Wouldn't it be more fair to say that it's not reasonable or economically feasible to mine metals off the moon today? It seems pretty pessimistic to assume that we won't be able to do it tomorrow, necessity being the mother of invention and all that...
It's pretty safe to assume it won't be feasible tomorrow either, with the approaching holiday and all that. Check back next week.
I've seen 1, ever, a DB programmer, she was supposedly good.
Inept male programmers have an easier time hiding in the crowd. Inept women programmers can't.
Because of this culling effect, the women that are still around are, on average, more capable. Industries dominated by women have a similar effect. The males end up being better because they need to overcome the inherent prejudice to get the same performance review.
If it is created by man then man can break it. Can you make an Operating System that contain millions of lines of code 100% error free and 100% optimized?
Certainly. What would you like it to do?
Can you right a spec for a OS without conflicting requirements? The devil is always in the details.
That an actor gets $100,000 for voicing a single production, in itself, is silly
It's not that silly, because once a voice actor has started a project, you can't cheaply replace him. If the actor jumps ship mid-project for a better offer, all the work done to that point is useless.
The two options are: raise the salary to keep the employee and/or contract for the entire project, which raises the natural salary.
Consider Rockstar's position: this game grossed $500M in the first week. A one-week delay will cost them $300,000 just in interest on the gross at 3%. If replacing the main voice actor pushes the release date back a month, that's a million dollars out the window. Spending an extra $30K-50K is small in comparison.
If you want to get really technical, one could serve as POTUS indefinitely by continuing to be elected to the office of Vice President and bumping off the latest President-elect before inauguration day.
It's not a very practical loophole...voters might get suspicious after this happened a few times.
How "truly" an offensive would have to be to lose the protection from the 1st Amendment?
Speech that is 'likely to incite imminent unlawful action' is the current Supreme Court standard.
If your t-shirt is sufficiently offensive to provoke a physical response from a 'typical' person, you can't hide behind the Constitution.
The First Amendment lets you say what you want, but it does let you force people to listen. When you cross the line to forcing your audience's attention by shocking them, you lose your Constitutional protection.
I think that the electrical hazard is a bit overstated, though. I can't think of a reason why high-current electrical loads would be carried through the structures normally cut through by the jaws of life
If you need the jaws of life, it's safe to assume that there have been some modifications to the structure. You've probably voided your warranty too.
The sinking of the Titanic may not seem relevant after nearly a century, but it is still a fascinating study on preventable catastrophes and engineering processes. The technology involved may change, but people do not.
Compare the Titanic to the Challenger shuttle. Replace faulty rivets with faulty O-rings. Compare the hubris of Harland and Wolff ("unsinkable") to NASA management ("the probability of failure is necessarily less than 1 in 10,000") Both were high-pressure, high-publicity events trying to reglamourize their tasks. Both were cases of pushing the bounds of the operating envelope. In both cases, the failure modes of a small part were known to the engineers at the time. In both cases, the relevant data were lost in the bureaucracy.
The Titanic disaster will continue to happen so long as the same circumstances continue to align. The only way to prevent such things in the future is to study and heed past mistakes.
If you build a system with tons of unsupported software, I am not responsible for reinstalling and reconfiguring all that software. Period. And that is absolutely a position that is supported by my boss and my bosses boss, and the only guy higher than that only talks to shareholders.
That's true today, but don't expect the status quo to last. This is no different from when people started bringing PCs into the office 25 years ago. Corporate IT said, "no way...use the mainframes", and the users brought PCs anyway. The users won.
IT exists to manage things in a sane and orderly manner, but it can not and never will be able to proscribe useful tools in the long run.
Don't ever turn a user request into a battle where your defense is "we can't support that." You may win that battle, but you will lose the war, every single time.
GoDaddy is like $10 a year, which I think is plenty cheap, so while I don't like their tactics, I don't think their pricing is exorbitant, and their online tools are pretty nice.
In this case, GoDaddy's lockdown policies are probably worth the trouble they cause. On the down side, you need to cough up an extra $10/domain if you happen to change your info, AND want to move registrars, AND wait until there are less than 60 days on your contract. On the up side, if your account gets compromised, you have 60 days to notice and fix things before it will cost you thousands of dollars in legal fees to maybe get your domains back.
