> Meanwhile, Paul Davies writes that we should be conducting SETI in our DNA.
Let's see, we're looking for an unspecified message in an unknown language spelled out in an unknown coding... Yeah, I bet you can 'find' any kind of message you want in there, just like the silly Bible Codes thing. The only surprise is that k00ks haven't already been making their claims.
This is hardly a surprise; the rules have applied to paper documents since forever.
If you've ever worked for company with a clue you surely encountered their "records retention policy", which is actually a "records destruction policy", since the general rule is that you are expected to delete everything as soon as the law allows you to. At places I've worked the managers made no bones about the fact that it was to keep damaging documents from coming out during lawsuits.
> The purpose of patents is to encourage innovation by protecting the income for the developer/innovator to recoup the cost of innovating/developing, not to discourage innovation.
It's probably not possible to write a set of laws that isn't subject to abusive exploitation by people who want to leech off the system.
> I have found that when I work on personal projects, a couple games amongst them, I get bored with them once the hard parts (those that I haven't had much experience with ie new to me) are done and bug free (as best I can tell;) ). I then get distaracted by something else that catches my eye and proceed to half finish it, then.....
Yeah, I tend to think of a problem, program at it just long enough to see how to do it, and then go on to another one.
I suppose there's a reason we aren't all entrepreneurs.
> Software patenting has been driven by court cases in the U.S. brought by a number of companies that wanted to be able to patent software and business methods.
I read an analysis somewhere that claimed that it also stemmed from the creation of a single court to handle all the cases.
> the terror level has just been raised to "Orange" high at the same time that Tom Ridge announced that after the election he will reteire due to financial difficulties. I guess $175,000 a year of tax payer money just doesn't buy a lot now a days
Probably has more to do with the latest election polls.
> Or perhaps the modern day battleground of evolution against the challenging new scientific theory of intelligent design, which suggests that certain biological features such as the flagellum are irreducibly complex and therefore could not possibly have been developed by increments as evolutionists would have it.
"Intelligent Design" is utter bunkum, nothing but an attempt to whitewash creationism with an appearence of scientific respectability. But you you look at it closely you discover that it's nothing but a collection of obfuscations, non sequiturs, and strawman arguments.
For example, in the case you cite there is a strawman, since "evolutionists" have long known that evolution most often operates by tweaking the function of existing features rather than adding new components incrementally, and a non sequitur, since even if the proponents of ID has shown that the flagellum didn't evolve, it would not actually follow that either intelligence or design had anything to do with it.
> But then evolution on the grand, macro scale that is, isn't testable either.
Perhaps you saw the PBS special on evolution a couple of years back? Though generally somewhat lame IMO, it did have one nice episode that showed testibility in practice. The guy studying the paleontology of cetaceans looked at the known fossils and their dates, and interpolated when an important intermediary must have existed. Then, rather than going around digging at random spots hoping to find it, he consulted geology to see where former seabeds of the required date are now exposed on dry land. On that basis he planned his safari, and bingo, intermediate cetacean ancestors were lying scattered in the sand, ready to pick up with the bare hands.
BTW, that's a bingo for old-earth geology as well.
> it is just as much a leap of faith to say that the primordial evolved into man over many eons as it is to say man was created
Except that one claim has supporting evidence and the other doesn't.
> Shouldn't this article immediately point back to other articles on how governments OUTSIDE the US are choosing open source for exactly the same reason (who knows what M$ + NSA put in the closed windows source that might hurt other nations)?
Also, are they assuming that they should just trust whatever's in a closed source package?
> "The renvenge of the teletubbies" would sure surprise me 100% more.
Ah, yes. Young Annakin throws himself into a volcano upon learning that his father is none other than the notorious Tinkie Skywinkie. After being maliciously rescued by a wandering band of Ewok jongleurs he dedicates his life to the destruction of all that is good and gold and gay, starting with his own droid C3PO.
Slashdot Mirror
> Not only a dupe, but a link to the original story is listed on the referenced page.
Think of it as steganography in action.
> Meanwhile, Paul Davies writes that we should be conducting SETI in our DNA.
Let's see, we're looking for an unspecified message in an unknown language spelled out in an unknown coding... Yeah, I bet you can 'find' any kind of message you want in there, just like the silly Bible Codes thing. The only surprise is that k00ks haven't already been making their claims.
This is hardly a surprise; the rules have applied to paper documents since forever.
If you've ever worked for company with a clue you surely encountered their "records retention policy", which is actually a "records destruction policy", since the general rule is that you are expected to delete everything as soon as the law allows you to. At places I've worked the managers made no bones about the fact that it was to keep damaging documents from coming out during lawsuits.
