On the other hand, if you subscribe to the prevailing theory as to why people buy a Lexus in the first place, all of the "targeted" ads will be for Viagra.
Wouldn't they be to the nearest gold digger/trophy spouse?
I've always kinda liked the original idea of $100 laptop. Too bad OLPC couldn't do it. I'd have said those $350 little things at walmart killed it, but OLPC was already too dead/ill to matter. What I always thought of when I thought of OLPC was those $40-50 barbie laptop toys that you can see in walmart. They make want to cry.
We should be able to get real laptop abilities for kids at $50. Heck, my first computer was an apple IIC, my first real introduction to programing and such was the TI82, and I remember my parents paying an arm and leg for a 486 with 400 MB of HD space and CD drive. We should easily be able to design and build a laptop for kids for $50. Those $350 laptops make me drool. If we can do that for $350, the we should be able to get a 486 or a P2 level chip with a CF reader and keyboard, screen for $50.
I'm not like slashdot group think. I'd actually want windows on it. Maybe Windows 98 SE. It's been awhile since I've played with a Win98 machine. I'd think Win2000 would be far more stable, but it would drive the specs up. If you want XPHome, save your money for those $350 laptops and get your kid one of those. Every time I've played with a linux desktop, I've thought that it wasn't quite there, yet. If you could get it to run and do a few decent tricks that turn out to be a glorified e-book reader for $50 than I'd buy it just to play with linux. Linux can be a pain the butt to run on a desktop. I'd much rather have a toy laptop that doesn't really matter have something like linux on that I could play with rather than my real PC.
Slashdot just doesn't think realistically. I've yet to have the cash to buy one of those $350 laptops because they are still too expensive for my family. I'm more pissed that those that should have been able to push an affordable and useful toy for kids have just been spinning their wheels and wasting their time.
There is a part of me that thinks that we've been spending far too much money on global warming/climate change "research" over the last 20-30 years and that money would have been better spent else where.
Government supported science is the modern state supported religion complete with high priests and teaching all the kids that these are the facts of the universe that damn near can't/shouldn't be changed.
I'm actually very pissed at that not that we have a new religion, but how we've got pieces of a religious system and it hiding itself as science instead.
Oh no! It's the end of the world. Every one run and scream and holler for more money!
O.k. I got it out of my system. We don't have DTV and aren't planning on buying a new TV any time soon. We get all our TV on DVD. We purchase entire seasons of shows and then just watch them over and over again. Heck, our movie collection is all DVD and I have no plans on buying a next gen movie player or movies either.
Second, I would bet the author has never actually been in a truly wild setting, where there are animals around that might hunt you. The wild is no place to be oblivious.
You know that doesn't automatically rule out cities. I mean in the wild nature, you've only got animals to worry about. Now in a city, you've got many other humans to worry about. Which group would you rather be hunting you animals or humans?
Actually, I'd think that most areas of cities are safe for 90% of the people that live there. There is always an area that the locals know is of a high crime rate and to avoid. It's when you are just passing through and don't know which areas are the wild ones to avoid where you give them the big chance to hunt you. That applies to natural areas as well as cities.;)
Well, if I only had 30 million, I'd buy one. Of course, if I had 30 million, I could actually afford to just throw the money at solar for my site.
If I were Bill Gates or a Walton, I'd get one of these to power MS or Walmart HQ or where ever their major data center is. One of theses is likely to power the business and the entire surrounding community for about 5-10 years or so. Now how much could 30 million in solar, wind, hydro or geothermal power?
What's really exciting is $30 million sounds about in the price range for a coop to buy. Sounds great for some folks.
William Hartnell - 56 Patrick Troughton - 46 Jon Pertwee - 51 (He will always be Worzel Gummidge to me) Tom Baker - 40 Peter Davidson - 29 Colin Baker - 40 Sylvester McCoy - 44 Paul McGann - 37 Christopher Eccleston - 41 David Tennant - 34 Matt Smith - 27 (when he starts playing the part in 2010 not now)
So only 2 of the Doctors were over 50 when he started. Yeah it is some ageist conspiracy alright. The BBC have cast 2 people under 40 in a row as the Doctor! OMGWTFBBQ! I think people's nostalgia tinted glasses are getting the better of them. You need to take them off and get over yourself. The doctor's age has clearly fluctuated a lot over the years. But Davidson to McCoy really ruins the age downward trend conspiracy. Seeing as Matt Smith is only 2 year shy of Peter Davidson's age I fail to see the problem really. Plus I'm 32 and the guy looks older than me.
50s, 50s? come on the British must have had really bad medical care back then. The first several doctors all looked like they were in their late 60s or 70s. My dad hasn't quite hit 60, yet, but looks far younger than those first couple of Doctors. My dad could pass for early 50s or late 40s. I never was really curious about actors ages, but finding out those guys were that young, but looked that old is kind of startling. I'd have to agree though that the Doctor "appears to be" getting younger.
I hate not to be all positive about this, but I'd much rather the prices drop rather than the sizes get bigger. Then again this is a huge sized solid state drive. I wonder if it is actually worth it. I'd like to see some real numbers comparing these drives to normal laptop drives.
A part of me also wonders when something like this will be thrown into the next ipod or DVR. It'll most likely be a price thing that determines it.
Seriously? There's a lot of people coming onto the web who have never been there. I was stunned last year when my retired (not computer literate) parents bought a laptop and got a broadband connection.
Increasingly everyone is being told that if you're not on line you're missing out on something. Unfortunately, the sophistication and knowledge required to do this safely belies the ease with which people can connect and then if they don't know anything about such things, they're at risk. People just aren't being made aware of the danger, and don't really understand all of the ways that they can get into trouble.