GoDaddy is slimy, and they will take the spammers dollars as readily as they'll take anyone else's, but that doesn't mean they are pure evil incarnate. If you ever do have a domain you care about compromised, you'll be very, very happy with their lockdown policies.
I am not a physicist (which I think I'm about to make painfully obvious...), but I do follow popular science. Time dilation has always made me think that in the future all the rich people will live close to the speed of light, orbiting a black hole or somesuch. They will leave the rest of the universe to get on with discovering things, generating cultural works and making stuff for them, and they can collect their profit by the century for every one of their subjective days.
The "rich" are those with large wealth stores or large incomes, usually both. Having a large income (independent of financial dividends), requires the ability to do valuable useful work. This is very hard to accomplish when you are traveling at a high time dilation factor. What good is some miracle doctor that can only do a consultation every 100 years?
Also, having a large stored wealth is also useless if it cannot be protected by either legal or military means. Imagine checking in with "real-time" only to find that your tax bracket has been paying 200% taxes for the past 50 years, and both you and your "rich" friends were too busy orbiting a black hole to notice.
No matter how wealthy you are, at the end of the day, you need to be actively involved in managing your own finances, whether that means counting the pennies on your paycheck or taking your senator golfing. You also need a recourse, whether that means suing your employer, changing your campaign funding, or invading a neighboring country. If you totally isolate yourself into some time-dilation coma, you will get screwed.
"If we let the public see what was really happening, to see dead bodies and destruction, they would never support the war." To me it sounded like the best reason FOR showing the pictures.
Yeah, people generally make their most logical, rational decisions when their emotional strings are being jerked around.
If somebody's opinions change between reading a casualty report and watching a sensational, tearjerking video of coffins and aggrieved widows, then they are probably not in sufficient command of their faculties to maintain an opinion about the war that is derived from fact and objective reality.
...from a while back in which some hardware counterfeiters in china got to the point where they where actually paying a firm for R&D for new products.
A hundred years ago the same thing was happening here in the US. Intellectual property law enforcement was non-existent in practice. US companies were ripping off European IP and then grew to the point when they needed their own R&D to compete with other US companies doing the same thing. Oddly enough, right about the time when serious commercial research was starting to take off in the States, the US IP laws grew some real teeth.
History is a funny thing. It almost seems like it keeps repeating itself.
Because they are making a profit on his work without his consent?
That argument is bogus. We do not compensate people simply because we make a profit off of their work in other areas, so why is photography special? When McDonalds spends two years and a chunk of cash to research the ideal location for a new franchise, Burger King doesn't pay them for that hard work when they open up next door. If the gas station next door gets more sales from the increased traffic, they don't pay the restaurants.
There are many good reasons for having copyrights, but none of them are about preventing people from profiting off the work of others without consent or compensation. Did the photographer in the article track down the architects and developers of those buildings in the image and compensate them? Of course not; he took a photo and sold it, profiting off their hard work without consent. Is there anything morally, ethically, or legally wrong with doing so? Not at all.
Copyrights are good. It's just your argument that is bad.
Wow, you must be kinda bitter that you picked the wrong choice in a format war. Seriously, why even consider buying HD-DVD movies, unless they are absolutely free right now? Even if it's only $5, you're still buying an obsolete format that you won't even be able to find a player for in a few years.
This format war won't have a winner. Both sides are betting on the future of the shiny 5" plastic disc. Music CDs have no future in the era of iTunes and ubiquitous iPods. Movie discs will share the same fate a few years later as bandwidth and storage technology fulfill the requirements. Tivo and OnDemand have already gotten people accustomed to recording TV shows and renting movies without a disc.
Obligatory Car Analogy:
Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were drag racing toward a cliff. HD-DVD flinched. Blu-Ray "won".
Furthermore, in support of your argument, the UK news is consistently riddled with stories where adults who have approached such groups have been kicked to shit, or more recently to death.
Why is the news riddled with such stories?...because it sells more papers.
Why does it sell more papers?...because society loves violence.
What you really need over there is a another really juicy sex scandal to get your mind off things and give to time to reflect on the fact that real violent crime rates have dropped every year for the past 13 years.
What do you mean, the problem is usually the user? That's like disclaiming responsibility for a roof that leaks when it rains by saying 'the problem is the weather'.
