Perhaps you underestimate the current generation entering the astronaut program, raised in the transformative power of Ecstasy, raves, hookups and porn downloads.
The old guard is dying off with the Shuttle. By the time we're sending people to Mars, all the old coots running NASA will be Boomers with their own history, looking to relive their youth through an even more flexible, athletic cohort.
A full DVD holds 4.7GB, for lots of video at TV rez. If new iPods had wireless networking, even an iPhone, their Flash would be a cache. 4GB is already only $35, which sounds like a workable replacement for HDs in a networked environment.
Where you're going, along with NASA, apparently, is a crew of grandmas past menopause. But we might not have the tech to maintain cabin environment integrity with all those cats.
And the video licensing revenue is substantially smaller.
I don't want any "no sex" freaks representing the next big human step, to another planet. Give me the humpers.
Besides, "all male" is more likely to both fail to meet the "no sex" and to be unfamiliar with long sexless periods than "all female" astronaut overachievers. I volunteer to provide the balance for that crew - enough to colonize Mars with a race of supermen.
No, what we want is pansexual swingers in a nonstop orgy. People who will have sex without conflating it with love, possession, jealousy, status or other issues. To prevent inferiority conflicts with mission rank, sexual performance should be evaluated along with other mission skills.
All of it on camera, especially the long seasons spent in zero-g. The syndication rights could fund the entire mission, and the subsequent colonization.
If I have a little milliturbine battery with 3 turbines, each rotating in one of the X, Y and Z axes, their combined gyroscopic motion will resist being moved in any direction. It's as if the battery is heavier - the faster the spin, the heavier the battery.
If I rotate the milliturbines backwards, will it get lighter, until the battery weighs nothing?
And can I move the turbines off the power the battery produces?
The articles aren't like code, which are tightly interdependent in every line. At a paragraph resolution, the paths are highly independent.
Determining trust can be a matter of simply clicking on paragraphs you read that you trust a little, accumulating minitrust for its different editors, until many editors have finely graded trust ratings. Add "friend of a friend" and some centralized editors who get explicit ratings and explicitly rate pages/paragraphs, and the community can have comprehensive trust networks without very much effort that bring very high reward.
This is a problem that might not succumb to a Slashdot comment's solutions. But it is a solvable problem. And a solution that will have revolutionary effects. We should get into it, rather than oscillate forever in an excluded middle fallacy.
Who are these "trustworthy" central editors? And why can't I have a Wikipedia with edits applied from only those editors who I trust, or who my trusted friends trust?
No, it's a trivial variation on the existing (patented or not) device. The lack of a patent does not indicate that no one thought of it, or would have. Why does this variant need patent protection of its "investment" in its unique design, so others can't compete with it starting with a full bank account? In fact, that is exactly what this design does, competing with existing designs, deriving its design from their substantial investment.
Patenting isn't an "I thought of it first" lottery. It's a major exception to free info exchange justified only as protection of substantial risky investments from competitors. Which investment would otherwise not have been made without the protection. Otherwise these monopolies come too cheap, and interfere with "progress in science and the useful arts".
And most ideas that are obvious after they're stated were obvious before they were stated. While all ideas that were obvious before they were stated are still obvious afterwards.
Taking an invention and running through all the combinations of directions of placement is not "novel". If I take AT&T's patented keypad and patent it with the numbers running right-left, or down-up, or both, that's an obvious invention from the prior art. So is putting the keypad above the display.
These patents are exceptions to the freedom to express information that are justified only by the necessity to protect the risky investments in invention that competitors would just use to start without the disadvantage of spending first on inventing, then on commercializing. This patent is an obvious example of using the initial investment in inventing the "top display" phone, then competing with it after investing practically nothing in the "bottom display" variation. It's a scam.
That flight was a stupid waste of fuel and time. The point of skywriting is to push a message to vast numbers of people in the sky we all have in common, "just look up". That version requries people to search to pull a flightpath in an obscure webpage that they "look up" with a great deal of effort for a tiny reward.
But who cares about the stupid skywriting stunt? That flightpath page is supercool. How do I find the specific flight number of a commercial flight I took, to look at my actual flightpath, without poring through all the flight activity from its originating airport?
one of those "Why didn't I think of that?" moments.
Sometimes known as an "obvious" invention. Which the law is supposed to prevent from being patented, if it were not abused by a patent regime administered to hand out as many artificial monopolies as possible.
It only seems fair to subsidize a losing American manufacturer with $BILLIONS of my tax money, for the same service we could just buy from them instead of lease?
