I just don't buy it. I think there are serious deficiencies in our education system but I don't buy the idea that as you go back you find a better and better one.
Perhaps one test of this is to look at art from previous periods of time. Especially what art becomes popular.
I read through Mr. Thomson's COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND FOR BREACH OF AGREEMENT to see what he was complaining about. Otherwise he is seeking legal action for Best Buy not obeying a settlement they agreed upon:
13. When plaintiff first filed an action similar to this in Miami-Dade Circuit Court it was against defendant Best Buy to stop the sale of "Mature-rated" video games at its stores to customers under the age of 17. Best Buy settled that suit by agreeing to henceforth age ID any customer who appeared to be 21 years of age or younger in order to intercept and prevent any sales to anyone under 17. Best Buy announced this new policy nationwide.
I'm not a lawyer, but I think this is the "Breach of Agreement" part of his complaint. I suspect he has a case for this portion of his complaint.
Below is the stuff about the game itself:
9. Halo 3 is a video game that allows the virtual reality player to rehearse violent acts resulting in the death of one's virtual victims. Lee Boyd Malvo, the younger of the two "DC Beltway Snipers" was trained on Halo to kill residents within Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. His "mentor," John Muhammad, knew the efficacy of the first Halo video game in this regard, because the Army in which he served used this same murder simulator to train snipers to kill. Malvo learned well on Halo.
10. The role of Microsoft's Halo in the "DC Beltway Snipings" was reported on NBC News and was introduced into evidence in the trial of Lee Boyd Malvo.
11. The proof as to the causal nexus between violence simulation video games and real-world violence is legion, but one of the more notable proofs is found in the August 2005 Report of the American Psychological Association that establishes the direct causal link between violent teenaged video game play and teenagers' aggression. The recent U. S. Supreme Court case of Roper v. Simmons, which struck down the juvenile death penalty, cites the brain scan studies similar to those coming out of Harvard, Indiana, and Michigan State Universities that prove that these violent games are processed in a different part of the brain in adolescents and teens than in adults, and it is the sector of the brain that leads of teen violence copycatting these violent games like Halo 3.
I thought of that, except, RMS is a kind of religious fanatic trying to "liberate" us from our immorality similar to Bin Laden. Since Bin Laden lectured the US about converting to Islam and leaving democracy just last week... it seemed more sensible to make such a connection.
Stallman doesn't care about any of that, per se: he's concerned with the philosophy and ethics of software licensing, not one particular piece of code.
As someone who works for a small software company writing customized solutions I feel that Stallman isn't really concerned with ethics. He is rather concerned with some strange philosophy that hard work shouldn't pay. I love open source and I think it's great where it is practical, but the kind of development we do just couldn't pay if we gave our source away. So the end result is less work gets done in the real world. This seems to be the point of GPLv3. RMS somehow reminds me of Bin Laden telling America they need to forsake democracy.
Yahoo could also have chosen to act ethically, despite local laws, rather they chose to act economically. Now, Yahoo is hoping to avoid consequences for an unethical decision. Yahoo is at can choose to violate human rights if they are willing to suffer consequences for such violations. It's ideal however, that a US based company which does not respect individual(_any_ individual) liberty according to the liberties provided by the US legislative body, would itself suffer consequences. I believe it is reasonable to expect US individuals and firms to treat clients according to US ethical standards. If a particular government does not allow a subsidiary to practice according to such standards, then the company should cease practicing within that government's jurisdiction.
This results in a situation that ultimately hurts China if they choose to attempt to force US firms and individuals into acting unethically. Since, their economy can only be hurt by not participating ethically in the global economy. Therefore, it would be ideal if Yahoo were punished for their ethical crimes, but for justice and for example to other US firms that acting unethically towards clients is unacceptable.
This will only benefit the reputation of the US and US based firms in the global market, since very few countries in the world have such high ethical standards(In theory, not practice of course). So their will be a temporary loss of profit for US based firms operating as a subsidiary of an unethical regime it will ultimately result in higher profits as those regimes realize the profitability of operating in the global market and the reputation of US firms is uplifted through the imposing of high ethical standards.