A roof is designed to withstand the weather within predetermined limits. It's perfectly reasonable for a roofer to say, "I guarantee this roof won't leak until the winds hit 130mph. After that, you lose the roof, and I'll blame the weather."
User stupidity is not so easily quantifiable. Admins can't say, "I guarantee this system to properly handle Stupidity Levels I to VI. Once it hits Level VII, all bets are off, and the breach is the user's fault."
Could you please explain where search isn't good enough? Google works well enough for me (and just about everyone I know). I've never really sat back and thought, "Damn, I wish there was some better search engine out there."
Let X be a small number greater than 0. A: Under the assumption that double of a small number is a small number we have: Y is small => 2Y is small B: Thus for all n > 0 we have (2^(n-1)) * X is small => (2^n)X is small C: Thus by the principle of mathematical induction we have that (2^n) * X is small for all n > 0 and X > 0. D: However, if X > 0 , then the sequence a(n) = (2^n) * X has no upper bound and is strictly increasing. Hence it diverges towards infinity. E: So either double of a small number is not necessarily a small number, or all positive numbers are small numbers.
Replace the word "small" with "even" if you care to blow a giant smoking hole in your logic.
Re:Gentlemen, start your spambots
on
Yahoo CAPTCHA Hacked
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
To register, answer these questions and click the button on the right What colour are buses in London? What is three times three? [Red] [Green] [Blue]
Yes, those are undoubtedly hard questions for a computer. How, exactly, do you plan to generate billions of these questions? For a CAPTCHA to work, it must still be hard even if the generation algorithm is public knowledge.
Slashdot Mirror
A Deus ex machine gun blasting the audience into stupified dazed submission. Utter Shock n' Awe MTV sweatshop excrement.
Perhaps you should have waited for the movie to be released in your native language.
So through the course of our research we've found that you've modified some of the sections on your policy positions...
*coughs (and that you have twenty times the traffic we do)
How else do you expect people to keep up with all of those policy position changes?
Wouldn't it be more fair to say that it's not reasonable or economically feasible to mine metals off the moon today? It seems pretty pessimistic to assume that we won't be able to do it tomorrow, necessity being the mother of invention and all that...
It's pretty safe to assume it won't be feasible tomorrow either, with the approaching holiday and all that. Check back next week.
I've seen 1, ever, a DB programmer, she was supposedly good.
Inept male programmers have an easier time hiding in the crowd. Inept women programmers can't.
Because of this culling effect, the women that are still around are, on average, more capable.
Industries dominated by women have a similar effect. The males end up being better because they need to overcome the inherent prejudice to get the same performance review.
If it is created by man then man can break it. Can you make an Operating System that contain millions of lines of code 100% error free and 100% optimized?
Certainly. What would you like it to do?
Can you right a spec for a OS without conflicting requirements? The devil is always in the details.
That an actor gets $100,000 for voicing a single production, in itself, is silly
It's not that silly, because once a voice actor has started a project, you can't cheaply replace him. If the actor jumps ship mid-project for a better offer, all the work done to that point is useless.
The two options are: raise the salary to keep the employee and/or contract for the entire project, which raises the natural salary.
Consider Rockstar's position: this game grossed $500M in the first week. A one-week delay will cost them $300,000 just in interest on the gross at 3%. If replacing the main voice actor pushes the release date back a month, that's a million dollars out the window. Spending an extra $30K-50K is small in comparison.
If you want to get really technical, one could serve as POTUS indefinitely by continuing to be elected to the office of Vice President and bumping off the latest President-elect before inauguration day.
It's not a very practical loophole...voters might get suspicious after this happened a few times.
How "truly" an offensive would have to be to lose the protection from the 1st Amendment?
Speech that is 'likely to incite imminent unlawful action' is the current Supreme Court standard.
If your t-shirt is sufficiently offensive to provoke a physical response from a 'typical' person, you can't hide behind the Constitution.
The First Amendment lets you say what you want, but it does let you force people to listen. When you cross the line to forcing your audience's attention by shocking them, you lose your Constitutional protection.
I think that the electrical hazard is a bit overstated, though. I can't think of a reason why high-current electrical loads would be carried through the structures normally cut through by the jaws of life
If you need the jaws of life, it's safe to assume that there have been some modifications to the structure. You've probably voided your warranty too.
It wasn't very riviting.
