Yup, it's a PITA. Lots of profs this year were complaining about cuts in DARPA funding. When I started touring schools for my PhD... the profs who had better funding sources made sure to mention that selling point.
That said, DARPA funds a lot of university research. Posters here seem to think that they make guns with all of that money, and that the researchers are enlisted.
If I recall, the guy said he could do the process with any biological material he wanted, even dead cats, and people got all fired up saying that he had built a kitty powered engine.
One thing to note about efficiency... some of the alternative energy sources that have gained popularity don't actually produce energy yet. They are so inefficient, that it takes more energy to put them in place and utilize them than you ever get out of the system.
That said. I have no problem with my buddies out in India snatching up the cash in this market. Several of my best friends come from India and have worked in these shops.
My gripe is with the idea that rotting out a company's core somehow retains that company's position.
I figure that if I'm buying a product, it might as well just say the company that ACTUALLY made it, and they should get 100% of the revenue.
Actually, the cost of outsourcing is having a company that doesn't actually produce anything. Management who can only buy a product from a third party and a brand name are not value-added.
Dude, as I commented above, we're not pulling soldiers out of the war for this. DARPA money goes to universities and companies who do the research. Enlisted folks are all off in Iraq.
They were flirting with the draft to get enough troops to chase down Iraq and their efforts in Afghanistan. The cut and dried truth is that there are plenty of other things that could be cut that would do a lot less damage the our country than DARPA funding (and the hard research funding took a deep slash this past year, in case you're wondering, lots of universities are reeling from the blow).
So, essentially, by implementing the draft, we can have the war in Iraq and chase Bin Laden. Cutting DARPA funding won't help that much.
The first is, these people are just talking. They are not taking action, and they are not consorting with terrorists.
There is debate as to whether Al Masri was caught in the explosion of landmines that he was clearing, or of a homemade explosive he was devising.
His son was imprisoned for conspiring in terrorist activity.
The guy just doesn't have his nose as clean.
You're also forgetting that "extremist" is being used as a term because it is percieved as more culturally sensitive than "jyhadist." The language has been changed from "jyhadist" in a number of documents. The government is only concerned with those who are waging war. The media is concerned with separating the "good muslims" from the "bad muslims." Is it a lousy distinction? Yes, probably. Even so. The reality is that there are people rioting, burning cars, and killing people. The reason that they are doing it is because of an idealogical difference based on religion. If one is to discuss the matter at all, they need to make a distinction based on these differences. If one is to do that, they have an obligation, out of sensitivity to people who are not involved in the violence, to make a distinction.
Or, I suppose that you would prefer that the media just said, "Muslim suicide bombers blew up a cafe in Israel today," or "Muslims took an elementary school hostage in eastern Europe?"
Both of those happened. In fact, the hotel my mother was staying at last summer was bombed the day after she left.
That would be what I said. The GP said that script kiddies should put their minds to good use. I merely said that the reason that script kiddies are called script kiddies is because they didn't put their mind to use in the exploit.
IE, I didn't say anything that disagrees with that.
I actually never said that. I said that with the license they could. With the license, if the GPL stands up in court, they are complying with US law. As a US ally, they might like to do that.
Dude... what are you talking about? Script kiddies are called script kiddies because they steal other people's ideas. They aren't actually coming up with anything.
It wasn't a script kiddie who figured out that this works, it was a "hacker" (or a "cracker").
It's not like some kid spent hours figuring this out. These kids were told by someone who figured it out, who would not be referred to as a script kiddie.
They can't own and modify a copy that is closed source. IE, they can't take the product, and produce a non-open source product (legally), which they could if they had the rights.
Ahh. It's even worse then. I remember those things. It was like poorly written interactive movies that took forever to load because CD-ROMS were slow back then, with subgames that were distincly subpar for the time.
Those sucked a lot worse than I thought that this thing did.
If Slashdot were prone to Xenophobia, there would be a lot less people saying essentially identical things to what you're saying. How about easing off of that crack pipe a bit and evaluating the posts before you call us all bigots next time? The fact of the matter is that most of the posts on that story (it got posted onto Slashdot... since it isn't at all about technology) were saying that people who don't support the deal are jerks.
You're getting modded insightful because people agree with your notions about the port deal (and you know what, it's going through anyway, so just about everyone else in this country agrees, we're not all bigots, contrary to popular believe). You haven't said anything that is insightful about Slashdot.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, it's a real pain in the ass when people's quality of life goes up.
Yup, it's a PITA. Lots of profs this year were complaining about cuts in DARPA funding. When I started touring schools for my PhD... the profs who had better funding sources made sure to mention that selling point.
That said, DARPA funds a lot of university research. Posters here seem to think that they make guns with all of that money, and that the researchers are enlisted.
If I recall, the guy said he could do the process with any biological material he wanted, even dead cats, and people got all fired up saying that he had built a kitty powered engine.
No way man. All we need is to process all of the bullshit slung around by alternative energy folks into gasoline, and we're set.
One thing to note about efficiency... some of the alternative energy sources that have gained popularity don't actually produce energy yet. They are so inefficient, that it takes more energy to put them in place and utilize them than you ever get out of the system.
That said. I have no problem with my buddies out in India snatching up the cash in this market. Several of my best friends come from India and have worked in these shops.