I think they would fulfill all moral obligations by only saying your services are no longer required. If they hire you to provide a service they aren't morally obligated to publish anything you write. They may be obligated to pay you, but not publish.
People buy newspapers based on credibility(truthiness) and entertainment value. If your article provides neither, then why publish?
Fortunately however, they will begin placing satellites in UELEO(Ultra Extreme Low Earth Orbit) anywhere in the US for about as much as a few tanks of gasoline. This simply involves piloting the new BMW UELEO vehicle to the desired location and depositing the UELEO satellite in UELEO. An added benefit is that UELEO Satellites require no altitude repositioning mechanism because gravity and normal forces cancel providing a static and stable orbit. Another benefit is that owners of UELEO satellites may maintain the satellites themselves as UELEO is easily accesible by the millions of UELEO vehicles already in use. Many experts are anticipating however, NASA will face fierce competition from current private sector UELEO deploying organizations such as UPS and FedEx.
Hello, AC again, but not AC this time. I must say, remarkably enjoyable response as well. I'm always curious as to what "True Islam" is, especially in terms of direct quotes from the Quran. Christianity is also significantly "fatalistic."
For example the passage below describes the Christian theology of salvation rather well:
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,
To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.
In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory. Ephesians 1:1-14
However, even despite the passage, evangelism is not in opposition to predestination but rather the means in which predestination is manifested(revealed). This also allows a great deal of freedom to Christians who understand this theology well. It is not their responsibility to change a persons mind. Rather it is simply their responsibility to not hide their beliefs and to live a holy and loving life. In this way, the Gospel is to be preached. Some have also rightly taken a more proactive means of preaching the Gospel by traveling and having respectful religious discussions with people interested in discussing religion. Paul was one of those, but he refused to have discussions with people who were not respectful. An example I wish more Christians would follow.
It is hard to disagree with you regarding the exploitation of natural resources in the middle east. However, I also would add that the wealthy leaders in middle eastern countries took an unfair share of the wealth from oil for themselves. There are a few middle eastern countries which have shown concern for the welfare of their common people and generally are not experiencing the same draw to militant Islam as other middle eastern countries. Namely, Oman, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait come to mind. So the problem is politically and economically within and without and I believe generally associated with greed.
Anyway, it's been a pleasant discussion and nice to hear some rational well thought out views from someone who is clearly devoted to the Islamic faith. I do hope your views and views like your's can spread as I would be pleased to live along side Muslims such as yourself.
Though, in the same light, it's geographical distinction that most commonly affects genetic distribution and overall genetic manipulation (over time.) Given the ease of relocation and more liberal ethical philosophies in deciding our mates (compare to 50+ years or just 2 generations ago) I understand the dramatic decrease.
I have often thought that the mobility of individuals would eventually bring about genetic uniformity to the human race as a whole. Could mobility be the cause of the genetic uniformity? As sort of capitalistic free market for genetics if you will? Mobility allows individuals to make more competitive decisions concerning their mate. If humans have some preprogrammed criteria for what a good mate is, then I believe it is most likely the quality of human genetics should increase as a result of increased mobility.
Why not just stop going to movies? In America especially, they are just serving up the same handful of plots and characters in as many different configurations as possible. Going to the movies is like going to taco bell. You can have Nachos with Cheese and ground beef, sour cream, tomatoes and chives, or you can have a taco(A big nacho!) with ground beef, sour cream, tomatoes and chives. Sometimes to really mix things up they throw in a wheat tortilla shell instead of the nachos. Oh did I mention the beans, they really make my burritos exciting. Same thing with the movies. Why do we pay good money for this?
I'd like to see the scientific evidence that smart people are less attractive. An IQ of 110 is not that uncommon and as I've seen it, more intelligent people are able to care for themselves better and generally have a better genetic makeup. Facial structure and body structure are all indications of internal and genetic wellness. It seems there is a point at which intelligence can be related to genetic disorders, but for the most part it is a result of well functioning natural selection.
