This is flat-out wrong. NASA specifically made a big deal about publicizing the images taken of the "face" by Mars Global Surveyor. You can see one of the many NASA pages that compares the 1976 Viking image with the MGS image here. MGS images of the other supposed "artifacts" are linked from that page.
Now, are you sure you aren't into conspiracy theories?:)
Yes, but until someone without this wimpy "live and let live" mentality comes along and goes for MS' jugular, Linux will live in the obscurity of the geek community and backoffice server types.
So? If you want to use Linux, use it. It's better, it's Free, it's there; who cares if everyone knows about it?
Having something that's good means nothing if nobody else knows it's good, just ask any independent filmmaker or musician.
I think any independent filmmaker or musician worth their salt would say that they construct their art because they have an internal need to be creative, an "itch to scratch" you might say, not so much to impress the neighbors.
I'm so tired of these articles. Paraphrasing, he said that while Linux is technologically a success, as a business, Linux is a failure. Hey buddy, guess what? Linux is not a business! Even if no one can make money from Linux, that doesn't make it a failure, because making money is not even remotely what Linux has been designed to do.
Sure, over the past few years there have been businesses that have tried to make money off of the Linux phenomenon. Many have failed. Don't mistake this side show for the real thing, however. Even if there are no Linux companies, there will still be Linux, and it will still be a success, because judging it on its technical merits as an OS is the *only* way to judge it!
We don't "need" more unity in (for example) our desktop offerings. We don't "need" more user-friendliness or a killer Office application. Most of all, we most certainly don't "need" to "beat Microsoft" by taking over desktop computing. Even if only 0.1% of the world uses Linux, I'll be fine as long as I'm one of them.
...except that the group Hemos reported about != the group that won the NP. The NP-winning work was earlier, they were the first group to construct a BEC.
First of all, a cure for AIDS would be up for a Nobel Prize in medicine, not physics. As for the benefit to society of this work, the ramifications are hard to know at this point. BEC's are to atoms as lasers are to photons. When lasers were first discovered, they were "just" gee-whiz science. Now you have CD/DVD players, ultra-precise distance measurements (i.e., distance to the moon to +/- 1 inch), quick and painless eye surgery, etc.
One possible application I've heard about is quantum computing, which requires the mechanical control of atoms. BECs are one way to do that.
The earlier/. article dealt with a variant that used the surface of a "chip" on which the condensate forms, making a "2-D" BEC. The earlier work that just earned the Nobel used lasers to supercool a gas of atoms.
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about this stuff to know if the difference is profound, or just semantic...
Actually, my post illustrates my belief that many muslims (especially those that live in western countries) are not the unthinking idealogues that you think they are. I don't disagree that religious zealots (of any faith) are dangerous. If history teaches anything, it's that dogmatism leads easily to brutality.
The point I disagree strongly with is that all Muslims are, by definition, dogmatist zealots. Do you know any Muslims? I do, and they are just as sane, tolerant and rational as any other group of people I know. In my country, we don't discriminate against people because of their religious beliefs; we judge individuals on their actions. I for one am not going to sit by and watch that freedom be eroded by paranoid and reactionary sentiments.
To about half of the respondents to my post: thank you for keeping our conversation civil and intelligent. To the rest: I have nothing to say.
I'm sorry for your personal loss in this tragedy, but it is no excuse to propose genocide against an entire people, the vast majority of which are as peace-loving and innocent as we Americans. Your post is rife with inaccurate and ignorant statements, and with despicable and racist inferences.
I hope you can get over your anger and grief, and realize that misdirected violence against innocent people is both evil and useless. It would do a severe dishonor to those who died.
Re:Don't let mourning lead to hatred
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 1
Thank you for the eloquent post. As another American, I am also disgusted by the reports of anti-muslim hate crimes happening in my country in the wake of this tragedy. They are only a few, isolated incidents, to be sure, but still...we cannot allow the terrorists to make us sink to their level. If we do, they win. Don't give in to hate and ignorance.
Well, I guess colloquially "light" is used to refer to the visible portion of the spectrum only, but technically, light is any form of electromagnetic radiation, from radio to gamma rays...it's all made of photons, and it all travels at c; the different "categories" differ only in frequency (ironically enough).
" This has been and will continue to be a root issue for the Open Source movement: justification of a free service as a business model in a capitalist society - or how the heck do you plug a worthy square peg (Open Source) into a round hole (Modern Economic Theory)"
Good point. The round hole that OSS's square peg doesn't fit is that it is fundamentally a business phenomenon, IMHO. It isn't about business, and never has been. In other words, OSS doesn't need a business model! It doesn't matter (much) if the Ransom Loves of the world can't make money off of it.
huh? So, you want to be able to take the products of other people's volunteer efforts, and sell them for profit? That doesn't strike you as, well, wrong?
If a developer doesn't mind you doing this, they'll release their code under a BSD license. If they don't want you profiting from their work, they'll prevent you from doing so by using the GPL. I don't understand the problem with this, it seems absolutely fair to me.
Slashdot Mirror
This is flat-out wrong. NASA specifically made a big deal about publicizing the images taken of the "face" by Mars Global Surveyor. You can see one of the many NASA pages that compares the 1976 Viking image with the MGS image here. MGS images of the other supposed "artifacts" are linked from that page.