My gripe is with the idea that rotting out a company's core somehow retains that company's position.
I figure that if I'm buying a product, it might as well just say the company that ACTUALLY made it, and they should get 100% of the revenue.
Actually, the cost of outsourcing is having a company that doesn't actually produce anything. Management who can only buy a product from a third party and a brand name are not value-added.
Nobody supports the war in Iraq.
I'm from one of the heaviest military areas in the US (originally).
People back there... Republicans... are saying how much they hate the war in Iraq (and a few choice things about Bush too).
What planet are you on where there is "popular support" for that war?
OK. Well, next time you're reading a research paper, look and see where the funding came from.
Lots of the ones that I read that come from American universities have a little thank you to the DARPA grant that paid for it.
This article rules. It shows that the Slashdot readership has grown quite diverse... as in diversely not nerds :-P
Since when do Slashdot readers feel the need to criticize large government agencies who fund R&D for building robots?
Jeez people. This thing is cool.
What kind of generic childrens books were you read? I thought that it was "Dick and Jane!"
Dude, as I commented above, we're not pulling soldiers out of the war for this. DARPA money goes to universities and companies who do the research. Enlisted folks are all off in Iraq.
They were flirting with the draft to get enough troops to chase down Iraq and their efforts in Afghanistan. The cut and dried truth is that there are plenty of other things that could be cut that would do a lot less damage the our country than DARPA funding (and the hard research funding took a deep slash this past year, in case you're wondering, lots of universities are reeling from the blow).
So, essentially, by implementing the draft, we can have the war in Iraq and chase Bin Laden. Cutting DARPA funding won't help that much.
So... what you're saying is that you just want research to dry up and die out while we hunt Bin Laden?
Seriously, they're not taking troops out of the war for this. DARPA funding is going to universities and private companies to fund stuff like this.
They were flirting with the draft over the Iraq war... I guess that what you're saying is that you want to be drafted to go and find Osama?
Perhaps there are better things to cut than research.
DARPA runs petrol?
Well... under US law this is true. Countries usually try to do what they can to not piss off their trade partners.
You're forgetting a few things.
The first is, these people are just talking. They are not taking action, and they are not consorting with terrorists.
There is debate as to whether Al Masri was caught in the explosion of landmines that he was clearing, or of a homemade explosive he was devising.
His son was imprisoned for conspiring in terrorist activity.
The guy just doesn't have his nose as clean.
You're also forgetting that "extremist" is being used as a term because it is percieved as more culturally sensitive than "jyhadist." The language has been changed from "jyhadist" in a number of documents. The government is only concerned with those who are waging war. The media is concerned with separating the "good muslims" from the "bad muslims." Is it a lousy distinction? Yes, probably. Even so. The reality is that there are people rioting, burning cars, and killing people. The reason that they are doing it is because of an idealogical difference based on religion. If one is to discuss the matter at all, they need to make a distinction based on these differences. If one is to do that, they have an obligation, out of sensitivity to people who are not involved in the violence, to make a distinction.
Or, I suppose that you would prefer that the media just said, "Muslim suicide bombers blew up a cafe in Israel today," or "Muslims took an elementary school hostage in eastern Europe?"
Both of those happened. In fact, the hotel my mother was staying at last summer was bombed the day after she left.
That would be what I said. The GP said that script kiddies should put their minds to good use. I merely said that the reason that script kiddies are called script kiddies is because they didn't put their mind to use in the exploit.
IE, I didn't say anything that disagrees with that.
I actually never said that. I said that with the license they could. With the license, if the GPL stands up in court, they are complying with US law. As a US ally, they might like to do that.
The American copyright wouldn't be violated. If they aren't honoring the American copyright, there is nothing for them to worry about.
So, yes, my knowledge of the law is sufficient ot identify this completely trivial instance.
I don't know if it's that. I think that people want to act like they have "skillz" and so bandy the term about as if they knew what it meant :-P
Perhaps you're right.
Dude... what are you talking about? Script kiddies are called script kiddies because they steal other people's ideas. They aren't actually coming up with anything.
It wasn't a script kiddie who figured out that this works, it was a "hacker" (or a "cracker").
It's not like some kid spent hours figuring this out. These kids were told by someone who figured it out, who would not be referred to as a script kiddie.
They can't own and modify a copy that is closed source. IE, they can't take the product, and produce a non-open source product (legally), which they could if they had the rights.
Ahh. It's even worse then. I remember those things. It was like poorly written interactive movies that took forever to load because CD-ROMS were slow back then, with subgames that were distincly subpar for the time.
Those sucked a lot worse than I thought that this thing did.
A reader submitted that story.
If Slashdot were prone to Xenophobia, there would be a lot less people saying essentially identical things to what you're saying. How about easing off of that crack pipe a bit and evaluating the posts before you call us all bigots next time? The fact of the matter is that most of the posts on that story (it got posted onto Slashdot... since it isn't at all about technology) were saying that people who don't support the deal are jerks.
You're getting modded insightful because people agree with your notions about the port deal (and you know what, it's going through anyway, so just about everyone else in this country agrees, we're not all bigots, contrary to popular believe). You haven't said anything that is insightful about Slashdot.