Somehow I thought it was long ago established Dvorak's articles were better left unread. Why do they keep getting onto./? Why do people submit them? Anyway, here's my response to Dvorak's worthless article:
Dvorak makes an assumption that popular = thin membraned air filled structures. I submit this is not true. For example, automobiles, cell-phones, computers, internet access, coffee, potatoes, wheels and even including advertising... the list goes on. Some products have real human, social and economic value. So, let's look at Dvorak's criticism of 6 key areas of the current web-economy:
Neo-social networking: Facebook, myspace, youtube are perhaps the biggest three and they all generate revenue and are connected to stable companies. Theses are likely to fail when hotmail and gmail fail... i.e. never. People like them too much.
Video mania: As long as the MPAA and RIAA don't crush this, it will be around for at least as long as television. On demand video is every couch potatoes dream and with the addition of the social(personal) element, the hope that you might talk to that girl humiliating herself with her "sexy dance" makes it even more attractive. Video mania is here to stay.
User-generated content: I'm not quite sure how this is different than video mania, but I think he just wanted a bigger list.
Mobile everything: Again, this has been a constant success since the first Palm or laptop through every bubble he has mentioned. Mobility sells.
Ad-leveraged search: If this weren't a valid business model then television studios would have failed long ago. Advertising based revenue works, period.
Widgets and toolbars: The one thing that I truly hope users grow to hate! Either way, his FUD about bad patches extends beyond the web. If nothing works there are bigger problems than a dot-com bubble bursting. If one bad patch can take down the majority(51%) of users computers it would be an unprecedented patch/disaster. Nothing like this has ever happened and I doubt it will happen.
The question I have here is, why did Dvorak write a FUD article about the dot-com bubble? Perhaps he knew no one would heed it and if it doesn't happen the article fades into obscurity and Dvorak comes out unscathed for his stupidity. If he is right, he is labeled a prophet in our own time and maybe he'll get the obeisance he feels he is due.
There are a few of reasons I think this might be true:
1. Smarter teens believe that sex can be risky. Namely: Unwanted pregnancy, disease, emotional distress and not to mention social pressures from parents.
2. Smarter teens may have higher standards as they are able to distinguish better between "good mate" and "not so good mate."
2a. Finding a good mate may mean finding an intellectual equal.
3. A deep fulfilling intellectual and emotional relationship may be more important than and a prerequisite to simple sexual pleasure.
I think one of the reasons scheduler debates might be so popular, is that it's one just a few parts of an operating system that are easy to understand and also heavily emphasized in introductory computer science classes. Schedulers do matter in terms of user-experience, but in terms of overall performance they theoretically shouldn't make that much of a difference(except for the cost of switching tasks). I think that's what Linus is getting at when he says it's a small part. Previous schedulers worked fine, but this one allows a little bit "smoother" user experience.
That said, here is one example of how schedulers affect the lives of users:
I tend to play with the nice values of shared servers at my work place(It's nice to be the administrator.) when I'm compiling on the same machine as someone else who is running a simulation.. The compile time for my primary project(on an unburdened system) is around 20 minutes for a full recompile, while the simulation might take days to finish. If my compile process is equally nice as the simulation process it takes approximately double the time to complete, so I end up reading Slashdot for an extra 20 minutes and the simulation runs for about an extra 20 minutes. That's great on a day when I don't have deadlines to meet. When I give my compilation priority, I may see the compilation finish in 25 to 30 minutes and the simulation will run an extra 30-35 minutes as a result of my compilation. So I save 15 minutes on my compile while my coworker never notices the difference even if I do a full compile 10 times in one day. So the scheduler allows me (the interactive user) to work more productively.
Anyway, I don't know if that example was needed, but I hope it was helpful for someone.
"The worst-case scenario is that enough dust in the sky decreases solar energy to the point that we have to shut down too many things to save power," Lemmon said. "The rovers keep their battery alive by keeping their electronics alive."
However, the article also mentions the cold breaking solder joints:
John Callas, project manager for the Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., explained that a dead rover battery could allow cold temperature to maim Opportunity's electronics.
"It's like leaving your laptop out in an Antarctic winter," Callas said. "Soldered joints in the electronics can contract due to thermal contraction. If a rover gets too cold, something essential will fail." Callas explained the situation is unprecedented, so the team isn't certain how much more light-blocking dust the rovers-especially Opportunity-can take.
