'Why don't they go and tell the oil companies what they should charge for their damn gas?'"
They did that up until around 1970 or so. The petroleum industry was totally regulated. Wasn't working out too well.
Bad analogy anyway. The government isn't saying what they can charge, just that they have to charge everybody the same.
So as I scan the responses here the overwhelming message is that cell phones are secure because they are closed-source and their code isn't published anywhere.
...My point is that ignorance can't go on forever... I hope.
You are seriously underestimating the durability of ignorance. Not only can it go on forever, but it's frequently demonstrated its ability to extend its influence.
About half of the population is below average intelligence, and they get to make most of the decisions because the other half is too smart to get involved in that stuff.
Now that they have two conflicting results they'll need a new grant to conduct another study so they can conclude which of their first two studies was correct. Yay! 5 more years of research funding.
...There is something intensely satisfying about 6 times 7. Its too big to really hold in your mind like 6 time 6... You can't really see it or get there by adding...
You can't get there by adding? Is this the new math? Have they put a limit on how many numbers can be added together?
The first time is saw Star Wars and Close Encounters they were on a screen that was wider than my house. There were probably also more speakers in that room than I could fit in my house. To get to the single screen in that theatre I went through a lobby that was as lavish as any 5-star hotel. It was all about presentation. We stood in line for 3 hours because we knew there was something special waiting inside.
Now I go to see movies on screens that don't impress me. I know some moderately wealthy people who have the same size screen in their house. I get there through a big hallway lined with overflowing trash bins. The only improvement is some really nice seats with cup holders.
I don't expect to see a return to the giant screens. You'd never convince anyone that he economics are there. A little work in the presentation part sure wouldn't hurt though.
...What IS dopey is to buy a 5.1 cheap nasty 300$ system...
Man, that would be dopey. My 5.1 surround from Wal-Mart only cost 39.95.
Sheesh! 300 bucks for something that just makes my DVDs sound a little better? I'm not that dumb.
I read a story once about about something like this. It was about a society where everything was driven by massive consumerism. Everybody bought new stuff all the time. I think it was written by some guy named Huxley.
Somebody mod the parent up! That description is dead on.
If you want proof just turn on NBC any evening this week. - Show a couple of skiers - Do a 10 minute personal story about one of them who happens to look good on TV - Show a couple of skaters - Show 10 minutes of a staged argument between them - Flash 1 second clips of all the sports you'll never see on the broadcast channel - Cut to studio where a couple of people are talking about something totally uninteresting - Show a couple more skiers - 10 minute story about the cuter one (or the one with the better hardship story) - Give the results of all the events you just saw almost none of. Next day: - Show 26 straight hours of hockey Next day: - Repeat day one with different events
It's the standard formula, and no network with dollars at stake is about to break from it.
...I think that it's a prerequisite to watching an event that you actually have some experience in participating in a similar event. Otherwise it can be difficult to appreciate what is going on and the level of skill required...
Not true at all. I've loved watching winter sports since I was a kid, and living in the Southwest I haven't had much personal exposure to them. On the other hand I have played basketball and soccer, and would rather watch paint dry than watch either one of those.
Didn't they already try something like this a couple of years ago on TechTV or someplace like that? Back when I still had Dish I remember seeing some lame show where some geeks played Quake or UT or something. You would see like 30 seconds of the game then cut away to shots of the guys playing while other geeks talked about their great frags. Then cut to the cute girl who had nothing to do with anything. That was good for about 5 minutes of entertainment.
I've noticed that when I'm really struggling with a decision it's usually because I intuitively feel that one choice is right, but I'm trying to figure out how to make a more attractive choice be the right one. Sleeping on it gives me a chance to let go of the emotional attachment.
...This DevWorks article tries to help developers use Ajax to build a solid foundation in which an application handles errors and problems smoothly.
That's good, because none of the commercial "enterprise class" software that I have to work with handles errors and problems smoothly. They just crash or send an error message that has no relation ot the actual problem.
...The gulf stream [wikipedia.org] is BIG. Do the math.
OK. I did the math. According to that wikipedia article the Gulf Stream is sinking about 1.4e+16 watts. The proposed turbine will generate 1e+7 watts. I didn't see any efficiency figures so let's give them credit for.75 just for the sake of argument:
1e+7/0.75/1.4e+16 = 0.000000095% of the current's power per generator.
There you go.
