gaining such knowledge does not happen by invention. It happens by some form of discovery.
Why am I against copyrighting or patenting knowledge? Because that makes natural things illegal, which of course ridicules the whole concept of legal ownership. (Arguably, that's the very reason we're having this discussion.)
Say I patent a human gene. What happens now (or in a hypothetical big brother future) to those who naturally have that gene?
Say I patent some aspect of physics. Does that mean that no-one alse is allowed to use that natural law without my permission?
It's patently ridiculuos (pun inteded). What's ridiculuos is not respected. That is why patent laws today are not respected (in various ways).
So, I am against patenting things like genes and naturally occurring medicines.
But I do accept copyrighting things like media and carefully designed medicines.
That said, the whole anti-piracy thing has gone too far. Respect goes both ways. If we consumers are expected to respect copyright holders, then copyright holders must respect consumers.
For example, DVD regions is a bloody pain. I can't legitimately buy a movie in one country and expect to be able to play it in another part of the world?!? Screw them!
Different example. How many times have we read how an artist politely asks (in a forum, say) his fans to respect his source of income, and consequently his income gets a massive boost?
It sounds like what *you* want is a large-scale RTT (Real-time tactical) game, where all you have to worry about is deciding on which units to move and where to move them. Personally, I would consider *that* boring, as it removes a lot of the complexity that makes a good RTS challenging.
Actually, I quite enjoy the battles in the Total War series.
I remember when I was a kid... (read to the end of this post before you get off my lawn;)
In the 80's when a student hit a teacher, it was in national news that sparked public discussion. "What is happening to our society?"
Today, when kids stab eacher to death, that may end up in the news, somewhere below other stuff. We're too jaded now to bother with public dicussion.
Of course, very bad things did happen then too, but they did not appear to happen as frequently as they do nowadays.
In the 80's video players came out. There was a backlash with people saying "Kids will watch violent videos, and become violent.". I saw a few violent movies, and I'm certainly not a violent person. But, I saw only a few violent movies during all my childhood which, if anything, because I was unused to violence, must have put me off violence.
Today, violence is on TV everyday, and alot of it too. ("You can't miss the next episode of XYZ. You're not going to believe what he/she does.") The more gruesome the better. We have "realistic" video games that aim to be as guesomely violent as possible, that players become immersed in for hours. But hey, that won't affect people. Sure, adverts of a few seconds here and there apparently work wonders for sales, but sitting for hours seeing something won't affect you at all, oh no.
Question...
When training soldiers, you give them the skills to kill. But how do you give them the ability to "cross the thin red line"? (This is a significant hurdle for most soldiers.)
Answer...
You desensitise them. That means that you give them so much simulated experience killing, that it ends up being more natural for them when it comes to the crunch.
There's now a problem with porn style behaviour, with both our kids and adults (mainly men) in Africa, that is brought on by them watching porn on the internet. People want to try what they saw on the internet, and that's usually not very healthy sex.
On the other hand, I firmly believe that overprotecting kids (such as only showing them "harmless" stuff like Teletubbies and making Humpty Dumpty no longer get injured from his great fall) is in fact harmful, as there is never a challenge or threat to overcome. That's the benefit of the Grimm stories like Hansel and Gretel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimm's_Fairy_Tales ). They may be grim, but they also teach strength against adversity. If kids don't learn that, and don't learn grace when loosing, then the weak minded ones might shoot their teachers/classmates when they get low grades or are bullied. But again, where'd they get the idea to shoot up the school in the first place? (And that certainly never happened when I was a kid, anywhere, ever. It was unthinkable, in every sense on the word.)
Don't get me wrong. I train martial arts. I enjoy a good action movie. I've even gazed on some porn (who hasn't). Yet I don't take those things to extremes. The same probably applies to you too. However, we're adults and probably not the weak minded type of people who do get "nudged" over the edge. But there are many who are.
So, how do we allow ourselves to enjoy ourselves, without corrupting our kids or nudging weak people over the edge?
Well, one way is to moderate our kids' access to gruesomness. I think many parents are not capable of moderating their kids. So how about giving them some help, some tools, such as... ratings?
I think that ratings should be considered advice, not law, so that parents can override them if they choose to. But at least ratings are a step in the right direction.
Seriously, taking all your "trouble" kids, having them stick around after class, in the same room... it's a silly idea. That means when they go home from school, the only other people to talk to are other trouble kids. Does someone who yells at a teacher need to be sitting around the kid who got caught smoking?
That's exactly the problem with prisons. I think we need to come up with a better system than prisons, that is still socially palatable.
memorizing vast amounts of crap is hard, but learning lots of new concepts is easy
For you, yes. For me, yes. For everyone else?... no, because we're all different.
I never did learn the times-table. Even now, I work out the answers. I was considered stupid for not being able to memorise. Yet I understand complex concepts very well.
Other people are the opposite. Ever come across someone who says "I don't get it. Just tell me what to do." and then they remember what to do, and do so doggedly for years, without ever putting the thought in to understand that there may be better ways. We might call that stupid, but that doesn't make it any less common.