The sinking of the Titanic may not seem relevant after nearly a century, but it is still a fascinating study on preventable catastrophes and engineering processes. The technology involved may change, but people do not.
Compare the Titanic to the Challenger shuttle. Replace faulty rivets with faulty O-rings. Compare the hubris of Harland and Wolff ("unsinkable") to NASA management ("the probability of failure is necessarily less than 1 in 10,000") Both were high-pressure, high-publicity events trying to reglamourize their tasks. Both were cases of pushing the bounds of the operating envelope. In both cases, the failure modes of a small part were known to the engineers at the time. In both cases, the relevant data were lost in the bureaucracy.
The Titanic disaster will continue to happen so long as the same circumstances continue to align. The only way to prevent such things in the future is to study and heed past mistakes.
Personally, I think it is very riveting.
i got fed up with downloading photoshop again and again though, so...
For a small fee, you can get Photoshop on a disc. Apparently, Adobe has been offering this for years. They even throw in a valid license for free.
Your software dealer of choice may have more information on this spectacular offer.
If you build a system with tons of unsupported software, I am not responsible for reinstalling and reconfiguring all that software. Period. And that is absolutely a position that is supported by my boss and my bosses boss, and the only guy higher than that only talks to shareholders.
That's true today, but don't expect the status quo to last. This is no different from when people started bringing PCs into the office 25 years ago. Corporate IT said, "no way...use the mainframes", and the users brought PCs anyway. The users won.
IT exists to manage things in a sane and orderly manner, but it can not and never will be able to proscribe useful tools in the long run.
Don't ever turn a user request into a battle where your defense is "we can't support that." You may win that battle, but you will lose the war, every single time.
GoDaddy is like $10 a year, which I think is plenty cheap, so while I don't like their tactics, I don't think their pricing is exorbitant, and their online tools are pretty nice.
In this case, GoDaddy's lockdown policies are probably worth the trouble they cause. On the down side, you need to cough up an extra $10/domain if you happen to change your info, AND want to move registrars, AND wait until there are less than 60 days on your contract. On the up side, if your account gets compromised, you have 60 days to notice and fix things before it will cost you thousands of dollars in legal fees to maybe get your domains back.
GoDaddy is slimy, and they will take the spammers dollars as readily as they'll take anyone else's, but that doesn't mean they are pure evil incarnate. If you ever do have a domain you care about compromised, you'll be very, very happy with their lockdown policies.
I am not a physicist (which I think I'm about to make painfully obvious...), but I do follow popular science. Time dilation has always made me think that in the future all the rich people will live close to the speed of light, orbiting a black hole or somesuch. They will leave the rest of the universe to get on with discovering things, generating cultural works and making stuff for them, and they can collect their profit by the century for every one of their subjective days.
The "rich" are those with large wealth stores or large incomes, usually both. Having a large income (independent of financial dividends), requires the ability to do valuable useful work. This is very hard to accomplish when you are traveling at a high time dilation factor. What good is some miracle doctor that can only do a consultation every 100 years?
Also, having a large stored wealth is also useless if it cannot be protected by either legal or military means. Imagine checking in with "real-time" only to find that your tax bracket has been paying 200% taxes for the past 50 years, and both you and your "rich" friends were too busy orbiting a black hole to notice.
No matter how wealthy you are, at the end of the day, you need to be actively involved in managing your own finances, whether that means counting the pennies on your paycheck or taking your senator golfing. You also need a recourse, whether that means suing your employer, changing your campaign funding, or invading a neighboring country. If you totally isolate yourself into some time-dilation coma, you will get screwed.
"If we let the public see what was really happening, to see dead bodies and destruction, they would never support the war."
To me it sounded like the best reason FOR showing the pictures.
Yeah, people generally make their most logical, rational decisions when their emotional strings are being jerked around.
If somebody's opinions change between reading a casualty report and watching a sensational, tearjerking video of coffins and aggrieved widows, then they are probably not in sufficient command of their faculties to maintain an opinion about the war that is derived from fact and objective reality.
...from a while back in which some hardware counterfeiters in china got to the point where they where actually paying a firm for R&D for new products.
A hundred years ago the same thing was happening here in the US. Intellectual property law enforcement was non-existent in practice. US companies were ripping off European IP and then grew to the point when they needed their own R&D to compete with other US companies doing the same thing. Oddly enough, right about the time when serious commercial research was starting to take off in the States, the US IP laws grew some real teeth.