I read another article that mentioned the electronics which charge the batteries must stay online in order for the rover to continue operating. If the electronics shut off and the batteries run out the rover will sink into darkness. So even if the solar panels are exposed to copious sunlight the batteries will remain uncharged.
Or rather 9 women depending on whether or not they are high maintenance and how long they stay out of work on maternity leave. I think in this situation more baby's are desirable, which would naturally consider the maintenance cost of said babies.
What about landing in a massive dust storm? Now naturally, I see there are problems, but perhaps they are worth contending with. The advantage, is that the atmosphere will be full of relatively heavy particles to transfer momentum to. The disadvantages I see are the super-sonic sandblasting effect on the heat shield and the difficulty in navigating to your desired location. Since we don't know exactly what the dust is like on mars overcoming the sand-blast effect may be difficult. However, I think the navigation could perhaps be manageable given that the MERs are still able to gather some solar energy during one of the largest dust storm witnessed to date navigation by satellite should be possible.
"I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return." Ecclesiastes 3:18-20 (English Standard Version)
ID(intelligent design) doesn't go so far as to say anything about the mechanism of how animal life, plant life or anything in the cosmos came into being in it's current form or otherwise. All ID theory states is that statistically it's impossible for what is now have come to be without some intelligence guiding the process. So ID is compatible with any theology or explanation of the universe which came to be through some intelligent guidance. The six day creation is another story and there are many ID theorists which do not believe in a 6 day creation, who do believe in some form of evolutionary process.
Hi, I'm an engineer too and I like to think of myself as realistic. One of the engineering methods I learned in school was something like, "guess and check." You make a guess, see how close you were then go from there. Mr. Lane has a great idea. He has a goal which seems unachievable, but along the way he has a series of seemingly achievable goals of which any of them would be profitable. His business plan and schedule is his hypothesis, his guess, and he's going to prove or disprove it and modify his plan accordingly. Maybe, probably, he won't build a space elevator, but along the way he may make some serious breakthroughs and I suspect will become rich in the process. Why do I think he'll become rich? Because he's doing the very thing you and I are afraid to do, taking risks, being optimistic. Some people might call it "aiming high" or having "fire in the belly."
It seems there are always people willing to try to hold back innovators and risk takers. I say let them stick their neck out if it makes them happy. Maybe they'll lose their head in the process, but maybe not. I'm not going to nay say someone's dream for... honestly I can't even begin to formulate a motive for nay sayers except, perhaps, jealousy. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Keep on going Mr. Lane!
Slashdot Mirror
I just don't buy it. I think there are serious deficiencies in our education system but I don't buy the idea that as you go back you find a better and better one.
Perhaps one test of this is to look at art from previous periods of time. Especially what art becomes popular.
I read through Mr. Thomson's COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND FOR BREACH OF AGREEMENT to see what he was complaining about. Otherwise he is seeking legal action for Best Buy not obeying a settlement they agreed upon:
I'm not a lawyer, but I think this is the "Breach of Agreement" part of his complaint. I suspect he has a case for this portion of his complaint.
Below is the stuff about the game itself:
I thought of that, except, RMS is a kind of religious fanatic trying to "liberate" us from our immorality similar to Bin Laden. Since Bin Laden lectured the US about converting to Islam and leaving democracy just last week... it seemed more sensible to make such a connection.
Stallman doesn't care about any of that, per se: he's concerned with the philosophy and ethics of software licensing, not one particular piece of code.
As someone who works for a small software company writing customized solutions I feel that Stallman isn't really concerned with ethics. He is rather concerned with some strange philosophy that hard work shouldn't pay. I love open source and I think it's great where it is practical, but the kind of development we do just couldn't pay if we gave our source away. So the end result is less work gets done in the real world. This seems to be the point of GPLv3. RMS somehow reminds me of Bin Laden telling America they need to forsake democracy.