How about using that WTO that other countries use to force American companies to abandon labor and pollution protection/costs to instead force the EU to stop competing unfairly?
How about you send me your extra tax dollars to help me compete in the labor market against foreign competition?
Why does the rest of the device have to be as big as a large cellphone? Why can't those electronics fit into the same volume, but in a longer tube, like a magic wand, with mediaplayer and "open" controls along the side, and Bluetooth? That would fit in any pocket, and let a much larger area display roll out from the longer edge. Maybe even folded over in half (or more plies) to roll out, then fold out from a short rod into a large area.
Americans used to joke that the Soviets could build a briefcase nuke - but the batteries would be as big as an office building. The next generations of these rollable displays should contract to make superportable volumes snap into large areas on demand.
The judge did warn against 'wholesale surveillance' of the population, though, so... that's some comfort.
It might be, if the judge had made that distinction, but that is not what the article says:
the government argues that no warrant was needed since "there was no search or seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment," but did add that "wholesale surveillance of the entire population" was to be viewed differently.
The judge's ruling on the distinction is not mentioned, so there's no reason to believe it exists. The government's defense of the cops might have made this distinction in this case, but that's not binding. Tomorrow, a government lawyer could argue that "reasonable suspicion" ("good faith" guessing without evidence, which evidence is required for the higher standard of "probable cause" that defines "reasonable search and siezure" as determined by a judge before the search) is OK to track everyone, because this judge said no individual has the right to be protected from it, and each search is of an individual. The government is not required to be consistent.
But a judge's ruling that such individual searches are different, that they require a different standard of "cause", would be a major landmark. Especially if the "wholesale" surveillance required a higher standard, especially a higher standard that just probable cause, but rather something like an actual court ruling on a trial finding actual guilt or liability on evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Because the courts do have to be consistent in a way that lawyers do not. Such a ruling would give rights defenders the tool to prohibit governments from invading our privacy with cross-referenced database queries without evidence justifying that tracking. And it would draw a line within which even this creepy ruling can be fought, without having to rise to bigger questions about mass surveillence that Bush and the outgoing Republican Congress held were justified by the national security excuse, even when no evidence for cause was up against evidence for exoneration.
We need these precedents, as surely as we need precedents defining our property rights on copyable info property, and privacy rights on private info. Without them we'll be as lost as would the emerging middle and merchant classes among the real pirates and privateers of the Colonization Age. While those throes did lead to revolutions establishing governments to protect our rights, it cost a lot of time and bloodshed that we don't have to waste in this generation.
Here's your last favor, blind guy: the "google" link to which I believe you're referring (not just the helpful link to the "greenwash" that you're trying to work in this thread) is just the site search that links to the crooked political science run by a host of non-Exxon oil companies. At a single site.
If I have to explain that to you, while you suck straight from the oil pump for your worldview, you're a lost cause. There is no next time for us.
Nit picked. The distinction without a difference just reinforces the facts about these content cartels, without limit to a specific medium. If books were still popular, I might have mistakenly typed the BPAA (imaginary Book Publishers Association of America).
Why does anyone believe these unaccountable, selfserving "stats" released by the notoriously lying, litigious, abusive RIAA? We don't make gas mileage requirements taking oil companies' reports as gospel, except when "we" are really screwing "ourselves".
Your eyes were shut to Exxon before they were so widely exposed. Still closed to how oil companies greenwash with public statements and "weakened strains" of environmental activism/lobbying to preempt expensive reforms.
I know all that. I've run exclusively a GNU/Linux desktop (GNOME) for several years, switching from Windows over the course of a year, after a decade following switching from a Mac (I used to work for Apple), when I'd also designed Windows 3.0/3.1 desktop publishing apps.
What I'm talking about is mainly drivers for phone touchscreens and other HW. And specifically, which Windows phones are most completely supported by GPE now. I ran the Handhelds.org Linux on some iPaqs without X (ethernet to stereo audio for MP3 streams) for a couple years until a year ago, and know that HW support is incomplete even on "PC replacements", not phones. Actually, I've found Handhelds.org project support for $100 iPaqs (or others with ethernet/WiFi + decent/good stereo audio output + USB) to be increasingly disappointing.
As I said, I want a phone Linux that can run existing apps on my data (like rsyncing my.evolution storage files), and leverage the exploding phone SW development to reinvigorate desktop development.
So which Windows mobile phones are the most completely supported by the new GPE releases?
