Given an object X distance away (in light years) and an event that occurs at time T you consider the event to have taken place at time T - X. What relativity states is that other observers moving in different frames will calculate a different time.
Me thinks if you are being critical of others on relativity:
1) The guy traveling at.9c has very different ideas about when events occurred. If observer A is sees an object X which is 5.1m light years away and B is 5.1m light years away, it is entirely possible that A will view an event on X as having happened 5m years ago and B won't view it as having happened yet assuming B is moving parallel to the line connect X and A fast enough.
2) You have any idea how much energy it takes to accelerate in.01 seconds to.9c? c = 300 mil meters / sec gravity is roughly 9.8m / s^2..9c = 270 m m/s That's around 2.75 b times earth's gravity.
That's high enough the molecules in your body would engage in atomic fusion, the whole ship you included would turn into a giant clump of superheated iron.
All most of the money they've spent on infrastructure was paid for by government subsidies
Where are you getting that from?
It also doesn't explain why most of the modern world outside the US has data capacities and speeds that equal or exceed the US at a fraction of the cost.
The reason the costs are higher is most places with better air data have effective much higher population density. The United States has a unique car culture which means are population is much more dispersed. Also I think you might want to check Asian and European data rates, thaey aren't as low as you think.
I'm using exactly the same bandwidth, but for a longer period of time.
What difference does that make. Think about a situation of 1m customers in an area with a max load 10,000 simultaneous data connections. The marginal cost of data may be small but the cost of adding additional connections (say going up to 20k) is huge.
They can handle something like 100k users demanding small bursts of data like loading a web page or checking email 20k users using larger data like downloading and then watching youtube 10k users using constant data
During peak times they don't want you either on the system or for long.
If they don't like it then stop selling unlimited plans
Well first off they mostly have stopped selling unlimited plans. Unlimited means, unlimited for most people, that you don't worry about it. Throttling the edge cases is one of the ways they achieve that. Another is selling limited bandwidth.
t's the same bullshit excuse they use for trying to charge you extra for tethering. What difference does it make whether I'm using my data for my phone, my tablet, my laptop, or my desktop? NONE
Actually a huge difference. People that tether tend to use more data. They don't care about what you are using the data for, but they do care that statistically the data usage is likely to go up.
As for these studies... I don't think so. You don't see Verizon and Sprint with market caps in the hundreds of billions which is what they would be if their net was close to their gross.
Or are they trying to tell us that their network is so crappy that a mere 2% of their users are able to destabilize the whole thing simply by being active for longer periods of time than the rest of us?
Yes that is what they are telling you except for the crappy part. Heavy users consume far more than light users. If we assume something like $4 per g in their cost a heavy unlimited user doing 20g or more could easily consume more than 30 average users at substantial cost.
If bandwidth really is a problem maybe they should take some of the billions they rake in each year and actually spend it on infrastructure
I suggest you look at how much carriers have been spending for decades on infrastructure. They spend a fortune on infrastructure, far more than on bonuses.
Your problem is that over the air bandwidth is expensive to provide.
How is that treating customers fairly? Bandwidth is a limited resource. The goal of throttling is to make sure that small percentage of the customers don't cause the carriers to have to raise prices broadly.
1) The quality of people's experience is heavily dependent on the quality of their phone. 2) As the experience gets better people are willing to spend more per month on the total package (phone + carrier charges). So the carrier can make more money on customers with better phones even if they just have to pass through the cost. 3) Customers are much more willing to pay a prorated cost than an upfront cost. 4) Customers underestimate how much the quality of the phone impacts their total experience.
Parents aren't trained, social workers are specific to particular issues. Though I'd agree the MSW social workers have a good grounding. If schools want to make use of counselors and make them broadly available, that's even better. The question above was about the involvement of schools.
As for neighborhood groups, what neighborhood groups deal with interpersonal issues?
And classroom management / discipline is what we are talking about. If they are dealing with a deep seated issue doing a referral would be excellent.
The was about police I think you are talking about school officials. I assume by "school cop" you mean school security not a police officer assigned to the school.
You are absolutely right that school officials can attempt to coerce false confessions, the same way bosses and corporate security can with adults.
Wow you would love nature of the Gothic (http://www47.homepage.villanova.edu/seth.koven/gothic.html) Start reading around the middle.