Yahoo could also have chosen to act ethically, despite local laws, rather they chose to act economically. Now, Yahoo is hoping to avoid consequences for an unethical decision. Yahoo is at can choose to violate human rights if they are willing to suffer consequences for such violations. It's ideal however, that a US based company which does not respect individual(_any_ individual) liberty according to the liberties provided by the US legislative body, would itself suffer consequences. I believe it is reasonable to expect US individuals and firms to treat clients according to US ethical standards. If a particular government does not allow a subsidiary to practice according to such standards, then the company should cease practicing within that government's jurisdiction.
This results in a situation that ultimately hurts China if they choose to attempt to force US firms and individuals into acting unethically. Since, their economy can only be hurt by not participating ethically in the global economy. Therefore, it would be ideal if Yahoo were punished for their ethical crimes, but for justice and for example to other US firms that acting unethically towards clients is unacceptable.
This will only benefit the reputation of the US and US based firms in the global market, since very few countries in the world have such high ethical standards(In theory, not practice of course). So their will be a temporary loss of profit for US based firms operating as a subsidiary of an unethical regime it will ultimately result in higher profits as those regimes realize the profitability of operating in the global market and the reputation of US firms is uplifted through the imposing of high ethical standards.
I think they would fulfill all moral obligations by only saying your services are no longer required. If they hire you to provide a service they aren't morally obligated to publish anything you write. They may be obligated to pay you, but not publish.
People buy newspapers based on credibility(truthiness) and entertainment value. If your article provides neither, then why publish?
Fortunately however, they will begin placing satellites in UELEO(Ultra Extreme Low Earth Orbit) anywhere in the US for about as much as a few tanks of gasoline. This simply involves piloting the new BMW UELEO vehicle to the desired location and depositing the UELEO satellite in UELEO. An added benefit is that UELEO Satellites require no altitude repositioning mechanism because gravity and normal forces cancel providing a static and stable orbit. Another benefit is that owners of UELEO satellites may maintain the satellites themselves as UELEO is easily accesible by the millions of UELEO vehicles already in use. Many experts are anticipating however, NASA will face fierce competition from current private sector UELEO deploying organizations such as UPS and FedEx.
Hello, AC again, but not AC this time. I must say, remarkably enjoyable response as well. I'm always curious as to what "True Islam" is, especially in terms of direct quotes from the Quran. Christianity is also significantly "fatalistic."
For example the passage below describes the Christian theology of salvation rather well:Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,
To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment--to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.
In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession--to the praise of his glory. Ephesians 1:1-14
However, even despite the passage, evangelism is not in opposition to predestination but rather the means in which predestination is manifested(revealed). This also allows a great deal of freedom to Christians who understand this theology well. It is not their responsibility to change a persons mind. Rather it is simply their responsibility to not hide their beliefs and to live a holy and loving life. In this way, the Gospel is to be preached. Some have also rightly taken a more proactive means of preaching the Gospel by traveling and having respectful religious discussions with people interested in discussing religion. Paul was one of those, but he refused to have discussions with people who were not respectful. An example I wish more Christians would follow.
It is hard to disagree with you regarding the exploitation of natural resources in the middle east. However, I also would add that the wealthy leaders in middle eastern countries took an unfair share of the wealth from oil for themselves. There are a few middle eastern countries which have shown concern for the welfare of their common people and generally are not experiencing the same draw to militant Islam as other middle eastern countries. Namely, Oman, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait come to mind. So the problem is politically and economically within and without and I believe generally associated with greed.
Anyway, it's been a pleasant discussion and nice to hear some rational well thought out views from someone who is clearly devoted to the Islamic faith. I do hope your views and views like your's can spread as I would be pleased to live along side Muslims such as yourself.
Though, in the same light, it's geographical distinction that most commonly affects genetic distribution and overall genetic manipulation (over time.) Given the ease of relocation and more liberal ethical philosophies in deciding our mates (compare to 50+ years or just 2 generations ago) I understand the dramatic decrease.
I have often thought that the mobility of individuals would eventually bring about genetic uniformity to the human race as a whole. Could mobility be the cause of the genetic uniformity? As sort of capitalistic free market for genetics if you will? Mobility allows individuals to make more competitive decisions concerning their mate. If humans have some preprogrammed criteria for what a good mate is, then I believe it is most likely the quality of human genetics should increase as a result of increased mobility.
Microforkers!