2) Too many degrees of freedom. The car has too many degrees of freedom that affect safety. Tire wear, engine wear, body wear, road conditions, weather conditions and unexpected obstacles like rocks, tree branches, other debris, animals, or other people act against the safe driving of a vehicle. A computer can't take all these degrees of freedom into account. An auto driven car with lousy tires, paired with poor weather and icy roads won't be able to swerve in time to avoid a deer that suddenly dashes out on the road. A human might see the deer emerging from the woods long before it dashes out on the road, a human knows what to do when seeing a deer approach the road. A computer might interpret the deer as a stationary obstacle on the side of the road and take no precautions like slowing down to avoid hitting it if it suddenly moves.
This same limitation applies to all but a very few humans. I know a LOT of people who drive cars daily and would never even give a thought to any of those factors. They drive exactly the same under all but the most extreme conditions.
Auto driven cars only work in a few carefully controlled conditions, not in real life. Perhaps an automated highway system is the only application for automated cars, one that prevents external influence like weather and animals and other humans, but it would require billions in infrastructure changes to make highways safe and usable as automated freeways.
Human-driven cars don't even work well in carefully controlled conditions. I don't think any amount of money can change that. The problem is that driving is treated as a God-given right, not a hard-earned priviledge.
I'm glad to hear that more than half of the Britons don't BELIEVE in evolution. Evolution is a scientific theory (or group of theories really), and therefore not something to be believed or disbelieved. Theories are to be tested, scrutinized, revised, etc. Belief is best reserved for philosophical matters. My degree is in geology so I have a pretty good understanding of paleontology and evolution. I hope I never fall into the trap of believing the theories I learned to work with.
But I've been doing what I love for years, and getting paid pretty decently to do it...
When I read the first line I thought (this being Slasdot and all) that you must be a sperm donor.
As for myself - I'm doing a job that pretty much sucks for somewhat less than 60k. I started out doing something that was OK and generated enough income to live on. I fairly quickly got the chance to move into a job that I loved for a little more money. A few years later that work went away and I was transitioned into another OK job for a bit more money. After that I got traded to another department where I got my current job. Then I got sold to another company while keeping the same work. Now I'm a long way from the work that I loved, and in a financial position where chucking my current job isn't a viable option.
I'm happy that your job in biological services (oh wait, that's not really what you're doing) worked out. Good for you.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like some WB suit has mod points on /. today. Who else would have modded the parent as a troll?
Bad analogy anyway. The government isn't saying what they can charge, just that they have to charge everybody the same.
So as I scan the responses here the overwhelming message is that cell phones are secure because they are closed-source and their code isn't published anywhere.
/.
That's a new sentiment to hear on
Have you ever stopped to think what this planet would be like without humans?
Now we can prove evolution. Just reverse all the cells back to their previous state until we get back to the original single-cell organism.
OK. Sure, nobody would be around any more to see it, but that's beside the point.
It would also be a great opportunity for Earth to pass on that whole human mistake.
About half of the population is below average intelligence, and they get to make most of the decisions because the other half is too smart to get involved in that stuff.
Probably because your boycott doesn't represent a significant percentage of Wal-Mart's sales.
Now that they have two conflicting results they'll need a new grant to conduct another study so they can conclude which of their first two studies was correct. Yay! 5 more years of research funding.
I totally agree.
The first time is saw Star Wars and Close Encounters they were on a screen that was wider than my house. There were probably also more speakers in that room than I could fit in my house. To get to the single screen in that theatre I went through a lobby that was as lavish as any 5-star hotel. It was all about presentation. We stood in line for 3 hours because we knew there was something special waiting inside.
Now I go to see movies on screens that don't impress me. I know some moderately wealthy people who have the same size screen in their house. I get there through a big hallway lined with overflowing trash bins. The only improvement is some really nice seats with cup holders.
I don't expect to see a return to the giant screens. You'd never convince anyone that he economics are there. A little work in the presentation part sure wouldn't hurt though.
...What IS dopey is to buy a 5.1 cheap nasty 300$ system...
Man, that would be dopey. My 5.1 surround from Wal-Mart only cost 39.95.
Sheesh! 300 bucks for something that just makes my DVDs sound a little better? I'm not that dumb.
I read a story once about about something like this. It was about a society where everything was driven by massive consumerism. Everybody bought new stuff all the time.
I think it was written by some guy named Huxley.
Somebody mod the parent up! That description is dead on.
If you want proof just turn on NBC any evening this week.
- Show a couple of skiers
- Do a 10 minute personal story about one of them who happens to look good on TV
- Show a couple of skaters
- Show 10 minutes of a staged argument between them
- Flash 1 second clips of all the sports you'll never see on the broadcast channel
- Cut to studio where a couple of people are talking about something totally uninteresting
- Show a couple more skiers
- 10 minute story about the cuter one (or the one with the better hardship story)
- Give the results of all the events you just saw almost none of.
