Of course, Salon is not public radio or television but they could be public internet news....
There is a certain amount of redundancy there, since the majority of news sites are free, just with annoying ads, and most are either politically neutral or liberal leaning. Being conservative myself, I never found any reason to read anything at Salon. This doesn't mean that there isn't anything of value, its just there are no shortages of liberal web sites for me to get that perspective.
On the other hand, I pay $45 a year for Rush Limbaugh 24/7 membership, so I can listen to show anytime 24/7, get his newsletter, and have full access to the premium content on his site. I just re-upped for two years.
dont have a link, but it has been done over a dozen years ago. guitar body with dc servos, you set to tune mode and strum lightly. It wasn't a production model, but it really HAS been done.
Symantic released its first verions of Norton Anti-Virus for Guitar today, due to the recent flood of attacks by Fender users. The latest virus, "Head Banger" delivered a payload that caused the guitars to play John Tesh music, and spread through the PA to infect other instruments. It was estimated that within 10 minutes of its initial release into the wild, over 10,000 band's were infected....
Please, PLEASE, don't say all we need are MP3's, you might as well say let's bring back the 45 because thats about the sound quality you get.
Paying to download would not stop you from buying a better version. It might even fuel it. If you could download mp3's for a quarter a pop, decide which full versions you want, and then ORDER them in higher quality, then great. They might even apply the cost of the mp3's toward the full cd. You may even buy more music because you know what you are getting before you plop down the cash.
Me, Im a musician. I like good sound, but i typically run a cd player through an eq, and into the aux in in my PA system. PA's are made to be good sound and durable, not audiophile quality anyway. So no matter what, i get 'good' sound quality, through 8 decent cabs, at 1200 to 2000 watts, but nothing near what you demand.
Your music sound great in your home. Mine sounds good all over the neighborhood. Damn musicians;)
They're missing a huge opportunity, because they're so afraid this would make it too easy to pirate songs. Like it's hard now??!
I agree. For some unknown reason, this reminds me of the joke virus that was running around years ago that said "This virus is being sent to you on the honor system. Please forward copies to everyone in your address book and then delete your hard drive. Thank you." Honor alone isn't going to stop piracy, its a better business model. We used to buy meat at the butcher, veggies at the market, bread at the baker and precooked food only at sit down restaurants. Then someone found a better way to distribute all these goods, saving everyone money.
Its a minor pain in the ass to find songs now, but only minor. A good service that charged a reasonable fee (maybe based upon quality of mp3) would clean up if it had a good interface and library. If nothing else, for older stuff not in print anymore. I would sign up. $9.99 a month for 40 songs and a fee per song after that. I wouldn't even bitch about the pop up ads.
A good system like this would reduce piracy somewhat because it would take away much of the incentive.
Finally, Pharmboy, you insinuate that you have illegally copied all of Metallica's mp3s, though it is allowable you may in fact not have. (Whether you actually "love" Metallica is also debatable since everything they cut after 1991 is complete trash.) Are you saying you did so because you perceived Metallica as ex-cons or schmucks? Basically, your argument boils down to: if someone is stupid or has been convicted of a crime, that person does not deserve equal protection under the law (i.e. with regard to copyright law.)
I think you are taking me entirely too literal on this point. I probably have an old Metalica CD or two around, and I dont download music except for oldies for my band to learn, which are impossible to buy anyway. I have thousands of CDs, literally. Several thousand that I have purchased new and used.
Basically, your argument boils down to: if someone is stupid or has been convicted of a crime, that person does not deserve equal protection under the law (i.e. with regard to copyright law.)
Wasn't implied at all. The point was the irony. Its just swimming in it. Its the proverbial "pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot". Its kinda like this: You see a guy beat his wife, her brother finds out and two days later, beats the husband senseless with a bat. Do you feel sorry for the husband? Not very.
It is stealing, it is wrong, however, I am not going to cry for the music industry (keep in mind, I am a performing musician) as long as it has such a negative opinion of their own customers. Its not justification, I'm just saying you can't be shocked that people are ripping them off after how shitty they treat their customers.
Personally, I only steal what I can't find TO buy, and yes, I feel perfectly justified in that. You can't paint everyone that downloads music with the same brush.
There are lies, damm lies, and statistics. I guess that the RIAA has aquired all three.