Does this remind anyone of "The Brown Note?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_note
Why not just stop going to movies? In America especially, they are just serving up the same handful of plots and characters in as many different configurations as possible. Going to the movies is like going to taco bell. You can have Nachos with Cheese and ground beef, sour cream, tomatoes and chives, or you can have a taco(A big nacho!) with ground beef, sour cream, tomatoes and chives. Sometimes to really mix things up they throw in a wheat tortilla shell instead of the nachos. Oh did I mention the beans, they really make my burritos exciting. Same thing with the movies. Why do we pay good money for this?
I'd like to see the scientific evidence that smart people are less attractive. An IQ of 110 is not that uncommon and as I've seen it, more intelligent people are able to care for themselves better and generally have a better genetic makeup. Facial structure and body structure are all indications of internal and genetic wellness. It seems there is a point at which intelligence can be related to genetic disorders, but for the most part it is a result of well functioning natural selection.
Somehow I thought it was long ago established Dvorak's articles were better left unread. Why do they keep getting onto ./?
Why do people submit them? Anyway, here's my response to Dvorak's worthless article:
Dvorak makes an assumption that popular = thin membraned air filled structures. I submit this is not true. For example, automobiles, cell-phones, computers, internet access, coffee, potatoes, wheels and even including advertising... the list goes on. Some products have real human, social and economic value. So, let's look at Dvorak's criticism of 6 key areas of the current web-economy:
Neo-social networking: Facebook, myspace, youtube are perhaps the biggest three and they all generate revenue and are connected to stable companies. Theses are likely to fail when hotmail and gmail fail... i.e. never. People like them too much.
Video mania: As long as the MPAA and RIAA don't crush this, it will be around for at least as long as television. On demand video is every couch potatoes dream and with the addition of the social(personal) element, the hope that you might talk to that girl humiliating herself with her "sexy dance" makes it even more attractive. Video mania is here to stay.
User-generated content: I'm not quite sure how this is different than video mania, but I think he just wanted a bigger list.
Mobile everything: Again, this has been a constant success since the first Palm or laptop through every bubble he has mentioned. Mobility sells.
Ad-leveraged search: If this weren't a valid business model then television studios would have failed long ago. Advertising based revenue works, period.
Widgets and toolbars: The one thing that I truly hope users grow to hate! Either way, his FUD about bad patches extends beyond the web. If nothing works there are bigger problems than a dot-com bubble bursting. If one bad patch can take down the majority(51%) of users computers it would be an unprecedented patch/disaster. Nothing like this has ever happened and I doubt it will happen.
The question I have here is, why did Dvorak write a FUD article about the dot-com bubble? Perhaps he knew no one would heed it and if it doesn't happen the article fades into obscurity and Dvorak comes out unscathed for his stupidity. If he is right, he is labeled a prophet in our own time and maybe he'll get the obeisance he feels he is due.
There are a few of reasons I think this might be true:
1. Smarter teens believe that sex can be risky. Namely: Unwanted pregnancy, disease, emotional distress and not to mention social pressures from parents.
2. Smarter teens may have higher standards as they are able to distinguish better between "good mate" and "not so good mate."
2a. Finding a good mate may mean finding an intellectual equal.
3. A deep fulfilling intellectual and emotional relationship may be more important than and a prerequisite to simple sexual pleasure.
I think one of the reasons scheduler debates might be so popular, is that it's one just a few parts of an operating system that are easy to understand and also heavily emphasized in introductory computer science classes. Schedulers do matter in terms of user-experience, but in terms of overall performance they theoretically shouldn't make that much of a difference(except for the cost of switching tasks). I think that's what Linus is getting at when he says it's a small part. Previous schedulers worked fine, but this one allows a little bit "smoother" user experience.
That said, here is one example of how schedulers affect the lives of users:
I tend to play with the nice values of shared servers at my work place(It's nice to be the administrator.) when I'm compiling on the same machine as someone else who is running a simulation.. The compile time for my primary project(on an unburdened system) is around 20 minutes for a full recompile, while the simulation might take days to finish. If my compile process is equally nice as the simulation process it takes approximately double the time to complete, so I end up reading Slashdot for an extra 20 minutes and the simulation runs for about an extra 20 minutes. That's great on a day when I don't have deadlines to meet. When I give my compilation priority, I may see the compilation finish in 25 to 30 minutes and the simulation will run an extra 30-35 minutes as a result of my compilation. So I save 15 minutes on my compile while my coworker never notices the difference even if I do a full compile 10 times in one day. So the scheduler allows me (the interactive user) to work more productively.