Next day:
- Show 26 straight hours of hockey
Next day:
- Repeat day one with different events
It's the standard formula, and no network with dollars at stake is about to break from it.
...I think that it's a prerequisite to watching an event that you actually have some experience in participating in a similar event. Otherwise it can be difficult to appreciate what is going on and the level of skill required...
Not true at all. I've loved watching winter sports since I was a kid, and living in the Southwest I haven't had much personal exposure to them. On the other hand I have played basketball and soccer, and would rather watch paint dry than watch either one of those.
Didn't they already try something like this a couple of years ago on TechTV or someplace like that? Back when I still had Dish I remember seeing some lame show where some geeks played Quake or UT or something. You would see like 30 seconds of the game then cut away to shots of the guys playing while other geeks talked about their great frags. Then cut to the cute girl who had nothing to do with anything. That was good for about 5 minutes of entertainment.
More jokes for people to endlessly parrot until the stars are numbered!
Is that and ex-parrot, or is it just pining for the fjords?
I've noticed that when I'm really struggling with a decision it's usually because I intuitively feel that one choice is right, but I'm trying to figure out how to make a more attractive choice be the right one. Sleeping on it gives me a chance to let go of the emotional attachment.
Wouldn't a file on one of these be a petafile? :)
Yeah. I was kind of wondering if a petabyte has to wear one of those transmitters on its ankle whenever it leaves the house.
...This DevWorks article tries to help developers use Ajax to build a solid foundation in which an application handles errors and problems smoothly.
That's good, because none of the commercial "enterprise class" software that I have to work with handles errors and problems smoothly. They just crash or send an error message that has no relation ot the actual problem.
...The gulf stream [wikipedia.org] is BIG. Do the math.
.75 just for the sake of argument:
1e+7/0.75/1.4e+16 = 0.000000095% of the current's power per generator.
OK. I did the math. According to that wikipedia article the Gulf Stream is sinking about 1.4e+16 watts. The proposed turbine will generate 1e+7 watts. I didn't see any efficiency figures so let's give them credit for
There you go.
2) Too many degrees of freedom. The car has too many degrees of freedom that affect safety. Tire wear, engine wear, body wear, road conditions, weather conditions and unexpected obstacles like rocks, tree branches, other debris, animals, or other people act against the safe driving of a vehicle. A computer can't take all these degrees of freedom into account. An auto driven car with lousy tires, paired with poor weather and icy roads won't be able to swerve in time to avoid a deer that suddenly dashes out on the road. A human might see the deer emerging from the woods long before it dashes out on the road, a human knows what to do when seeing a deer approach the road. A computer might interpret the deer as a stationary obstacle on the side of the road and take no precautions like slowing down to avoid hitting it if it suddenly moves.
This same limitation applies to all but a very few humans. I know a LOT of people who drive cars daily and would never even give a thought to any of those factors. They drive exactly the same under all but the most extreme conditions.
Auto driven cars only work in a few carefully controlled conditions, not in real life. Perhaps an automated highway system is the only application for automated cars, one that prevents external influence like weather and animals and other humans, but it would require billions in infrastructure changes to make highways safe and usable as automated freeways.
Human-driven cars don't even work well in carefully controlled conditions. I don't think any amount of money can change that. The problem is that driving is treated as a God-given right, not a hard-earned priviledge.
I'm glad to hear that more than half of the Britons don't BELIEVE in evolution.
Evolution is a scientific theory (or group of theories really), and therefore not something to be believed or disbelieved. Theories are to be tested, scrutinized, revised, etc. Belief is best reserved for philosophical matters.
My degree is in geology so I have a pretty good understanding of paleontology and evolution. I hope I never fall into the trap of believing the theories I learned to work with.
But I've been doing what I love for years, and getting paid pretty decently to do it...
When I read the first line I thought (this being Slasdot and all) that you must be a sperm donor.
As for myself - I'm doing a job that pretty much sucks for somewhat less than 60k. I started out doing something that was OK and generated enough income to live on. I fairly quickly got the chance to move into a job that I loved for a little more money. A few years later that work went away and I was transitioned into another OK job for a bit more money. After that I got traded to another department where I got my current job. Then I got sold to another company while keeping the same work. Now I'm a long way from the work that I loved, and in a financial position where chucking my current job isn't a viable option.
I'm happy that your job in biological services (oh wait, that's not really what you're doing) worked out. Good for you.
So something that is invisible, cannot be directly measured now has to undergo constant changing properties so that it fits theory...
Good. You're beginning to understand how science in the real world works.
And people make fun of creationism and intelligent design.