Some people understand, other people remember. (The lucky ones do both.)
Or show them what it can be used for, before teaching it.
(ie. Make them need it sooner.)
By giving students interesting problems to solve (that can only be solved using maths) before teaching, their attention will be held that much better.
In my experience this practice is common among good teachers, but uncommon among bad teachers.
Some subjects are harder to teach than others, and require better teaching skills. Such teaching skills can be taught.
A good teacher can even lift a students mental blocks.
Those are average speeds, not top speeds. And even if that battey type is better suited as an "endurance battery", it could then be fitted alongside a "strength battery".
Sure, you'd have to fit smaller batteries to fit both, but at some point you're going to have to make a tradeoff, no matter how you look at it.
Okay, so we won't be able to charge car batteries at home. But we don't fill our cars with petrol or diesel at home either.
We use service stations for that. I'm sure service stations could be retrofitted to charge car batteries.
(Though for safety reasons, a service station should probably not serve both fuel and high voltage electricity.)
Slashdot Mirror
ROFL =D
I guess the whole Pirate Bay issue introduced them to the wonderful world of corporate bribery.
I like many aspects of US culture, but I do wish the US would stop spreading all aspects of its culture to the rest of the world.
(That's meant as a joke, not flamebait. Well, perhaps it's not entirely a joke...)
In really cold weather regular touch screens would probably freeze up and stop working from the cold. So an ice touch screen would be perfect, especially for a cold place such as Finland. Well, at least for part of the year.
Do you think the elves who work for Santa Claus at the North Pole would be interested in this?
What about arctic/desert/jungle explorers? They tend to be not be too old (due to the rigours of the environments they traverse) and they're often researchers.
If lucky, one might find a live one here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_explorers
It worked on me, despite knowing what to expect. I just can't seem to concentrate and be aware at the same time.
If I'm not mistaken, all mobile phones have backdoors for telco's to use, for silently pushing firmware updates and bricking phones, etc.
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that's what my cousin told me, who works with setting up mobile infrastructure.
How far did it fly? Where did it land?
A few days ago a worker at a missile silo brought his kids in to have a look at daddy's work place. Kids, you know. Can't always control them.
Mmmm... witchetty grubs. =b..
Info
I think Disney does deserve the right to Mickey Mouse. Why?
Because Walt Disney (the man) invented Mickey. Disney (the man) wanted his invention to be owned by Disney (the business). That was his prerogative, as the inventor and thus the owner of Mickey. Now Disney (the business) owns Mickey. Simple as that.
Sure Disney is a big, successful business. Good for them. And if you want something like Mickey, then go and invent your own character.
Compare that to knowledge, and my tune changes. In my view, no one has the right to prevent other people from using knowledge.
Knowledge is typically gained from discovery. The very act of discovery implies that there is prior art. Some prior art is found freely occurring in nature (ex. useful organic compunds, processes) while other prior art (such as sorting algorithms) is worked out by clever people. Either way, gaining such knowledge does not happen by invention. It happens by some form of discovery.
Why am I against copyrighting or patenting knowledge? Because that makes natural things illegal, which of course ridicules the whole concept of legal ownership. (Arguably, that's the very reason we're having this discussion.)
Say I patent a human gene. What happens now (or in a hypothetical big brother future) to those who naturally have that gene?
Say I patent some aspect of physics. Does that mean that no-one alse is allowed to use that natural law without my permission?
It's patently ridiculuos (pun inteded). What's ridiculuos is not respected. That is why patent laws today are not respected (in various ways).
So, I am against patenting things like genes and naturally occurring medicines.
But I do accept copyrighting things like media and carefully designed medicines.
That said, the whole anti-piracy thing has gone too far. Respect goes both ways. If we consumers are expected to respect copyright holders, then copyright holders must respect consumers.
For example, DVD regions is a bloody pain. I can't legitimately buy a movie in one country and expect to be able to play it in another part of the world?!? Screw them!
Different example. How many times have we read how an artist politely asks (in a forum, say) his fans to respect his source of income, and consequently his income gets a massive boost?
Well, that's my opinion anyway.
I've never heard a convincing argument why Mickey Mouse should be taken away from them if he's still a viable property.
Slavery has been banned. Set him free.
Geez, they weren't particularly agile. I feel for you. :/
I might not know much about Agile methodology, but I do know one needs an agile approach.
Chinese lucky number of critical flaws. Can anyone work out the feng-shui of that...?
I already live in Australia.
It sounds like what *you* want is a large-scale RTT (Real-time tactical) game, where all you have to worry about is deciding on which units to move and where to move them. Personally, I would consider *that* boring, as it removes a lot of the complexity that makes a good RTS challenging.
Actually, I quite enjoy the battles in the Total War series.
Unless, of course, some of that research money can be spent on making the armed services less expensive to run. (Such as reducing the use of "liquid fossil fuels". http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/11/01/2033248/Saving-Lives-On-the-Battlefield-With-Green-Tech )
That said, I don't know of any military being financially savvy. They'd probably just spend the saved money on something else.