The irony is that they don't see the writing on the wall. They are like the Wizard who keeps saying "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!". No matter how much they lie, downloading the 2 songs on an album of 10 is more convenient. Once downloaded, they are already compressed for your computer and MP3 devices and you can burn to cd for your car.
EVEN IF THEY WERE GIVING AWAY CDs at the music store, it still requires more effort to go there, wait in line, take it home, bust it down to MP3 so its small enough to stay parked on your computer and MP3 devices, and then just use that CD in your car. Its about convenience.
Its also about choice. Its frustrating to go to buy a CD, especially if you are like me and you are old and you want to buy a CD that came out 15 years ago, and you can't find it. Why would I go to the store to look for a CD that I KNOW isn't there, when I can do a quick search and find a reasonably decent copy in 5 to 30 minutes.
Another problem is all the security they are trying to use. Lets say I legally purchase a downloadable song (it could happen). I have several computers I use daily (office, home office, laptop in the only room the wife lets me smoke in) plus a portable MP3 player. Its a hassle to get PERMISSION for all these devices, to play a song I have legally purchased. Then I replace one of my computers (rinse, repeat) Plus, I front a band of old farts that play old rock, country and blues. They can't play the song on a CD I burn for our "learn music" either. The purpose of the CD is to learn the music, not enjoy it, so we can play at clubs that pay BMI and ASCAP royalties.
Screw it, I would just get a non protected version of the song so I didn't have to hassle with it, even if I had already purchased it. The problem isn't what I will pay, its the hoops I will jump through to use what I own.
The RIAA has sucessfully made their own customers hate them, similar to Microsoft. When your customers think you are a schmuck, they don't feel too bad stealing from you. Of course, half the rappers ARE convicts. Don't be shocked if people break the law getting a copy of their latest songs. Its almost poetic justice.
That is true up until a point. However, once energy consumption peeks out in the next few years, we will be in a global zero sum game with the sum shrinking over time. Like it or not, the GDP is constrained by the availability of energy.
Sorry, but there is no shortage of energy, nor an anticipated peak in a few years. The amount of untapped energy on this planet is thousands of times more than all the oil, wood and coal that has been been burned since man first rubbed two sticks together.
Plants can grown and converted into alcohol very easily. Just add water. Solar energy is improving, and we have yet to see its potential. Hydrogen is the most abundent element in the universe, and we are just now beginning to develop ways to utilize it. If plants were allowed to be built, we could produce more nuclear power than we could use. The fact is, we have not even scratched the surface of our energy on this planet.
Up to now, we have used mainly the easy, and dirty, fuel. We use oil NOT because its the only fuel available, but because its so cheap, and we have developed infrastructure that converts it into usable fuel. There is so much potential fuel to run factories and transportation, it is beyond what words can express. The problem has been the costs to extract the energy. We are entering an age where alternative energy will become more cost effective. Infrastructure will be built, the cost will go down. It will get cleaner.
We are also mandating more energy efficiency in our homes, with refrigerators, air conditioners and other appliances required to meet higher and higher standards. Slowly but surely, cars are being forced to get better milage. Every few years, we create better insulation, more efficient electronics and more.
People once believed you couldn't go 70 miles an hour, or your skin would tear off. They were wrong. Then people said you could never go faster than the speed of sound because the turbulence would tear the craft apart. They were wrong. At one time people even believed the earth was flat, and the sun and stars rotated around a fixed Earth. Of course the Earth isn't moving, if it was, we would feel it, right?
We have yet to scratch the surface of our potential. Within my lifetime of 38 years, we have landed on the moon, sent probes all over the solar system, irradicated Small Pox, increased farm production many times over, and have taken the power of a computer than once required a room the size of an office building, and put it in a device that is the size of the average novel.
Some heart problems that would have been a death sentence just 20 years ago are treated regularly all over the US and other western countries, and is being delivered to the world. Before the 1980s, DNA fingerprinting was unheard of, and 20 years later we are mapping the entire human genome. We are able to communicate with other humans virtually anywhere on the planet via sataltite phone. GPS has allowed us to pinpoint our location within a few meters, anywhere on the globe. Life expectancy has skyrocketted in the last 100 years. Through our combined efforts, we have been able to devote 1326.945 years worth of computer time to look for intellegence in space, by using a simple screen saver by seti@home.
I'm pretty sure we can figure out how to keep the lights on.
I'm not sure, but I've heard people pronounce "warez" as "war-ez" instead of as "wares", and swear up and down that they know what they're talking about. Morons.