Anyway I agree that as workers we live in a less free society, we don't have an artisan culture but rather want our goods mass produced sacrificing variety for inexpensive uniform quality. That incidentally is now what you had in feudalism which was an artisan culture. Rather it is more similar to the slave states of Greece and Rome.
As for schools their are schools that emphasize autonomy. Montossori schools and Friends schools. These are excellent. They are however not what public schools do... except for some few public charter schools.
Schools have gotten worse and worse at educating students due to the plethora of things which are not their job that they insist on doing instead.
Actually in almost all cases when they gotten involved in this plethora of things it has made education better. For example school lunch programs substantially increase student performance for malnourished children. School vaccination programs substantially decreased absences due to plagues. School hearing and vision testing increase performance. Social work decreases distractions.
If the goal is to maximize student performance the best thing you could do would be to have schools get involved in hundreds of these side activities.
It still kind of boggles my mind that we give teachers and administrators (who are largely untrained in such matters)
Actually most teachers in most states have fairly extensive training in dealing with interpersonal problems involving children. They all have extensive experience in it. Who in our society is better trained?
Why? What agency in our society is better setup to regulate and handle day to day petty issues involving minors? The juvenile justice system isn't setup for petty issues.
Adults with these sorts of problems have recourse to HR departments for example, which certainly would take out of work harassment of another employee very seriously.
Actually they sort of are parents: loco parentis. They have to act in place of parents.
Further they most certainly have an obligation to make the school safe for everyone involved. And in many states there are explicit anti-bullying statutes.
They question is whether they can implicitly threaten legal sanction as a way of obtaining information during their investigation. For example the police need to be able to investigate traffic accidents. That doesn't mean the officer can whip his gun to get you to tell the truth about what happened.
I'm not sure it is such a bad thing if school administrators have broad investigative rights. I do think it is such a bad thing for there to be no law spelling out the checks and balances.
Why should my speech be curtailed because of your feelings?
Because that is common workplace behavior. People should not be forced to endure coercive environments.
Censoring speech for the sake of making others feel good is a very slippery slope since what is and is not 'bullying' is entirely subjective. If you think your feelings are more important than the speech rights of others, maybe the US isn't the place for you to live.
Or maybe you should understand what the policies in the US are. Political speech is fully protected. Religious speech is fully protected. As speech moves away from areas of public interest and into areas of private interest it becomes more regulated.
We used to have those things, they were called "honor courts" and handled both in school and out of school petty issues. I see no reason not to bring them back.
No, in many instances they can't. That's besides the fact that there is a corporation facilitating this discussion. We need an entire new legal framework for child on child discussion which treats a 12 year old sending naughty pictures to her 14 year old online boyfriend very differently than a 12 year old sending naughty pictures to her 41 year old online boyfriend. Right now we mostly don't have that framework.
That's not true. Statements made by a child against interest may not be admissible if parents aren't notified, and other evidence obtained based on those statements may be ruled inadmissible. Generally it is policy to notify parents unless there is good reason not to.
It is essentially the same situation as not mirandizing someone.
Schools may very well be an appropriate venue for handling most petty activities involving minors. It is a point of contact between government and underaged people. And in many states their jurisdiction in regulating off campus activities has been extended by state statute.
Further it was often the case in private schools that the honor code, which regulated all conduct at all times was in force for all students. I'm not sure that is such a bad thing. Reinstating an honor court might very well provide due process for minors without the excessive expenses and consequences associated with adult courts.
That isn't a license problem. Generally proprietary software is being sold by the copyright owner so no license is binding on them. However, copyright law allows you to modify code you licensed as long as you don't distribute (and to some extent if you do pay) they can't stop that. They don't have to make it easy, so generally they don't give you the code...
But again that has nothing to do with licensing. In practice people don't exercise the right because they make it hard enough.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not right.
Given an object X distance away (in light years) and an event that occurs at time T you consider the event to have taken place at time
T - X. What relativity states is that other observers moving in different frames will calculate a different time.
Me thinks if you are being critical of others on relativity:
1) The guy traveling at .9c has very different ideas about when events occurred. If observer A is sees an object X which is 5.1m light years away and B is 5.1m light years away, it is entirely possible that A will view an event on X as having happened 5m years ago and B won't view it as having happened yet assuming B is moving parallel to the line connect X and A fast enough.