History is a funny thing. It almost seems like it keeps repeating itself.
Because they are making a profit on his work without his consent?
That argument is bogus. We do not compensate people simply because we make a profit off of their work in other areas, so why is photography special? When McDonalds spends two years and a chunk of cash to research the ideal location for a new franchise, Burger King doesn't pay them for that hard work when they open up next door. If the gas station next door gets more sales from the increased traffic, they don't pay the restaurants.
There are many good reasons for having copyrights, but none of them are about preventing people from profiting off the work of others without consent or compensation. Did the photographer in the article track down the architects and developers of those buildings in the image and compensate them? Of course not; he took a photo and sold it, profiting off their hard work without consent. Is there anything morally, ethically, or legally wrong with doing so? Not at all.
Copyrights are good. It's just your argument that is bad.
"Notepad" is not a part of the "operating system" just because it came on your XP disc.
Rule of thumb: If it runs in userland and not in kernel space, it's not part of the operating system.
Wouldn't surprise me if Notepad did run in kernel space.
Wow, you must be kinda bitter that you picked the wrong choice in a format war. Seriously, why even consider buying HD-DVD movies, unless they are absolutely free right now? Even if it's only $5, you're still buying an obsolete format that you won't even be able to find a player for in a few years.
This format war won't have a winner. Both sides are betting on the future of the shiny 5" plastic disc. Music CDs have no future in the era of iTunes and ubiquitous iPods. Movie discs will share the same fate a few years later as bandwidth and storage technology fulfill the requirements. Tivo and OnDemand have already gotten people accustomed to recording TV shows and renting movies without a disc.
Obligatory Car Analogy:
Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were drag racing toward a cliff. HD-DVD flinched. Blu-Ray "won".
Furthermore, in support of your argument, the UK news is consistently riddled with stories where adults who have approached such groups have been kicked to shit, or more recently to death.
...because it sells more papers.
...because society loves violence.
Why is the news riddled with such stories?
Why does it sell more papers?
What you really need over there is a another really juicy sex scandal to get your mind off things and give to time to reflect on the fact that real violent crime rates have dropped every year for the past 13 years.
What do you mean, the problem is usually the user? That's like disclaiming responsibility for a roof that leaks when it rains by saying 'the problem is the weather'.
A roof is designed to withstand the weather within predetermined limits. It's perfectly reasonable for a roofer to say, "I guarantee this roof won't leak until the winds hit 130mph. After that, you lose the roof, and I'll blame the weather."
User stupidity is not so easily quantifiable. Admins can't say, "I guarantee this system to properly handle Stupidity Levels I to VI. Once it hits Level VII, all bets are off, and the breach is the user's fault."
Could you please explain where search isn't good enough? Google works well enough for me (and just about everyone I know). I've never really sat back and thought, "Damn, I wish there was some better search engine out there."
This is when I will be impressed...
http://pics.nerdnirvana.org/d/1406-1/myhouse_google_com.jpg
I have a large variety of MP3 files to better understand the file format for possible future creation of my own codec... Does that work for ya?
Not when you can accomplish the same thing without violating copyrights.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sound/list
http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/fdd/fdd000012.shtml
http://www.id3.org/mp3Frame
http://www.dv.co.yu/mpgscript/mpeghdr.htm
Let X be a small number greater than 0.
A: Under the assumption that double of a small number is a small number we have: Y is small => 2Y is small
B: Thus for all n > 0 we have (2^(n-1)) * X is small => (2^n)X is small
C: Thus by the principle of mathematical induction we have that (2^n) * X is small for all n > 0 and X > 0.
D: However, if X > 0 , then the sequence a(n) = (2^n) * X has no upper bound and is strictly increasing. Hence it diverges towards infinity.
E: So either double of a small number is not necessarily a small number, or all positive numbers are small numbers.
Replace the word "small" with "even" if you care to blow a giant smoking hole in your logic.
To register, answer these questions and click the button on the right
What colour are buses in London?
What is three times three?
[Red] [Green] [Blue]
Yes, those are undoubtedly hard questions for a computer. How, exactly, do you plan to generate billions of these questions? For a CAPTCHA to work, it must still be hard even if the generation algorithm is public knowledge.