This system would be a great feature of SourceForge. Finding all the common components in different projects to be factored out and share instead. I was always disappointed in SourceForge's lack of intelligence about the related contents of its different projects. This thing could find relevant code and import it into the integrated navigation.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you underestimate the current generation entering the astronaut program, raised in the transformative power of Ecstasy, raves, hookups and porn downloads.
The old guard is dying off with the Shuttle. By the time we're sending people to Mars, all the old coots running NASA will be Boomers with their own history, looking to relive their youth through an even more flexible, athletic cohort.
A full DVD holds 4.7GB, for lots of video at TV rez. If new iPods had wireless networking, even an iPhone, their Flash would be a cache. 4GB is already only $35, which sounds like a workable replacement for HDs in a networked environment.
Where you're going, along with NASA, apparently, is a crew of grandmas past menopause. But we might not have the tech to maintain cabin environment integrity with all those cats.
And the video licensing revenue is substantially smaller.
I don't want any "no sex" freaks representing the next big human step, to another planet. Give me the humpers.
Besides, "all male" is more likely to both fail to meet the "no sex" and to be unfamiliar with long sexless periods than "all female" astronaut overachievers. I volunteer to provide the balance for that crew - enough to colonize Mars with a race of supermen.
No, what we want is pansexual swingers in a nonstop orgy . People who will have sex without conflating it with love, possession, jealousy, status or other issues. To prevent inferiority conflicts with mission rank, sexual performance should be evaluated along with other mission skills.
All of it on camera, especially the long seasons spent in zero-g. The syndication rights could fund the entire mission, and the subsequent colonization.
If I have a little milliturbine battery with 3 turbines, each rotating in one of the X, Y and Z axes, their combined gyroscopic motion will resist being moved in any direction. It's as if the battery is heavier - the faster the spin, the heavier the battery.
If I rotate the milliturbines backwards, will it get lighter, until the battery weighs nothing?
And can I move the turbines off the power the battery produces?
How valuable is this kind of advertisement in that tiny market? Compared to its cost? Huge waste.
The articles aren't like code, which are tightly interdependent in every line. At a paragraph resolution, the paths are highly independent.
Determining trust can be a matter of simply clicking on paragraphs you read that you trust a little, accumulating minitrust for its different editors, until many editors have finely graded trust ratings. Add "friend of a friend" and some centralized editors who get explicit ratings and explicitly rate pages/paragraphs, and the community can have comprehensive trust networks without very much effort that bring very high reward.
This is a problem that might not succumb to a Slashdot comment's solutions. But it is a solvable problem. And a solution that will have revolutionary effects. We should get into it, rather than oscillate forever in an excluded middle fallacy.
Who are these "trustworthy" central editors? And why can't I have a Wikipedia with edits applied from only those editors who I trust, or who my trusted friends trust?
No, it's a trivial variation on the existing (patented or not) device. The lack of a patent does not indicate that no one thought of it, or would have. Why does this variant need patent protection of its "investment" in its unique design, so others can't compete with it starting with a full bank account? In fact, that is exactly what this design does, competing with existing designs, deriving its design from their substantial investment.
Patenting isn't an "I thought of it first" lottery. It's a major exception to free info exchange justified only as protection of substantial risky investments from competitors. Which investment would otherwise not have been made without the protection. Otherwise these monopolies come too cheap, and interfere with "progress in science and the useful arts".
And most ideas that are obvious after they're stated were obvious before they were stated. While all ideas that were obvious before they were stated are still obvious afterwards.
Taking an invention and running through all the combinations of directions of placement is not "novel". If I take AT&T's patented keypad and patent it with the numbers running right-left, or down-up, or both, that's an obvious invention from the prior art. So is putting the keypad above the display.
These patents are exceptions to the freedom to express information that are justified only by the necessity to protect the risky investments in invention that competitors would just use to start without the disadvantage of spending first on inventing, then on commercializing. This patent is an obvious example of using the initial investment in inventing the "top display" phone, then competing with it after investing practically nothing in the "bottom display" variation. It's a scam.
That flight was a stupid waste of fuel and time. The point of skywriting is to push a message to vast numbers of people in the sky we all have in common, "just look up". That version requries people to search to pull a flightpath in an obscure webpage that they "look up" with a great deal of effort for a tiny reward.
But who cares about the stupid skywriting stunt? That flightpath page is supercool. How do I find the specific flight number of a commercial flight I took, to look at my actual flightpath, without poring through all the flight activity from its originating airport?