Reminds me of all the general complaints about Mac Users being so generally uneducated about IT crap and on the internet pre 2000. The big joke was that any PC user that un-educated would never have been able to get on the internet. The Macs made it trivial for any one that owned the PC to get on the internet. Jump ahead about a decade and what do you see now? Cell phones that you could browse the internet on, $350 laptops, and broadband at what dial up used to cost. Now anyone that is willing to make the minor effort can get on the internet fairly easily without being generally educated about computers, cell phones or the internet.
You'll see all those old Mac user jokes come back re-written for whatever is the current lowest knowledge level demographic. Things are getting easier to do on the internet without having to be educated much. Spam and scams in general seem to be about it that you need to tell people to watch out for. I almost think that we need a high school class on IDing scams and how not to fall into them.
The wrong person would simply have to submit proof that they got the wrong person.
So it's now not up to the system to prove that they've got the right person, but to anyone caught randomly close with the same name now has to come out and yell up and and down "it's not me, it's not me." and hope that the system is sane in their case?
It would be an email address reported on a credit application, a bank, or confirmed by an employer. There is no address book of email addresses, so the only way to get an email address for a person is to have some verifiable real-world link to them, or to have extensive circumstantial evidence.
I don't know about you, but I've never seen a blank for e-mail address at anywhere other than at an ISP. All you really have circumstantial evidence not actual evidence that they may match up.
RTFA. They defaulted on their house payments, and multiple attempts were made to contact them at home, by telephone, and by email. Again, you don't get yourself off the hook simply by refusing to open your door.
Um, sounds like it should be trivial for the bank/lending institution to get the house/property back and have the police arrest the squatters. Though in practice it turns out to be difficult.
So wait, can we now say that because no parents have expressly approved the use of Google we should ban it? Whitelisting sites like that is honestly, is an idea that can only be expressed as "stupid" along with "retarded". Wait, but lets not stop with websites, lets now expect parents to approve all curriculum by the school! If parent's don't approve the teaching of prime numbers, lets stop it! And who knows where it would go with evolution, no doubt it wouldn't even be allowed to be taught even as a "theory".
That might actually be a great idea! I've never really found anything that you can usefully get out the evolution thing except politically stirring people up. So I wouldn't mind it if the material just disappeared from those that didn't want to see it. Those that actually don't mind or think its the best thing since sliced bread will of course be wanting that on their kids educational menu.
What was that quote about a parents complaining about teachers teaching things that they didn't like and once the principle actually found out what the parents were upset about it was that the school taught their children to read and think differently from their families.
Some parents would love to micromanage the standards that their kids where were required to be taught to, others would just send their kids to school and not even change any thing from the default guidelines, and still others will find that things that they want in the guidelines/standards aren't their for them to demand their kids to be taught to. If you could get the schools to do it, every school would appear to be a religious/cultureal school tailored exactly by the parents for their kids to learn only their religious/culture view point in life. We do it currently by those that disagree with public school morals/guidelines sending their kids to religious schools. If it was really up to the parents, they'd want every public school to be a religious school for every religion for every student. It's not currently possible for public schools to do that. If they could do it practically, you'd see it in a heart beat.
I, for one, hope they have very strong filtering methods that require some real knowledge to bypass. You will be pitting their desire to be lazy against their 14-year-old hormones and they will, completely by accident, end up with very useful knowledge about information security.
Some of the hardest workers that you'll ever find are the lazy ones trying to find a better methods to be lazy. A hard normal worker will do things the long hard way because it's like their duty to do it the way they were shown and not mess anything up. A lazy worker will find and exploit every means to improve the process that they were shown in order to have more lazy time when others are still hard at work.
This is something that is never quite clearly shown in Dilbert. Wally is likely the guy that gets the most work done soonest or improves his efficiency and his ability to do his work so that he spends the rest of the time not doing anything. It only appears that he isn't working because he's already finished. That's kinda one of those key things that you learn in school. Finish everything ASAP so that you'd have it when needed and can spend the rest of the time goofing off and never ever let some one that assigns things see you finished/not doing anything while everyone else is hard at work. That just encourages them to assign more and more work on until you appear to be hard at work busy.
The more rules and restrictions you put around this, the more you will make "criminals" out of ordinary students.
Giggles. This is funny. Have you even bothered to read any school hand books lately? Doesn't matter if it's for elementary, middle, or high school. They all just about make every student a hand book criminal for just being a human student that attends their educational system. It's been ages since I had to attend public school from the inside, but as I liked to refer to it, it's the other public penal institution where every one is sent for being guilty of being within a certain age range.
If they really want to stop problems, they'd just treat the thing like a text book. If you return it or show up with the thing "damaged" in any visible way to those that assigned it to you, expect to pay at least the purchase price of the thing. Also you could make the tech support fines for when it is really a user thing instead of a laptop thing either $50-100 and that would stop most of the student related tech support right there. (Expect to be doing a lot of cloning from decent machines at the end of the year when you reclaim the things though.)
I'm mixed on the entire concept. Why? Because in order for all these educational systems to provide laptops to the their students, their parents will being more in taxes regardless to get the thing in place and run the damn program. How many of those parents would have much rather had gone out to buy their own laptop, but now suddenly can't quite afford because their cost of living is a bit higher due to these hidden "educational taxes." Every time I'm in walmart, I think about buying one of those $350 laptops for my kid. $350 is a ton of money to me, but I'd like to spend it if other cost of living bills didn't drain my paycheck before the end of the month. Why should I want to support higher taxes to give every child a locked down laptop when I'd rather save a bit and buy my kid our own unlocked laptop and hook it up to a WAP over the home DSL? It's plans like these that slow my ability to even save up for that damn cheap laptop.