...onlyafucktardwouldsuemeoverthisdomainname.co
> The purpose of patents is to encourage innovation by protecting the income for the developer/innovator to recoup the cost of innovating/developing, not to discourage innovation.
It's probably not possible to write a set of laws that isn't subject to abusive exploitation by people who want to leech off the system.
> I have found that when I work on personal projects, a couple games amongst them, I get bored with them once the hard parts (those that I haven't had much experience with ie new to me) are done and bug free (as best I can tell
Yeah, I tend to think of a problem, program at it just long enough to see how to do it, and then go on to another one.
I suppose there's a reason we aren't all entrepreneurs.
> Should I put on my tinfoil hat now?
Yes, it improves our reception.
> an exam all high school students do in year 10 in Australia
Here in the USA, most of us finish high school within 6 or 7 years.
> The Register has a good summary of the report.
70% of slashdottings were caused by Slashdot.
> Software patenting has been driven by court cases in the U.S. brought by a number of companies that wanted to be able to patent software and business methods.
I read an analysis somewhere that claimed that it also stemmed from the creation of a single court to handle all the cases.
> the terror level has just been raised to "Orange" high at the same time that Tom Ridge announced that after the election he will reteire due to financial difficulties. I guess $175,000 a year of tax payer money just doesn't buy a lot now a days
Probably has more to do with the latest election polls.
> it creates a somewhat massive economic boom in the area
So how come they aren't funded by selling shares to the people who expect to benefit from it?
> If I don't have a stadium near me?
Write your congressman, and maybe the taxpayers will buy you one.
> TiVo vs. the Broadcast Flag Wavers
> By Rob Pegoraro The Washington Post Sunday, August 1, 2004; Page F06
Thanks. You can still let eight other people read it, too.
> file contained 21 documents with classifications ranging from For Official Use Only to Secret/NO FORN.
What's "FRON"?
> Or perhaps the modern day battleground of evolution against the challenging new scientific theory of intelligent design, which suggests that certain biological features such as the flagellum are irreducibly complex and therefore could not possibly have been developed by increments as evolutionists would have it.
"Intelligent Design" is utter bunkum, nothing but an attempt to whitewash creationism with an appearence of scientific respectability. But you you look at it closely you discover that it's nothing but a collection of obfuscations, non sequiturs, and strawman arguments.
For example, in the case you cite there is a strawman, since "evolutionists" have long known that evolution most often operates by tweaking the function of existing features rather than adding new components incrementally, and a non sequitur, since even if the proponents of ID has shown that the flagellum didn't evolve, it would not actually follow that either intelligence or design had anything to do with it.
> But then evolution on the grand, macro scale that is, isn't testable either.
Perhaps you saw the PBS special on evolution a couple of years back? Though generally somewhat lame IMO, it did have one nice episode that showed testibility in practice. The guy studying the paleontology of cetaceans looked at the known fossils and their dates, and interpolated when an important intermediary must have existed. Then, rather than going around digging at random spots hoping to find it, he consulted geology to see where former seabeds of the required date are now exposed on dry land. On that basis he planned his safari, and bingo, intermediate cetacean ancestors were lying scattered in the sand, ready to pick up with the bare hands.
BTW, that's a bingo for old-earth geology as well.
> it is just as much a leap of faith to say that the primordial evolved into man over many eons as it is to say man was created
Except that one claim has supporting evidence and the other doesn't.
the "Foo Queue" category.
Harder than you might think, I suspect.> How hard would it be to build in a small tiny bit of error that would only be useful in cases of calibration of high-tech weapons?
> Shouldn't this article immediately point back to other articles on
how governments OUTSIDE the US are choosing open source for exactly
the same reason (who knows what M$ + NSA put in the closed windows
source that might hurt other nations)?
Also, are they assuming that they should just trust whatever's in a closed source package?
What makes FOSS harder to check than ECSS?
> Gentoo has moved from XFree86 to X.org
Will the DRI acceleration stuff for ATI and NVIDIA cards still work?
> "The renvenge of the teletubbies" would sure surprise me 100% more.
Ah, yes. Young Annakin throws himself into a volcano upon learning that his father is none other than the notorious Tinkie Skywinkie. After being maliciously rescued by a wandering band of Ewok jongleurs he dedicates his life to the destruction of all that is good and gold and gay, starting with his own droid C3PO.
> Now they'll be able to prove that my photo of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam in 1983 is a fake.
Yeah, and prove that my photo of Osama and Bert was real!