Some people have a "zero sum" perspective, which is wrong. If someone gets rich, it doesn't mean it was at the expense of someone else, but so many socialists seem to think this.
If I make a better widget, and sell it and get rich, I am creating jobs for my widget builders, and lower costs for those who buy my widgets. The people who make inferior widgets might have to find new jobs, but those losts jobs are LESS (on average) than the new wealth created by the new improved widgets.
Some people believe that there is a "fixed amount of wealth" so when one person gets more, someone one else must have less. This is utterly incorrect. My success helps others, it doesnt take away from them. Obviously, I could do things detrimental to others by my success, anyone can, but free market capitalism is what prevents me from over charging for my widgets. Free market capitalism prevents me from underpaying my employees, according to what market conditions are in my area. If I treat my employees like crap, they leave and I can't build more widgets.
Zero sum believers simply do not get the fact that wealth is relative, not absolute. A perfect example is "poor Americans". In America, if you work for $7 an hour and you are married with one child, you are considered poor. Odds are, this poor person has heat and air, a roof that doesn't leak, a vcr, a tv, a phone, a car and a decent meal 3x a day.
In many countries, especially countries that do not have free market capitalism (China, N. Korea, etc), this would be considered quite wealthy.
Nothing is perfect. Capitalism is like democracy. It's a rotten system, and the only system worse than democracy and capitalism is everything else.
just show me the poor people who get better from the outsourcing of the production of computer parts (or anything, like jeans, furniture, etc). they are being exploited for lower wages than you could imagine, and they are left no other option.
If you live in China, a job for $1 a day is better than no job for $0 a day. They can only pay $1 a day as long as people will work for it, as their economy improves, the universe of persons willing to work for $1 a day shrinks, thus they have to pay $2 a day to get workers (rinse, repeat).
The fact that some can work so cheap means I buy new computers every year, instead of every 3 years. This means everyone in the chain gets 3x the work, from shippers, builders, etc. It also means that I am significanly more productive (my computer speed is very relative to my productivity). It also means that there are jobs for 3 persons in China instead of 1.
free market economy only works within the boundaries of the self-proclaimed "free world". this does not include the countries outside this "free world" where people *are* poor and exploited by the "free world". think of this next time you buy one of your upgrades, levis, or ikea furniture.
I do agree with your general point. I am not for worker exploitation, but I also know that if we do $1billion in trade with China (as an example) then we are more likely to have influence than if we do $1million. If you refuse to do any trade, then not only do they not care what you think, but it reduces China's economy and their average income.
As an example: Over the last 20 years, China has invested greatly in manufacturing of electronics, building a lot of plants (with the help of western companies). As a result, they are better invested for the future, last year China was the only country experiencing double digit growth in their economy, the average citizen, while still poor, is much better off. This is also leading to small improvements in the political system as well. Very small, but at least in the right direction.
In order to make China a "free" place, you have to empower the people there. Opening our markets to them, trading with them, exchanging culture with them, helps do this. As long as we do the OTHER things necessary (push them to reforms, etc) then it the long run, the average Chinese citizen will be better. Even in the short run they are better than 20 years ago.
And now, instead of producing trinkets, China is producing some pretty damn good stuff. Their quality has good up dramatically. Its not a perfect world, but at least its moving in the right direction, thanks to Capitalism.
My guess is that your "feed the poor people" comment smells very much like one of the running gags on The Simpsons. When something bad happens, someone always says "Won't someone please think of the children!" whether or not the event is remotely related.
Those of us who work hard to build businesses and hire people get tired of hearing about "feeding the poor people" especially when we can't get decent employees to show up sober for $10 an hour for an entry level job. (almost twice minimum wage).
Personally, I'm tired of guys with "will work for food" signs that if you offer a job, they refuse. From my experience, most poor people suffer from bad life choices, not "big bad companies".
Re:Popular Front for the Liberation of Europe
on
Building the A380
·
· Score: 0
We gave you the mobile phone, and now the world's biggest/best passenger plane. So what have the Americans ever done for us?
... how many poor people could eat a year with $260m.
perosnally, i don't see the benefit of a huge plane like this. somebody convince me.
Increases productivity, increases profits for companies, company expands, company hires new people, poor people get jobs, poor people eat. I trust that they feel they need to build this, that someone wants to buy it, or they would not bother.
Every time I hear how a company is investing millions in a new project, and someone says "think of all the poor people it could feed" I just want to spit up.