What's interesting is how often the union's improved terms for labor increases labor's productivity. Which means a larger total profit, so even a smaller share of it to the owners can be a larger total amount than before the union, when worse working conditions produced less profit for everyone.
You'd think all those unionized grocery stores and department stores would be out competing walmart with that kinda thought process.
Personal service is preferred, and process servers go to extreme and often comical lengths to put the paper in your hand, but some people refuse to accept service. Should you have to continue a manhunt for a year, at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars, in order to exercise your legal rights? How would you feel if someone potentially owed you thousands or millions of dollars and you couldn't get it because they wouldn't open the door?
I'd be more upset at the system that allowed that rather than the individual that evaded being called up by the system. The thing is that process server is supposed to make sure that the right people get the papers. Think of 3-5 people with the same name living on the same street with only the address numbers being slightly different. I doubt that happens too much in the physical world, but it would be much easier to happen online.
I had a college friend named Mark Miller. When I tried looking him up a few months ago, there were 10 Mark Millers in the same city as he was last known. I didn't need to find him badly enough to actually contact each of the 10 to find out if any of them where him, but I'd imagine that a process server would have to do that and then physically contact the person. Well, calling people on the phone/cell or e-mailing them is easy. It's difficult to actually verify if the person that you've contacted is the person that you actually should be talking to though. Esp if you aren't already familiar with the person. (I might remember my friend from college and could tell him from the other 9 Mark Millers, how the heck would a process server tell them apart? The only thing that he has going for him is the address to limit it down a bit.
It sounds like this lawyer didn't even have a current address. I'm sorry, but this doesn't sound like it should be valid at all. If anything, it would just let lawyers serve things without the proper people finding out until after the lawyer has had a court date and used his time to say that the other party defaulted so his side should win.
Seriously -- you believe it's morally and legally correct for we, as a community, to simply decide you need to die? You actually WANT to live in a society where that's codified?!?!
Um, we do. You live in a society where "crimes" exist. You commit certain types of crimes and you'll be hunted down, jailed, a trail, and then executed if found guilty. You seem to want to live in a society where laws and crimes don't exist and where no one will be able to force their views on you. Ha, you are living in a fantasy land.
Or do you simply think that not having rights to one's own body is a status that should be reserved only for women? Would you support government-sponsored rape camps? Hey just because I grew in some one else's body doesn't mean that should give them total rights over me. I didn't state that women or men have no rights over their body. They have the rights that we as the community permit them to have. I don't support government rape camps, but if enough of the community does support it, then I'm afraid yes it would legally happen. Heck, we could quiet easily change our penal institutions where that was s mandatory part of being jailed if we wanted to. No one wants that though. Now do they? You don't see anyone forming political groups to support that action now do you? I didn't say that I supported that, just that if the community decided that an action was so, that's how things will legally be.
Until something inside your body, made by your body, is voluntarily removed from your body with your explicit permission, it is not in our world or our nation. Oh my, my shit doesn't exist until I poop! I didn't know that.
It is within sovereign territory, over which no government can claim authority; that territory has but a single ruler. Any invasion of that territory is a crime against basic human rights. Which, it's clear, you don't believe everyone deserves. I'm mixed on the concept of "body rights" being a basic human right as you seem to view it. I'm not convinced that it is. Your logic is that you are the ruler of your own body and that no one out side of your body has rights over you or it. By your logic, police can't search you for hiding drugs in your body or search your body for blood alcohol level.
Any group of people that out number you and has enough control over you, has effective sovereignty over you regardless of what you'd like. It's only because we have of the customs and laws that we have that limits what rights others have over each of us. If you are suspected of a crime, many of those rights seem to suddenly be reduced.
In other words, if these guys were privately employed, you'd advocate using tax money to keep them employed through hard times, but since they're publicly employed, they should be let go because they're paid with tax money.
No I don't support that either, but those autoworkers do and they happen to be voters so their reps have to push the issue regardless of what I'd like.
My camera came with a strap. If I were dangling my camera by its strap, not holding the actual camera body, and the strap broke and my camera smashed to the pavement, it would never occur to me to sue the camera manufacturer. My thoughts, after the "oh shit" would be, "I shouldn't have been doing that and should have been more careful."
I'd end up buying a new device because I'd never believe that it was possible for me to get money out of the manufacturer. If I thought there was a good shot of me getting my money back for the device, I'd certainly join up on board a class action lawsuit.
If your luggage handle or strap broke and spilled the contents of your bag and damaged what ever you had instead, you'd like the maker to give you some form of compensation. You wouldn't expect to be able to actually collect any, but if you could get your clothes dry cleaned, replaced, or broken bag replaced, you'd feel a bit better. If you could get that kinda of service, without having to go to court in a class action lawsuit, you'd be really happy with that company.
The PC is optimized for one person to use at a distance of maybe 0.5 m. It sits on a desk. It is a lousy multi-player device.
The console is optimized for multiple people to use at a distance of 2 m. It sits in the living room. It is an excellent multi-player device, and, even if equipped with a keyboard and mouse, a highly inconvenient personal computer.
This is in addition to the cost reasons already cited.
Nah, I think with cheap 16-32 GB flash cards that even a PS2 would make a perfectly fine universal computer for nearly everyone. It depends on how much you expect to do on a given device. On a cheap $500-600 desktop or laptop, you can do a surprising amount. You may run into problems with the newest games or really high end apps loading in less than 15 minutes, but you generally can get them to run. Painfully, but run. If you managed a PS2 level device with 30 GB of storage, it'd be enough for millions of people. We are getting close to where many people can actually see a need for a 1-2 TB media server that has images of all your DVDs and games and can be streamed across your in house network to any of your devices and record from any incoming media source.
