There are two things we need to consider here: First: The transmission of information from earth to the moon. This is possible. But that information travels at the speed of light so it's ok.
Second: The transmission of information along the dots trajectory. If you move the laser point from one crater to the next, there has been no information transfer from the first crater to the next crater. Since the dot has moved faster than light from the first crater to the second crater, BUT has not transfered information from the first crater to the second, this is ok too.
"Killer Physics: Gyroscopic Effect Tied to All Motorcycle Fatalities!"
this is like saying that angry birds is related to LUA. We should instead focus on other products that also use the gyroscopic effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroscope#Modern_uses
"iPhone 4 tied to motorcycle fatalities"
Does it have a wysiwyg gui designer?
Can I hotswap code during debugging?
Refactoring?
Can I get documentation on a function just by hovering my mouse over it?
Are there automated bug finders?
Another problem that should be identified is that the people understanding technology are libertarian aspies unwilling to compromise. "No we have to have absolute freedom, we can never give up _anything_. Fuck you we'll move our servers to Sealand nenene try to stop me trololol".
By taking this immature all-or-nothing stance, we are rapidly approaching the latter.
Don't take this the wrong way, I'm all for EFF et al's campaigning. It is just that we, as a group have way to few vocal moderates.
You, it is the smart move. Since the return for publishing in a high prestige journal is so great, it is unreasonable to ask people not to publish there. Asking people not to review for them is something that wont hurt the individual who practices that behavior.
"When you submit a paper you consume reviewer time from peers. You have to give that time back to the community by reviewing papers."
Or else? The journal fails? I think this is exactly what is intended...
It seems reasonable to assume these two things:
Nyteknik are right about this producing more energy than would be expected if reactions were chemical
The whole thing is a scam.
Did this guy just invent the revolutionary battery that will popularize electric cars?
Slashdot Mirror
There are two things we need to consider here: First: The transmission of information from earth to the moon. This is possible. But that information travels at the speed of light so it's ok. Second: The transmission of information along the dots trajectory. If you move the laser point from one crater to the next, there has been no information transfer from the first crater to the next crater. Since the dot has moved faster than light from the first crater to the second crater, BUT has not transfered information from the first crater to the second, this is ok too.
I, for one, welcome our new NSA rootkits.
they are now reporting that there is no record of a US citizen with that name
At the risk of feeding a troll, being wooshed, or having the black helicopters come find me, I have some middle school yearbooks which say otherwise.
*woosh*
If the media really is reporting that Edward Snowden is a made up person, please, provide a citation.
I blame some sort of PRISM intercept for that *woosh* ending up in the wrong place.
Ah, the good ol' woosh-in-the-middle attack!
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/MtGox/API/Streaming
The rules state nothing about *outbound* links.
Patents should work like trademarks: Use them or lose them. These sneak attacks long after the fact suck.
"Killer Physics: Gyroscopic Effect Tied to All Motorcycle Fatalities!" this is like saying that angry birds is related to LUA. We should instead focus on other products that also use the gyroscopic effect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyroscope#Modern_uses "iPhone 4 tied to motorcycle fatalities"
Is this the future of intelligence gathering? Instead of collecting it yourself, dispatch the minions!
So many horrible ac-trolls... Feel for you
4. IDEs and tools
Does it have a wysiwyg gui designer?
Can I hotswap code during debugging?
Refactoring?
Can I get documentation on a function just by hovering my mouse over it?
Are there automated bug finders?
This is why we need an Open Source, distributed search engine.
Mod parent up
I expect the invisible hand to invest in the infrastructure necessary to prevent this. It's going to happen any minute now, I'm positive.
Another problem that should be identified is that the people understanding technology are libertarian aspies unwilling to compromise. "No we have to have absolute freedom, we can never give up _anything_. Fuck you we'll move our servers to Sealand nenene try to stop me trololol".
By taking this immature all-or-nothing stance, we are rapidly approaching the latter.
Don't take this the wrong way, I'm all for EFF et al's campaigning. It is just that we, as a group have way to few vocal moderates.
That might depend on your reference frame
On a related note, wouldn't a "pure" keyword for functions be sweet?
Put my thoughts into words.
You must admit that launching their own game is better than trying to censor other games, on so many levels. Plus the game is actually kinda cool
What about a phosphorescent gas? That way there would be no glare.
Sci-fi authors? Their readers? Nerds in general?
I just want a thermostat that can simulate tropical dawns. Combining this with automatically dimmed lights, mmmmm
So from a self interested agents perspective you want everything to fail at once or not at all. Sounds like task for Martingale!
"It's not a bug, it's a feature! This will make users think twice about changing their search engine preference"
You, it is the smart move. Since the return for publishing in a high prestige journal is so great, it is unreasonable to ask people not to publish there. Asking people not to review for them is something that wont hurt the individual who practices that behavior. "When you submit a paper you consume reviewer time from peers. You have to give that time back to the community by reviewing papers." Or else? The journal fails? I think this is exactly what is intended...
It seems reasonable to assume these two things: Nyteknik are right about this producing more energy than would be expected if reactions were chemical The whole thing is a scam. Did this guy just invent the revolutionary battery that will popularize electric cars?