Anyway, I don't know if that example was needed, but I hope it was helpful for someone.
"The worst-case scenario is that enough dust in the sky decreases solar energy to the point that we have to shut down too many things to save power," Lemmon said. "The rovers keep their battery alive by keeping their electronics alive."
l
http://www.space.com/news/070705_dusty_rovers.htm
However, the article also mentions the cold breaking solder joints:
John Callas, project manager for the Mars Exploration Rover (MER) mission at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., explained that a dead rover battery could allow cold temperature to maim Opportunity's electronics.
"It's like leaving your laptop out in an Antarctic winter," Callas said. "Soldered joints in the electronics can contract due to thermal contraction. If a rover gets too cold, something essential will fail." Callas explained the situation is unprecedented, so the team isn't certain how much more light-blocking dust the rovers-especially Opportunity-can take.
I read another article that mentioned the electronics which charge the batteries must stay online in order for the rover to continue operating. If the electronics shut off and the batteries run out the rover will sink into darkness. So even if the solar panels are exposed to copious sunlight the batteries will remain uncharged.
Or rather 9 women depending on whether or not they are high maintenance and how long they stay out of work on maternity leave. I think in this situation more baby's are desirable, which would naturally consider the maintenance cost of said babies.
What about landing in a massive dust storm? Now naturally, I see there are problems, but perhaps they are worth contending with. The advantage, is that the atmosphere will be full of relatively heavy particles to transfer momentum to. The disadvantages I see are the super-sonic sandblasting effect on the heat shield and the difficulty in navigating to your desired location. Since we don't know exactly what the dust is like on mars overcoming the sand-blast effect may be difficult. However, I think the navigation could perhaps be manageable given that the MERs are still able to gather some solar energy during one of the largest dust storm witnessed to date navigation by satellite should be possible.
i ty/20070703a.html
Any thoughts?
Here's a reference to the dust storm I wrote about: http://marsrovers.nasa.gov/gallery/press/opportun
"All substances are poisons; there is none which is not a poison. The right dose differentiates a poison from a remedy." Paracelsus (1493-1541)
"I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return." Ecclesiastes 3:18-20 (English Standard Version)
ID(intelligent design) doesn't go so far as to say anything about the mechanism of how animal life, plant life or anything in the cosmos came into being in it's current form or otherwise. All ID theory states is that statistically it's impossible for what is now have come to be without some intelligence guiding the process. So ID is compatible with any theology or explanation of the universe which came to be through some intelligent guidance. The six day creation is another story and there are many ID theorists which do not believe in a 6 day creation, who do believe in some form of evolutionary process.
Hi, I'm an engineer too and I like to think of myself as realistic. One of the engineering methods I learned in school was something like, "guess and check." You make a guess, see how close you were then go from there. Mr. Lane has a great idea. He has a goal which seems unachievable, but along the way he has a series of seemingly achievable goals of which any of them would be profitable. His business plan and schedule is his hypothesis, his guess, and he's going to prove or disprove it and modify his plan accordingly. Maybe, probably, he won't build a space elevator, but along the way he may make some serious breakthroughs and I suspect will become rich in the process. Why do I think he'll become rich? Because he's doing the very thing you and I are afraid to do, taking risks, being optimistic. Some people might call it "aiming high" or having "fire in the belly."
It seems there are always people willing to try to hold back innovators and risk takers. I say let them stick their neck out if it makes them happy. Maybe they'll lose their head in the process, but maybe not. I'm not going to nay say someone's dream for... honestly I can't even begin to formulate a motive for nay sayers except, perhaps, jealousy. Anyway, just my 2 cents. Keep on going Mr. Lane!
Its for researching problems using a computer. Its not generally for research computing issues themselves.
What is the difference? Is computer science not "science?"