It would be nice if open device platform gaming could take off. I wouldn't want it based on the PC model, I'd want it built around the DVD player. It would be nice to have 50-100 electronics companies all making and selling consoles and game pads and the same game "just works" on every damn one of 'em without any problems. Of course with our luck, it would take 3 months to end up like the current PC gaming hardware cycle.
Besides, with everyone talking about creating jobs, how does it make sense to cut NASA hard and put tons of people who are working on Ares out of work?
Because those people work directly for the government. Which means you or I indirectly pay for them. Now if they were doing it because a space transport company was paying the bills, it would be much more impressive and more likely to be real long term jobs that don't need political support to survive.
It is unfortunate that we've come to this point in American history, but the truth is probably that we can't afford a grandiose space program right now.
NASA will still exist, but the bureaucrats running it need to go. NASA will have a chance at manned space flight, but they need to figure out a way to do it cheaper. The rest of the nation has tightened its belt, the rest of the nation is concerned about the ballooning debt, NASA isn't exempt from the changes.
If I had my choice, I'd much rather see the billions spent on a shuttle launch go toward turning children into future aerospace engineers.
Um, I'm mixed on NASA. There is a strong part of me that wants the entire governmental body redone from the ground up. I think that it needs to be more like the FAA for space than how it currently exists. So I'm not really against it being made of "regulators"/mangers, I'm against all US space development being controlled and sponsored solely through NASA.
I'm not worried about future aerospace engineers or education at all. Why? Because if the only source for those jobs is directly through the government financing of an entire industry, then it isn't really worth it to push. If every air line industry was also interested in building space planes or mining orbital resources, you'd see students shift where they study to tailor themselves for those companies. It'll happen despite the government not because of it.
Calling anonymity one of the greatest disappointments of the Internet's evolution, Dyson said: 'I'm pro choice, but I think abortion is an unfortunate thing. I think the same thing about anonymity: Everybody should have the right to it, but it's not something one wants to encourage.'"
Just proof that because one relative in a family is bright doesn't mean many of the others will be as well.
I've always been against abortion for a perfectly logical reason. It assumes that mothers have the legal right to terminate their child's life any time through such and such time frame of it's development. I believe that only the state has the right to terminate the lives of criminals. I just don't that that mothers should have the right to terminate the little unborn children for the crime of picking the wrong uterus to grow in.
I believe that sterilization should be mandatory for anyone that does chose to have their offspring terminated.
If you are pro choice flip it around and extend it all the way: If your mother has the right to kill you at 6 weeks development, why shouldn't she or the other partner have the right to kill you at any time after your birth?
I believe in prevention, but just because you screwed up your birth control, doesn't mean that you need rights to kill developing humans. Of course, I don't think biological mothers should have nearly the rights that they think that they do. If they don't want the child, it shouldn't be killed, that's wasteful, the state should take it and raise it to their standards. The "state" is defined in this case as your surrounding community. If we as a community decide that all orphans are going to be feed into a meat processing plant, that's what would happen. If we as a community decide that we want to fund orphanages to raise those kids as productive citizens despite their parent's wishes, then that's what would happen.
Do you really want to know? Think about what breathalyzers do. They are used by the cops to get a number off you. That number has been used by law makers and such that anything above a number is instant DWI, anything between some numbers is up to the cop, and anything below a certain number the cops just let you go because they know that they it's too low to make get through a court.
That's what this person wants. A black box that any idiot cop can use on a computer and return a score that they can use like a blood alcohol level. That magic number would be used in jury trials and what not instead of showing you know the actual evidence that they are required to produce now. Jury this guy has a computer with a.10 porn level,.02 child porn level,.01 drug level,.01 credit card fraud level,.02 hacking index,.3 pirated software level, and.5 unlicensed media content level.
It's to reduce things down to a few numbers produced by a tool that the defendant can't argue with.
Combine this with a remote access software, and you don't even need to enter a person's home to scan their PC for files anymore. Forget all this pesky due process for warrants and investigation, we can now scan tens of thousands of computers every day and just fish idly for perps. All done without even needing to look at your screen while the software does the dirty work for you.
This is kinda why I don't run apps like google desktop search or MS desktop search. Other than they just slow my computer down for no useful return for me.
I voted on a few questions just to see how it worked, I saw at least 10 Blagojevich questions out of the 50 I voted on. If the wingnuts are gonna spam stupid questions they should be deleted when there are real questions out there. There were also five or so birth certificate questions. The Republicans are probably not going to have good luck winning elections anytime soon unless they realize people don't care about this bullshit right now, we care about the war and the economy.
I've never really thought about until some one was complaining about it to me. I thought who is responsible for checking the birth certificates for everyone running for president? I have no idea. Or do the only check the "winners" birth certificate? That would be really funny if your champion couldn't take office because he didn't have all the governmental paper work proving that he was eligible to run in the first place. Personally, I have little problem with foreigners or those under 35 from running and actually being president. I figure if enough of the population would want a foreigner or some younger person in office, then it would happen.
If I asked a birth certificate related question, I'd have to ask if he has to stand in a line with all his paperwork correctly before some government guy before he is passed as the president? Come on that would be awesome, one little clerk's job to verify the paper work of the next president, and if they don't have all their paper work in order to send the person around through all the other government offices before getting the special tokens saying "you are now president."