HOW the plane is used is irrelevent. How many many people NEED the fastest computer? Since I upgrade every year, it creates jobs. From Dell, to UPS, in China (for parts), on the docks in California. It doesn't matter HOW or WHY I need the new computer, it creates jobs.
Um, dude, yes, you can read text at 300bps. You might have trouble reading a novel at that speed, but you can certainly read text from a chatroom (or teleconference, as they were called in those days). Assuming N81 (no parity, 8 bits per byte and one stop bit), that's 33 characters per second, which is about 5 words or so. Maybe 6 or 7 if they're short.
And thus abbreviations were born. ie::) lol, rofl, btw, wtf
I also think 300 baud modems are partially to blame for L33+ 5p34k, in some way. I wonder how many people claim to have invented that. Algore perhaps?
At absolute zero, you would not have to take a measurement to know what state the system was in. The reason that you have to make measurements noramlly is that a system is really a combonation of multiple states that all exist at once. Taking the measurement collapses the state into only one of the possible states. However, there is no way of knowing the state of the system without taking the measurement, for the very reason that the system is, in effect, in all the possible states at once (until you take the meausurement) (btw i think this is either ppostulate 4 or 5 of quantum mechanics) I know all this sounds confusing, and that is becuase it is confusing. The difference at absulute zero is that all the infinite energy that it took to lower the temp (or that you extracted, it really doesn't make a difference how you think about it) in effect went into collapsing the vectors into there lowest state. Thus you already know, just by knowing the temp, what states the system is in.
As in Schrodenger's cat?:) At least thats what it sounds like (although Im sure I spell it wrong), and I understand that (as well as one could, I suppose) I just thought of something else. Ok, bear with me (and thanks for intellegent conversation so far).
Ok, keeping in mind that "black holes have hair", and assuming the Uncertainty Priciple is correct, isn't it possible (however improbable) that if you take a given area "A" and it is either at absolute zero or just above. Now area "B", which is at any temperature, "borrows" energy from "A" for a brief period of time. During this time, A has a temperature that is less than zero, say -.00000001. I'm sure this violates several laws, including common sense, but to not allow it violates Uncertainty. Catch 22.
Now, Im only a high school graduate, and self taught from there (38, so I have had a few years to learn) but this is how I understand it. Now my brain REALLY hurts.
Ever notice when someone wants to talk crap, they post as ACs? But I digress...
Either way, the worse that can happen is you give up your domain.
Actually, as those who have opposed M$ have learned, even if you are right, you can inccur so many legal fees that you go out of business. I am dealing with a "similar but different" problem as we speak, thus the basis of my point.
EVERYTHING your parents ever tell you to do or not do is dead on the money.
My mother told me computers were a passing fad, and refused to help pay for college when I wanted to study them, 10th grade in 1981. Said it was a waste of time. She would only help if I became a Geologist, to enter the oil industry.
There is joke in Texas after 1983: How do you get a Geologists attention? Yell "Hey waiter!"
So obviously, I is not a collage gradiate. But I don't wait tables either.
Very interesting. Just for grins and giggles, I have a thought. First, you said...
What absolute zero means is that each atom, or molecule, or whatever, is perfectly ordered (as far as quantum mecanics will allow) Each atom, ect. is in its lowest allowed quantum states. every one of them. Thus you know what state every atom is in at absolute zero.
In order to observe the atom or particle, would you not have to introduce some energy into it, raising the temperature anyway (to observe, you gotta bounce some photons off of it).
Also, now that I think about it, the idea that a group of molecules can be moving and then go into a state of rest may violate the rules of entropy. Granted, somewhere else some molecules may have gained more entropy than this 0 degree group lost (thanks to the uncertainty principle).
Thus it takes more and more energy to cool a substance a unit of temperature......Therefore, it would take an infinite amount of energy to bring a substance to absolute zero.
Or is it that you would have to REMOVE an infinite amount of energy to reach absolute 0?
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, Salon is not public radio or television but they could be public internet news....
There is a certain amount of redundancy there, since the majority of news sites are free, just with annoying ads, and most are either politically neutral or liberal leaning. Being conservative myself, I never found any reason to read anything at Salon. This doesn't mean that there isn't anything of value, its just there are no shortages of liberal web sites for me to get that perspective.
On the other hand, I pay $45 a year for Rush Limbaugh 24/7 membership, so I can listen to show anytime 24/7, get his newsletter, and have full access to the premium content on his site. I just re-upped for two years.