I remember when I was a kid... (read to the end of this post before you get off my lawn ;)
In the 80's when a student hit a teacher, it was in national news that sparked public discussion. "What is happening to our society?"
Today, when kids stab eacher to death, that may end up in the news, somewhere below other stuff. We're too jaded now to bother with public dicussion.
Of course, very bad things did happen then too, but they did not appear to happen as frequently as they do nowadays.
In the 80's video players came out. There was a backlash with people saying "Kids will watch violent videos, and become violent.". I saw a few violent movies, and I'm certainly not a violent person. But, I saw only a few violent movies during all my childhood which, if anything, because I was unused to violence, must have put me off violence.
Today, violence is on TV everyday, and alot of it too. ("You can't miss the next episode of XYZ. You're not going to believe what he/she does.") The more gruesome the better. We have "realistic" video games that aim to be as guesomely violent as possible, that players become immersed in for hours. But hey, that won't affect people. Sure, adverts of a few seconds here and there apparently work wonders for sales, but sitting for hours seeing something won't affect you at all, oh no.
Question...
When training soldiers, you give them the skills to kill. But how do you give them the ability to "cross the thin red line"? (This is a significant hurdle for most soldiers.)
Answer...
You desensitise them. That means that you give them so much simulated experience killing, that it ends up being more natural for them when it comes to the crunch.
There's now a problem with porn style behaviour, with both our kids and adults (mainly men) in Africa, that is brought on by them watching porn on the internet. People want to try what they saw on the internet, and that's usually not very healthy sex.
On the other hand, I firmly believe that overprotecting kids (such as only showing them "harmless" stuff like Teletubbies and making Humpty Dumpty no longer get injured from his great fall) is in fact harmful, as there is never a challenge or threat to overcome. That's the benefit of the Grimm stories like Hansel and Gretel ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grimm's_Fairy_Tales ). They may be grim, but they also teach strength against adversity. If kids don't learn that, and don't learn grace when loosing, then the weak minded ones might shoot their teachers/classmates when they get low grades or are bullied. But again, where'd they get the idea to shoot up the school in the first place? (And that certainly never happened when I was a kid, anywhere, ever. It was unthinkable, in every sense on the word.)
Don't get me wrong. I train martial arts. I enjoy a good action movie. I've even gazed on some porn (who hasn't). Yet I don't take those things to extremes. The same probably applies to you too. However, we're adults and probably not the weak minded type of people who do get "nudged" over the edge. But there are many who are.
So, how do we allow ourselves to enjoy ourselves, without corrupting our kids or nudging weak people over the edge?
Well, one way is to moderate our kids' access to gruesomness. I think many parents are not capable of moderating their kids. So how about giving them some help, some tools, such as... ratings?
I think that ratings should be considered advice, not law, so that parents can override them if they choose to. But at least ratings are a step in the right direction.
Seriously, taking all your "trouble" kids, having them stick around after class, in the same room... it's a silly idea. That means when they go home from school, the only other people to talk to are other trouble kids. Does someone who yells at a teacher need to be sitting around the kid who got caught smoking?
That's exactly the problem with prisons. I think we need to come up with a better system than prisons, that is still socially palatable.
Is that because violent people are to busy studying how to be more violent? ;)
memorizing vast amounts of crap is hard, but learning lots of new concepts is easy
For you, yes. For me, yes. For everyone else?... no, because we're all different.
I never did learn the times-table. Even now, I work out the answers. I was considered stupid for not being able to memorise. Yet I understand complex concepts very well.
Other people are the opposite. Ever come across someone who says "I don't get it. Just tell me what to do." and then they remember what to do, and do so doggedly for years, without ever putting the thought in to understand that there may be better ways. We might call that stupid, but that doesn't make it any less common.
Some people understand, other people remember. (The lucky ones do both.)
I can't think of a better way to do it
Teach it to them when they do need it.
Or show them what it can be used for, before teaching it.
(ie. Make them need it sooner.)
By giving students interesting problems to solve (that can only be solved using maths) before teaching, their attention will be held that much better.
In my experience this practice is common among good teachers, but uncommon among bad teachers.
Some subjects are harder to teach than others, and require better teaching skills. Such teaching skills can be taught.
A good teacher can even lift a students mental blocks.
The Metroplex is the city centre complex in the city called Metropolis.
Those are average speeds, not top speeds. And even if that battey type is better suited as an "endurance battery", it could then be fitted alongside a "strength battery".
Sure, you'd have to fit smaller batteries to fit both, but at some point you're going to have to make a tradeoff, no matter how you look at it.
Okay, so we won't be able to charge car batteries at home. But we don't fill our cars with petrol or diesel at home either.
We use service stations for that. I'm sure service stations could be retrofitted to charge car batteries.
(Though for safety reasons, a service station should probably not serve both fuel and high voltage electricity.)
I don't know anyone with a 150kW electrical service to their house. Do you?
Lots of people! For example Bruce Wayne, Lex Luthor, Gru, Tony Stark, etc.