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, if you subscribe to the prevailing theory as to why people buy a Lexus in the first place, all of the "targeted" ads will be for Viagra.
Wouldn't they be to the nearest gold digger/trophy spouse?
I've always kinda liked the original idea of $100 laptop. Too bad OLPC couldn't do it. I'd have said those $350 little things at walmart killed it, but OLPC was already too dead/ill to matter. What I always thought of when I thought of OLPC was those $40-50 barbie laptop toys that you can see in walmart. They make want to cry.
We should be able to get real laptop abilities for kids at $50. Heck, my first computer was an apple IIC, my first real introduction to programing and such was the TI82, and I remember my parents paying an arm and leg for a 486 with 400 MB of HD space and CD drive. We should easily be able to design and build a laptop for kids for $50. Those $350 laptops make me drool. If we can do that for $350, the we should be able to get a 486 or a P2 level chip with a CF reader and keyboard, screen for $50.
I'm not like slashdot group think. I'd actually want windows on it. Maybe Windows 98 SE. It's been awhile since I've played with a Win98 machine. I'd think Win2000 would be far more stable, but it would drive the specs up. If you want XPHome, save your money for those $350 laptops and get your kid one of those. Every time I've played with a linux desktop, I've thought that it wasn't quite there, yet. If you could get it to run and do a few decent tricks that turn out to be a glorified e-book reader for $50 than I'd buy it just to play with linux. Linux can be a pain the butt to run on a desktop. I'd much rather have a toy laptop that doesn't really matter have something like linux on that I could play with rather than my real PC.
Slashdot just doesn't think realistically. I've yet to have the cash to buy one of those $350 laptops because they are still too expensive for my family. I'm more pissed that those that should have been able to push an affordable and useful toy for kids have just been spinning their wheels and wasting their time.
And fund our research instead.
There is a part of me that thinks that we've been spending far too much money on global warming/climate change "research" over the last 20-30 years and that money would have been better spent else where.
Government supported science is the modern state supported religion complete with high priests and teaching all the kids that these are the facts of the universe that damn near can't/shouldn't be changed.
I'm actually very pissed at that not that we have a new religion, but how we've got pieces of a religious system and it hiding itself as science instead.
Oh no! It's the end of the world. Every one run and scream and holler for more money!
O.k. I got it out of my system. We don't have DTV and aren't planning on buying a new TV any time soon. We get all our TV on DVD. We purchase entire seasons of shows and then just watch them over and over again. Heck, our movie collection is all DVD and I have no plans on buying a next gen movie player or movies either.
Second, I would bet the author has never actually been in a truly wild setting, where there are animals around that might hunt you. The wild is no place to be oblivious.
You know that doesn't automatically rule out cities. I mean in the wild nature, you've only got animals to worry about. Now in a city, you've got many other humans to worry about. Which group would you rather be hunting you animals or humans?
Actually, I'd think that most areas of cities are safe for 90% of the people that live there. There is always an area that the locals know is of a high crime rate and to avoid. It's when you are just passing through and don't know which areas are the wild ones to avoid where you give them the big chance to hunt you. That applies to natural areas as well as cities. ;)
Well, if I only had 30 million, I'd buy one. Of course, if I had 30 million, I could actually afford to just throw the money at solar for my site.
If I were Bill Gates or a Walton, I'd get one of these to power MS or Walmart HQ or where ever their major data center is. One of theses is likely to power the business and the entire surrounding community for about 5-10 years or so. Now how much could 30 million in solar, wind, hydro or geothermal power?
What's really exciting is $30 million sounds about in the price range for a coop to buy. Sounds great for some folks.
William Hartnell - 56
Patrick Troughton - 46
Jon Pertwee - 51 (He will always be Worzel Gummidge to me)
Tom Baker - 40
Peter Davidson - 29
Colin Baker - 40
Sylvester McCoy - 44
Paul McGann - 37
Christopher Eccleston - 41
David Tennant - 34
Matt Smith - 27 (when he starts playing the part in 2010 not now)
So only 2 of the Doctors were over 50 when he started. Yeah it is some ageist conspiracy alright. The BBC have cast 2 people under 40 in a row as the Doctor! OMGWTFBBQ! I think people's nostalgia tinted glasses are getting the better of them. You need to take them off and get over yourself. The doctor's age has clearly fluctuated a lot over the years. But Davidson to McCoy really ruins the age downward trend conspiracy. Seeing as Matt Smith is only 2 year shy of Peter Davidson's age I fail to see the problem really. Plus I'm 32 and the guy looks older than me.
50s, 50s? come on the British must have had really bad medical care back then. The first several doctors all looked like they were in their late 60s or 70s. My dad hasn't quite hit 60, yet, but looks far younger than those first couple of Doctors. My dad could pass for early 50s or late 40s. I never was really curious about actors ages, but finding out those guys were that young, but looked that old is kind of startling. I'd have to agree though that the Doctor "appears to be" getting younger.
I hate not to be all positive about this, but I'd much rather the prices drop rather than the sizes get bigger. Then again this is a huge sized solid state drive. I wonder if it is actually worth it. I'd like to see some real numbers comparing these drives to normal laptop drives.
A part of me also wonders when something like this will be thrown into the next ipod or DVR. It'll most likely be a price thing that determines it.
Seriously? There's a lot of people coming onto the web who have never been there. I was stunned last year when my retired (not computer literate) parents bought a laptop and got a broadband connection.
Increasingly everyone is being told that if you're not on line you're missing out on something. Unfortunately, the sophistication and knowledge required to do this safely belies the ease with which people can connect and then if they don't know anything about such things, they're at risk. People just aren't being made aware of the danger, and don't really understand all of the ways that they can get into trouble.