:)
Now, are you sure you aren't into conspiracy theories?
It's not illegal to be a monopoly; it's illegal to abuse your position as a monopoly.
So? If you want to use Linux, use it. It's better, it's Free, it's there; who cares if everyone knows about it?
I think any independent filmmaker or musician worth their salt would say that they construct their art because they have an internal need to be creative, an "itch to scratch" you might say, not so much to impress the neighbors.
I'm so tired of these articles. Paraphrasing, he said that while Linux is technologically a success, as a business, Linux is a failure. Hey buddy, guess what? Linux is not a business! Even if no one can make money from Linux, that doesn't make it a failure, because making money is not even remotely what Linux has been designed to do.
Sure, over the past few years there have been businesses that have tried to make money off of the Linux phenomenon. Many have failed. Don't mistake this side show for the real thing, however. Even if there are no Linux companies, there will still be Linux, and it will still be a success, because judging it on its technical merits as an OS is the *only* way to judge it!
We don't "need" more unity in (for example) our desktop offerings. We don't "need" more user-friendliness or a killer Office application. Most of all, we most certainly don't "need" to "beat Microsoft" by taking over desktop computing. Even if only 0.1% of the world uses Linux, I'll be fine as long as I'm one of them.
You've only seen "loose" used improperly 6 times on slashdot? Stick around, man...it happens all the time (drives me nuts, too).
Not without quite a bit of work. Either the kdelibs would have to be ported to OSX, or the kapps would have to be made "pure" Qt.
Hey Mutt,
I hate to do this to ya, but I have to be a pig latin grammar nazi....
It should be "ixnay on the ackinghay my oxbay"
Yeah, but...there are a hell of a lot more than nine drops of water in the ocean.
The Adequacy.org "review" was satire. I think most of the flames were directed at the clueless MCSE's who sprang up in the discussion...
...except that the group Hemos reported about != the group that won the NP. The NP-winning work was earlier, they were the first group to construct a BEC.
Oddly enough, that part of it was spot-on. They do use "laser pumping" to get the gas down so obscenely close to absolute zero.
First of all, a cure for AIDS would be up for a Nobel Prize in medicine, not physics. As for the benefit to society of this work, the ramifications are hard to know at this point. BEC's are to atoms as lasers are to photons. When lasers were first discovered, they were "just" gee-whiz science. Now you have CD/DVD players, ultra-precise distance measurements (i.e., distance to the moon to +/- 1 inch), quick and painless eye surgery, etc.
One possible application I've heard about is quantum computing, which requires the mechanical control of atoms. BECs are one way to do that.
Unfortunately, I don't know enough about this stuff to know if the difference is profound, or just semantic...
...and since we're on this tack:
you mean "respectable", not "respectful", don't you? I mean, unless UPN dissed you at some point.
I think the poster was kidding. He was pretending to be the FBI. That's how I read it anyway...
Right-click in the konsole, select "Transparent konsole" from the Schema menu.
You can also customize the schema, but this must be done from KConfig, it isn't available in the konsole menu for some reason...
The Afghanis aren't generally religious fanatics, either. The Taliban and ObL are, but not the majority of the people themselves.
Yes, conservation of energy demands that the wind speed slows down as it passes through the turbine.
That's right, we just have to make 3 posts that are absolutely without content on slashdot. Keep going! Two more and you've got it!!!
The point I disagree strongly with is that all Muslims are, by definition, dogmatist zealots. Do you know any Muslims? I do, and they are just as sane, tolerant and rational as any other group of people I know. In my country, we don't discriminate against people because of their religious beliefs; we judge individuals on their actions. I for one am not going to sit by and watch that freedom be eroded by paranoid and reactionary sentiments.
To about half of the respondents to my post: thank you for keeping our conversation civil and intelligent. To the rest: I have nothing to say.
I'm sorry for your personal loss in this tragedy, but it is no excuse to propose genocide against an entire people, the vast majority of which are as peace-loving and innocent as we Americans. Your post is rife with inaccurate and ignorant statements, and with despicable and racist inferences.
I hope you can get over your anger and grief, and realize that misdirected violence against innocent people is both evil and useless. It would do a severe dishonor to those who died.
Thank you for the eloquent post. As another American, I am also disgusted by the reports of anti-muslim hate crimes happening in my country in the wake of this tragedy. They are only a few, isolated incidents, to be sure, but still...we cannot allow the terrorists to make us sink to their level. If we do, they win. Don't give in to hate and ignorance.
Well, I guess colloquially "light" is used to refer to the visible portion of the spectrum only, but technically, light is any form of electromagnetic radiation, from radio to gamma rays...it's all made of photons, and it all travels at c; the different "categories" differ only in frequency (ironically enough).
Good point. The round hole that OSS's square peg doesn't fit is that it is fundamentally a business phenomenon, IMHO. It isn't about business, and never has been. In other words, OSS doesn't need a business model! It doesn't matter (much) if the Ransom Loves of the world can't make money off of it.
If a developer doesn't mind you doing this, they'll release their code under a BSD license. If they don't want you profiting from their work, they'll prevent you from doing so by using the GPL. I don't understand the problem with this, it seems absolutely fair to me.