2) You have any idea how much energy it takes to accelerate in .01 seconds to .9c? .9c = 270 m m/s
c = 300 mil meters / sec
gravity is roughly 9.8m / s^2.
That's around 2.75 b times earth's gravity.
That's high enough the molecules in your body would engage in atomic fusion, the whole ship you included would turn into a giant clump of superheated iron.
All most of the money they've spent on infrastructure was paid for by government subsidies
Where are you getting that from?
It also doesn't explain why most of the modern world outside the US has data capacities and speeds that equal or exceed the US at a fraction of the cost.
The reason the costs are higher is most places with better air data have effective much higher population density. The United States has a unique car culture which means are population is much more dispersed. Also I think you might want to check Asian and European data rates, thaey aren't as low as you think.
I'm using exactly the same bandwidth, but for a longer period of time.
What difference does that make. Think about a situation of 1m customers in an area with a max load 10,000 simultaneous data connections. The marginal cost of data may be small but the cost of adding additional connections (say going up to 20k) is huge.
They can handle something like
100k users demanding small bursts of data like loading a web page or checking email
20k users using larger data like downloading and then watching youtube
10k users using constant data
During peak times they don't want you either on the system or for long.
If they don't like it then stop selling unlimited plans
Well first off they mostly have stopped selling unlimited plans. Unlimited means, unlimited for most people, that you don't worry about it. Throttling the edge cases is one of the ways they achieve that. Another is selling limited bandwidth.
t's the same bullshit excuse they use for trying to charge you extra for tethering. What difference does it make whether I'm using my data for my phone, my tablet, my laptop, or my desktop? NONE
Actually a huge difference. People that tether tend to use more data. They don't care about what you are using the data for, but they do care that statistically the data usage is likely to go up.
As for these studies... I don't think so. You don't see Verizon and Sprint with market caps in the hundreds of billions which is what they would be if their net was close to their gross.
It isn't the end of the world, it is an expense.
Or are they trying to tell us that their network is so crappy that a mere 2% of their users are able to destabilize the whole thing simply by being active for longer periods of time than the rest of us?
Yes that is what they are telling you except for the crappy part. Heavy users consume far more than light users. If we assume something like $4 per g in their cost a heavy unlimited user doing 20g or more could easily consume more than 30 average users at substantial cost.
If bandwidth really is a problem maybe they should take some of the billions they rake in each year and actually spend it on infrastructure
I suggest you look at how much carriers have been spending for decades on infrastructure. They spend a fortune on infrastructure, far more than on bonuses.
Your problem is that over the air bandwidth is expensive to provide.
-- stop throttling altogether
How is that treating customers fairly? Bandwidth is a limited resource. The goal of throttling is to make sure that small percentage of the customers don't cause the carriers to have to raise prices broadly.
There is a good reason for subsidy.
1) The quality of people's experience is heavily dependent on the quality of their phone.
2) As the experience gets better people are willing to spend more per month on the total package (phone + carrier charges). So the carrier can make more money on customers with better phones even if they just have to pass through the cost.
3) Customers are much more willing to pay a prorated cost than an upfront cost.
4) Customers underestimate how much the quality of the phone impacts their total experience.
Given those parameters heavy subsidy makes sense.
Wow. What a waste of expensive resources. I lived in NC around 93 for a year, it was a pretty law and order society back then too.
Yes in that situation the kid just has to know to shutdown and request a parent.
Parents aren't trained, social workers are specific to particular issues. Though I'd agree the MSW social workers have a good grounding. If schools want to make use of counselors and make them broadly available, that's even better. The question above was about the involvement of schools.
As for neighborhood groups, what neighborhood groups deal with interpersonal issues?
And classroom management / discipline is what we are talking about. If they are dealing with a deep seated issue doing a referral would be excellent.
The was about police I think you are talking about school officials. I assume by "school cop" you mean school security not a police officer assigned to the school.
You are absolutely right that school officials can attempt to coerce false confessions, the same way bosses and corporate security can with adults.
Sorry about what happened to your kid.