Reminds me of all the general complaints about Mac Users being so generally uneducated about IT crap and on the internet pre 2000. The big joke was that any PC user that un-educated would never have been able to get on the internet. The Macs made it trivial for any one that owned the PC to get on the internet. Jump ahead about a decade and what do you see now? Cell phones that you could browse the internet on, $350 laptops, and broadband at what dial up used to cost. Now anyone that is willing to make the minor effort can get on the internet fairly easily without being generally educated about computers, cell phones or the internet.
You'll see all those old Mac user jokes come back re-written for whatever is the current lowest knowledge level demographic. Things are getting easier to do on the internet without having to be educated much. Spam and scams in general seem to be about it that you need to tell people to watch out for. I almost think that we need a high school class on IDing scams and how not to fall into them.
The wrong person would simply have to submit proof that they got the wrong person.
So it's now not up to the system to prove that they've got the right person, but to anyone caught randomly close with the same name now has to come out and yell up and and down "it's not me, it's not me." and hope that the system is sane in their case?
It would be an email address reported on a credit application, a bank, or confirmed by an employer. There is no address book of email addresses, so the only way to get an email address for a person is to have some verifiable real-world link to them, or to have extensive circumstantial evidence.
I don't know about you, but I've never seen a blank for e-mail address at anywhere other than at an ISP. All you really have circumstantial evidence not actual evidence that they may match up.
RTFA. They defaulted on their house payments, and multiple attempts were made to contact them at home, by telephone, and by email. Again, you don't get yourself off the hook simply by refusing to open your door.
Um, sounds like it should be trivial for the bank/lending institution to get the house/property back and have the police arrest the squatters. Though in practice it turns out to be difficult.
So wait, can we now say that because no parents have expressly approved the use of Google we should ban it? Whitelisting sites like that is honestly, is an idea that can only be expressed as "stupid" along with "retarded". Wait, but lets not stop with websites, lets now expect parents to approve all curriculum by the school! If parent's don't approve the teaching of prime numbers, lets stop it! And who knows where it would go with evolution, no doubt it wouldn't even be allowed to be taught even as a "theory".
That might actually be a great idea! I've never really found anything that you can usefully get out the evolution thing except politically stirring people up. So I wouldn't mind it if the material just disappeared from those that didn't want to see it. Those that actually don't mind or think its the best thing since sliced bread will of course be wanting that on their kids educational menu.
What was that quote about a parents complaining about teachers teaching things that they didn't like and once the principle actually found out what the parents were upset about it was that the school taught their children to read and think differently from their families.
Some parents would love to micromanage the standards that their kids where were required to be taught to, others would just send their kids to school and not even change any thing from the default guidelines, and still others will find that things that they want in the guidelines/standards aren't their for them to demand their kids to be taught to. If you could get the schools to do it, every school would appear to be a religious/cultureal school tailored exactly by the parents for their kids to learn only their religious/culture view point in life. We do it currently by those that disagree with public school morals/guidelines sending their kids to religious schools. If it was really up to the parents, they'd want every public school to be a religious school for every religion for every student. It's not currently possible for public schools to do that. If they could do it practically, you'd see it in a heart beat.
I, for one, hope they have very strong filtering methods that require some real knowledge to bypass. You will be pitting their desire to be lazy against their 14-year-old hormones and they will, completely by accident, end up with very useful knowledge about information security.
Some of the hardest workers that you'll ever find are the lazy ones trying to find a better methods to be lazy. A hard normal worker will do things the long hard way because it's like their duty to do it the way they were shown and not mess anything up. A lazy worker will find and exploit every means to improve the process that they were shown in order to have more lazy time when others are still hard at work.
This is something that is never quite clearly shown in Dilbert. Wally is likely the guy that gets the most work done soonest or improves his efficiency and his ability to do his work so that he spends the rest of the time not doing anything. It only appears that he isn't working because he's already finished. That's kinda one of those key things that you learn in school. Finish everything ASAP so that you'd have it when needed and can spend the rest of the time goofing off and never ever let some one that assigns things see you finished/not doing anything while everyone else is hard at work. That just encourages them to assign more and more work on until you appear to be hard at work busy.
The more rules and restrictions you put around this, the more you will make "criminals" out of ordinary students.
Giggles. This is funny. Have you even bothered to read any school hand books lately? Doesn't matter if it's for elementary, middle, or high school. They all just about make every student a hand book criminal for just being a human student that attends their educational system. It's been ages since I had to attend public school from the inside, but as I liked to refer to it, it's the other public penal institution where every one is sent for being guilty of being within a certain age range.
If they really want to stop problems, they'd just treat the thing like a text book. If you return it or show up with the thing "damaged" in any visible way to those that assigned it to you, expect to pay at least the purchase price of the thing. Also you could make the tech support fines for when it is really a user thing instead of a laptop thing either $50-100 and that would stop most of the student related tech support right there. (Expect to be doing a lot of cloning from decent machines at the end of the year when you reclaim the things though.)
I'm mixed on the entire concept. Why? Because in order for all these educational systems to provide laptops to the their students, their parents will being more in taxes regardless to get the thing in place and run the damn program. How many of those parents would have much rather had gone out to buy their own laptop, but now suddenly can't quite afford because their cost of living is a bit higher due to these hidden "educational taxes." Every time I'm in walmart, I think about buying one of those $350 laptops for my kid. $350 is a ton of money to me, but I'd like to spend it if other cost of living bills didn't drain my paycheck before the end of the month. Why should I want to support higher taxes to give every child a locked down laptop when I'd rather save a bit and buy my kid our own unlocked laptop and hook it up to a WAP over the home DSL? It's plans like these that slow my ability to even save up for that damn cheap laptop.