It only seems fair to subsidize a losing American manufacturer with $BILLIONS of my tax money, for the same service we could just buy from them instead of lease?
How about using that WTO that other countries use to force American companies to abandon labor and pollution protection/costs to instead force the EU to stop competing unfairly?
How about you send me your extra tax dollars to help me compete in the labor market against foreign competition?
Moderation 0
50% Flamebait
50% Funny
Funny "flamers" like nonprocreating gay couples? Republican trollMods: hiding under the bed with the monster is your national pastime.
Why does the rest of the device have to be as big as a large cellphone? Why can't those electronics fit into the same volume, but in a longer tube, like a magic wand, with mediaplayer and "open" controls along the side, and Bluetooth? That would fit in any pocket, and let a much larger area display roll out from the longer edge. Maybe even folded over in half (or more plies) to roll out, then fold out from a short rod into a large area.
Americans used to joke that the Soviets could build a briefcase nuke - but the batteries would be as big as an office building. The next generations of these rollable displays should contract to make superportable volumes snap into large areas on demand.
Why not? Bush's aerospace program already tried to bail out Boeing with $BILLIONS in wasteful jet tanker leases, rather than buying them upfront.
But a judge's ruling that such individual searches are different, that they require a different standard of "cause", would be a major landmark. Especially if the "wholesale" surveillance required a higher standard, especially a higher standard that just probable cause, but rather something like an actual court ruling on a trial finding actual guilt or liability on evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Because the courts do have to be consistent in a way that lawyers do not. Such a ruling would give rights defenders the tool to prohibit governments from invading our privacy with cross-referenced database queries without evidence justifying that tracking. And it would draw a line within which even this creepy ruling can be fought, without having to rise to bigger questions about mass surveillence that Bush and the outgoing Republican Congress held were justified by the national security excuse, even when no evidence for cause was up against evidence for exoneration.
We need these precedents, as surely as we need precedents defining our property rights on copyable info property, and privacy rights on private info. Without them we'll be as lost as would the emerging middle and merchant classes among the real pirates and privateers of the Colonization Age. While those throes did lead to revolutions establishing governments to protect our rights, it cost a lot of time and bloodshed that we don't have to waste in this generation.
Here's your last favor, blind guy: the "google" link to which I believe you're referring (not just the helpful link to the "greenwash" that you're trying to work in this thread) is just the site search that links to the crooked political science run by a host of non-Exxon oil companies. At a single site.
If I have to explain that to you, while you suck straight from the oil pump for your worldview, you're a lost cause. There is no next time for us.
Goodbye.
Nit picked. The distinction without a difference just reinforces the facts about these content cartels, without limit to a specific medium. If books were still popular, I might have mistakenly typed the BPAA (imaginary Book Publishers Association of America).
Why does anyone believe these unaccountable, selfserving "stats" released by the notoriously lying, litigious, abusive RIAA? We don't make gas mileage requirements taking oil companies' reports as gospel, except when "we" are really screwing "ourselves".
Your eyes were shut to Exxon before they were so widely exposed. Still closed to how oil companies greenwash with public statements and "weakened strains" of environmental activism/lobbying to preempt expensive reforms.
When you open your eyes, you'll realize that the other oil companies are in the Greenhouse denial biz too. They just haven't gotten caught as much as Exxon (the biggest) already has.
I know all that. I've run exclusively a GNU/Linux desktop (GNOME) for several years, switching from Windows over the course of a year, after a decade following switching from a Mac (I used to work for Apple), when I'd also designed Windows 3.0/3.1 desktop publishing apps.
.evolution storage files), and leverage the exploding phone SW development to reinvigorate desktop development.
What I'm talking about is mainly drivers for phone touchscreens and other HW. And specifically, which Windows phones are most completely supported by GPE now. I ran the Handhelds.org Linux on some iPaqs without X (ethernet to stereo audio for MP3 streams) for a couple years until a year ago, and know that HW support is incomplete even on "PC replacements", not phones. Actually, I've found Handhelds.org project support for $100 iPaqs (or others with ethernet/WiFi + decent/good stereo audio output + USB) to be increasingly disappointing.
As I said, I want a phone Linux that can run existing apps on my data (like rsyncing my
So which Windows mobile phones are the most completely supported by the new GPE releases?
This system would be a great feature of SourceForge. Finding all the common components in different projects to be factored out and share instead. I was always disappointed in SourceForge's lack of intelligence about the related contents of its different projects. This thing could find relevant code and import it into the integrated navigation.