Wow you would love nature of the Gothic (http://www47.homepage.villanova.edu/seth.koven/gothic.html) Start reading around the middle.
Anyway I agree that as workers we live in a less free society, we don't have an artisan culture but rather want our goods mass produced sacrificing variety for inexpensive uniform quality. That incidentally is now what you had in feudalism which was an artisan culture. Rather it is more similar to the slave states of Greece and Rome.
As for schools their are schools that emphasize autonomy. Montossori schools and Friends schools. These are excellent. They are however not what public schools do... except for some few public charter schools.
Schools have gotten worse and worse at educating students due to the plethora of things which are not their job that they insist on doing instead.
Actually in almost all cases when they gotten involved in this plethora of things it has made education better. For example school lunch programs substantially increase student performance for malnourished children. School vaccination programs substantially decreased absences due to plagues. School hearing and vision testing increase performance. Social work decreases distractions.
If the goal is to maximize student performance the best thing you could do would be to have schools get involved in hundreds of these side activities.
It still kind of boggles my mind that we give teachers and administrators (who are largely untrained in such matters)
Actually most teachers in most states have fairly extensive training in dealing with interpersonal problems involving children. They all have extensive experience in it. Who in our society is better trained?
Why? What agency in our society is better setup to regulate and handle day to day petty issues involving minors? The juvenile justice system isn't setup for petty issues.
Adults with these sorts of problems have recourse to HR departments for example, which certainly would take out of work harassment of another employee very seriously.
Actually they sort of are parents: loco parentis. They have to act in place of parents.
Further they most certainly have an obligation to make the school safe for everyone involved. And in many states there are explicit anti-bullying statutes.
They question is whether they can implicitly threaten legal sanction as a way of obtaining information during their investigation. For example the police need to be able to investigate traffic accidents. That doesn't mean the officer can whip his gun to get you to tell the truth about what happened.
I'm not sure it is such a bad thing if school administrators have broad investigative rights. I do think it is such a bad thing for there to be no law spelling out the checks and balances.
Why should my speech be curtailed because of your feelings?
Because that is common workplace behavior. People should not be forced to endure coercive environments.
Censoring speech for the sake of making others feel good is a very slippery slope since what is and is not 'bullying' is entirely subjective. If you think your feelings are more important than the speech rights of others, maybe the US isn't the place for you to live.
Or maybe you should understand what the policies in the US are. Political speech is fully protected. Religious speech is fully protected. As speech moves away from areas of public interest and into areas of private interest it becomes more regulated.
We used to have those things, they were called "honor courts" and handled both in school and out of school petty issues. I see no reason not to bring them back.
A kid can't talk about sex with another kid?
No, in many instances they can't. That's besides the fact that there is a corporation facilitating this discussion. We need an entire new legal framework for child on child discussion which treats a 12 year old sending naughty pictures to her 14 year old online boyfriend very differently than a 12 year old sending naughty pictures to her 41 year old online boyfriend. Right now we mostly don't have that framework.
Some states (like mine, NJ) have anti-bullying statutes that extend 24/7 to students.
That's not true. Statements made by a child against interest may not be admissible if parents aren't notified, and other evidence obtained based on those statements may be ruled inadmissible. Generally it is policy to notify parents unless there is good reason not to.
It is essentially the same situation as not mirandizing someone.
Schools may very well be an appropriate venue for handling most petty activities involving minors. It is a point of contact between government and underaged people. And in many states their jurisdiction in regulating off campus activities has been extended by state statute.
Further it was often the case in private schools that the honor code, which regulated all conduct at all times was in force for all students. I'm not sure that is such a bad thing. Reinstating an honor court might very well provide due process for minors without the excessive expenses and consequences associated with adult courts.
That isn't a license problem. Generally proprietary software is being sold by the copyright owner so no license is binding on them. However, copyright law allows you to modify code you licensed as long as you don't distribute (and to some extent if you do pay) they can't stop that. They don't have to make it easy, so generally they don't give you the code...
But again that has nothing to do with licensing. In practice people don't exercise the right because they make it hard enough.
Not android itself, free software available for Android.
Using your analogy it would be like getting stats on Obama's approval numbers by calling everyone with a phone in the United States.
Quartz Compositor
Quicktime
etc... are part of the Aqua.