What's interesting is how often the union's improved terms for labor increases labor's productivity. Which means a larger total profit, so even a smaller share of it to the owners can be a larger total amount than before the union, when worse working conditions produced less profit for everyone.
You'd think all those unionized grocery stores and department stores would be out competing walmart with that kinda thought process.
Personal service is preferred, and process servers go to extreme and often comical lengths to put the paper in your hand, but some people refuse to accept service. Should you have to continue a manhunt for a year, at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars, in order to exercise your legal rights? How would you feel if someone potentially owed you thousands or millions of dollars and you couldn't get it because they wouldn't open the door?
I'd be more upset at the system that allowed that rather than the individual that evaded being called up by the system. The thing is that process server is supposed to make sure that the right people get the papers. Think of 3-5 people with the same name living on the same street with only the address numbers being slightly different. I doubt that happens too much in the physical world, but it would be much easier to happen online.
I had a college friend named Mark Miller. When I tried looking him up a few months ago, there were 10 Mark Millers in the same city as he was last known. I didn't need to find him badly enough to actually contact each of the 10 to find out if any of them where him, but I'd imagine that a process server would have to do that and then physically contact the person. Well, calling people on the phone/cell or e-mailing them is easy. It's difficult to actually verify if the person that you've contacted is the person that you actually should be talking to though. Esp if you aren't already familiar with the person. (I might remember my friend from college and could tell him from the other 9 Mark Millers, how the heck would a process server tell them apart? The only thing that he has going for him is the address to limit it down a bit.
It sounds like this lawyer didn't even have a current address. I'm sorry, but this doesn't sound like it should be valid at all. If anything, it would just let lawyers serve things without the proper people finding out until after the lawyer has had a court date and used his time to say that the other party defaulted so his side should win.
Seriously -- you believe it's morally and legally correct for we, as a community, to simply decide you need to die? You actually WANT to live in a society where that's codified?!?!
Um, we do. You live in a society where "crimes" exist. You commit certain types of crimes and you'll be hunted down, jailed, a trail, and then executed if found guilty.
You seem to want to live in a society where laws and crimes don't exist and where no one will be able to force their views on you. Ha, you are living in a fantasy land.
Or do you simply think that not having rights to one's own body is a status that should be reserved only for women? Would you support government-sponsored rape camps?
Hey just because I grew in some one else's body doesn't mean that should give them total rights over me. I didn't state that women or men have no rights over their body. They have the rights that we as the community permit them to have. I don't support government rape camps, but if enough of the community does support it, then I'm afraid yes it would legally happen. Heck, we could quiet easily change our penal institutions where that was s mandatory part of being jailed if we wanted to. No one wants that though. Now do they? You don't see anyone forming political groups to support that action now do you? I didn't say that I supported that, just that if the community decided that an action was so, that's how things will legally be.
Until something inside your body, made by your body, is voluntarily removed from your body with your explicit permission, it is not in our world or our nation.
Oh my, my shit doesn't exist until I poop! I didn't know that.
It is within sovereign territory, over which no government can claim authority; that territory has but a single ruler. Any invasion of that territory is a crime against basic human rights. Which, it's clear, you don't believe everyone deserves.
I'm mixed on the concept of "body rights" being a basic human right as you seem to view it. I'm not convinced that it is. Your logic is that you are the ruler of your own body and that no one out side of your body has rights over you or it. By your logic, police can't search you for hiding drugs in your body or search your body for blood alcohol level.
Any group of people that out number you and has enough control over you, has effective sovereignty over you regardless of what you'd like. It's only because we have of the customs and laws that we have that limits what rights others have over each of us. If you are suspected of a crime, many of those rights seem to suddenly be reduced.
In other words, if these guys were privately employed, you'd advocate using tax money to keep them employed through hard times, but since they're publicly employed, they should be let go because they're paid with tax money.
No I don't support that either, but those autoworkers do and they happen to be voters so their reps have to push the issue regardless of what I'd like.
My camera came with a strap. If I were dangling my camera by its strap, not holding the actual camera body, and the strap broke and my camera smashed to the pavement, it would never occur to me to sue the camera manufacturer. My thoughts, after the "oh shit" would be, "I shouldn't have been doing that and should have been more careful."
I'd end up buying a new device because I'd never believe that it was possible for me to get money out of the manufacturer. If I thought there was a good shot of me getting my money back for the device, I'd certainly join up on board a class action lawsuit.
If your luggage handle or strap broke and spilled the contents of your bag and damaged what ever you had instead, you'd like the maker to give you some form of compensation. You wouldn't expect to be able to actually collect any, but if you could get your clothes dry cleaned, replaced, or broken bag replaced, you'd feel a bit better. If you could get that kinda of service, without having to go to court in a class action lawsuit, you'd be really happy with that company.
The PC is optimized for one person to use at a distance of maybe 0.5 m. It sits on a desk. It is a lousy multi-player device.
The console is optimized for multiple people to use at a distance of 2 m. It sits in the living room. It is an excellent multi-player device, and, even if equipped with a keyboard and mouse, a highly inconvenient personal computer.
This is in addition to the cost reasons already cited.
Nah, I think with cheap 16-32 GB flash cards that even a PS2 would make a perfectly fine universal computer for nearly everyone. It depends on how much you expect to do on a given device. On a cheap $500-600 desktop or laptop, you can do a surprising amount. You may run into problems with the newest games or really high end apps loading in less than 15 minutes, but you generally can get them to run. Painfully, but run. If you managed a PS2 level device with 30 GB of storage, it'd be enough for millions of people. We are getting close to where many people can actually see a need for a 1-2 TB media server that has images of all your DVDs and games and can be streamed across your in house network to any of your devices and record from any incoming media source.
It would be nice if open device platform gaming could take off. I wouldn't want it based on the PC model, I'd want it built around the DVD player. It would be nice to have 50-100 electronics companies all making and selling consoles and game pads and the same game "just works" on every damn one of 'em without any problems. Of course with our luck, it would take 3 months to end up like the current PC gaming hardware cycle.
Besides, with everyone talking about creating jobs, how does it make sense to cut NASA hard and put tons of people who are working on Ares out of work?
Because those people work directly for the government. Which means you or I indirectly pay for them. Now if they were doing it because a space transport company was paying the bills, it would be much more impressive and more likely to be real long term jobs that don't need political support to survive.
It is unfortunate that we've come to this point in American history, but the truth is probably that we can't afford a grandiose space program right now.
NASA will still exist, but the bureaucrats running it need to go. NASA will have a chance at manned space flight, but they need to figure out a way to do it cheaper. The rest of the nation has tightened its belt, the rest of the nation is concerned about the ballooning debt, NASA isn't exempt from the changes.
If I had my choice, I'd much rather see the billions spent on a shuttle launch go toward turning children into future aerospace engineers.
Um, I'm mixed on NASA. There is a strong part of me that wants the entire governmental body redone from the ground up. I think that it needs to be more like the FAA for space than how it currently exists. So I'm not really against it being made of "regulators"/mangers, I'm against all US space development being controlled and sponsored solely through NASA.
I'm not worried about future aerospace engineers or education at all. Why? Because if the only source for those jobs is directly through the government financing of an entire industry, then it isn't really worth it to push. If every air line industry was also interested in building space planes or mining orbital resources, you'd see students shift where they study to tailor themselves for those companies. It'll happen despite the government not because of it.
Calling anonymity one of the greatest disappointments of the Internet's evolution, Dyson said: 'I'm pro choice, but I think abortion is an unfortunate thing. I think the same thing about anonymity: Everybody should have the right to it, but it's not something one wants to encourage.'"
Just proof that because one relative in a family is bright doesn't mean many of the others will be as well.
I've always been against abortion for a perfectly logical reason. It assumes that mothers have the legal right to terminate their child's life any time through such and such time frame of it's development. I believe that only the state has the right to terminate the lives of criminals. I just don't that that mothers should have the right to terminate the little unborn children for the crime of picking the wrong uterus to grow in.
I believe that sterilization should be mandatory for anyone that does chose to have their offspring terminated.
If you are pro choice flip it around and extend it all the way:
If your mother has the right to kill you at 6 weeks development, why shouldn't she or the other partner have the right to kill you at any time after your birth?
I believe in prevention, but just because you screwed up your birth control, doesn't mean that you need rights to kill developing humans. Of course, I don't think biological mothers should have nearly the rights that they think that they do. If they don't want the child, it shouldn't be killed, that's wasteful, the state should take it and raise it to their standards. The "state" is defined in this case as your surrounding community. If we as a community decide that all orphans are going to be feed into a meat processing plant, that's what would happen. If we as a community decide that we want to fund orphanages to raise those kids as productive citizens despite their parent's wishes, then that's what would happen.
So what is this project really aiming at?
Do you really want to know? Think about what breathalyzers do. They are used by the cops to get a number off you. That number has been used by law makers and such that anything above a number is instant DWI, anything between some numbers is up to the cop, and anything below a certain number the cops just let you go because they know that they it's too low to make get through a court.
That's what this person wants. A black box that any idiot cop can use on a computer and return a score that they can use like a blood alcohol level. That magic number would be used in jury trials and what not instead of showing you know the actual evidence that they are required to produce now. Jury this guy has a computer with a .10 porn level, .02 child porn level, .01 drug level, .01 credit card fraud level, .02 hacking index, .3 pirated software level, and .5 unlicensed media content level.
It's to reduce things down to a few numbers produced by a tool that the defendant can't argue with.
Combine this with a remote access software, and you don't even need to enter a person's home to scan their PC for files anymore. Forget all this pesky due process for warrants and investigation, we can now scan tens of thousands of computers every day and just fish idly for perps. All done without even needing to look at your screen while the software does the dirty work for you.
This is kinda why I don't run apps like google desktop search or MS desktop search. Other than they just slow my computer down for no useful return for me.
I voted on a few questions just to see how it worked, I saw at least 10 Blagojevich questions out of the 50 I voted on. If the wingnuts are gonna spam stupid questions they should be deleted when there are real questions out there. There were also five or so birth certificate questions. The Republicans are probably not going to have good luck winning elections anytime soon unless they realize people don't care about this bullshit right now, we care about the war and the economy.
I've never really thought about until some one was complaining about it to me. I thought who is responsible for checking the birth certificates for everyone running for president? I have no idea. Or do the only check the "winners" birth certificate? That would be really funny if your champion couldn't take office because he didn't have all the governmental paper work proving that he was eligible to run in the first place. Personally, I have little problem with foreigners or those under 35 from running and actually being president. I figure if enough of the population would want a foreigner or some younger person in office, then it would happen.
If I asked a birth certificate related question, I'd have to ask if he has to stand in a line with all his paperwork correctly before some government guy before he is passed as the president? Come on that would be awesome, one little clerk's job to verify the paper work of the next president, and if they don't have all their paper work in order to send the person around through all the other government offices before getting the special tokens saying "you are now president."