A self tuning guitar?
dont have a link, but it has been done over a dozen years ago. guitar body with dc servos, you set to tune mode and strum lightly. It wasn't a production model, but it really HAS been done.
Now, just imagine a Beowulf of those......
Found on ZDNET....
Symantic released its first verions of Norton Anti-Virus for Guitar today, due to the recent flood of attacks by Fender users. The latest virus, "Head Banger" delivered a payload that caused the guitars to play John Tesh music, and spread through the PA to infect other instruments. It was estimated that within 10 minutes of its initial release into the wild, over 10,000 band's were infected....
Please, PLEASE, don't say all we need are MP3's, you might as well say let's bring back the 45 because thats about the sound quality you get.
;)
Paying to download would not stop you from buying a better version. It might even fuel it. If you could download mp3's for a quarter a pop, decide which full versions you want, and then ORDER them in higher quality, then great. They might even apply the cost of the mp3's toward the full cd. You may even buy more music because you know what you are getting before you plop down the cash.
Me, Im a musician. I like good sound, but i typically run a cd player through an eq, and into the aux in in my PA system. PA's are made to be good sound and durable, not audiophile quality anyway. So no matter what, i get 'good' sound quality, through 8 decent cabs, at 1200 to 2000 watts, but nothing near what you demand.
Your music sound great in your home. Mine sounds good all over the neighborhood. Damn musicians
They're missing a huge opportunity, because they're so afraid this would make it too easy to pirate songs. Like it's hard now??!
I agree. For some unknown reason, this reminds me of the joke virus that was running around years ago that said "This virus is being sent to you on the honor system. Please forward copies to everyone in your address book and then delete your hard drive. Thank you." Honor alone isn't going to stop piracy, its a better business model. We used to buy meat at the butcher, veggies at the market, bread at the baker and precooked food only at sit down restaurants. Then someone found a better way to distribute all these goods, saving everyone money.
Its a minor pain in the ass to find songs now, but only minor. A good service that charged a reasonable fee (maybe based upon quality of mp3) would clean up if it had a good interface and library. If nothing else, for older stuff not in print anymore. I would sign up. $9.99 a month for 40 songs and a fee per song after that. I wouldn't even bitch about the pop up ads.
A good system like this would reduce piracy somewhat because it would take away much of the incentive.
I heard mandrake lives up in pittsburg..
:)
God, first it was Jim Morrison, then Elvis, now we are getting random "Mandrake" sightings.
A computer without two systems is like a duck without a wooden handle.
4.21 kernel
Wow, I had no idea Mandrake was so advanced!
Lisdexia is a terrible disease.
Finally, Pharmboy, you insinuate that you have illegally copied all of Metallica's mp3s, though it is allowable you may in fact not have. (Whether you actually "love" Metallica is also debatable since everything they cut after 1991 is complete trash.) Are you saying you did so because you perceived Metallica as ex-cons or schmucks? Basically, your argument boils down to: if someone is stupid or has been convicted of a crime, that person does not deserve equal protection under the law (i.e. with regard to copyright law.)
I think you are taking me entirely too literal on this point. I probably have an old Metalica CD or two around, and I dont download music except for oldies for my band to learn, which are impossible to buy anyway. I have thousands of CDs, literally. Several thousand that I have purchased new and used.
Basically, your argument boils down to: if someone is stupid or has been convicted of a crime, that person does not deserve equal protection under the law (i.e. with regard to copyright law.)
Wasn't implied at all. The point was the irony. Its just swimming in it. Its the proverbial "pot, meet kettle. Kettle, meet pot". Its kinda like this: You see a guy beat his wife, her brother finds out and two days later, beats the husband senseless with a bat. Do you feel sorry for the husband? Not very.
It is stealing, it is wrong, however, I am not going to cry for the music industry (keep in mind, I am a performing musician) as long as it has such a negative opinion of their own customers. Its not justification, I'm just saying you can't be shocked that people are ripping them off after how shitty they treat their customers.
Personally, I only steal what I can't find TO buy, and yes, I feel perfectly justified in that. You can't paint everyone that downloads music with the same brush.
There are lies, damm lies, and statistics.
I guess that the RIAA has aquired all three.
The irony is that they don't see the writing on the wall. They are like the Wizard who keeps saying "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!". No matter how much they lie, downloading the 2 songs on an album of 10 is more convenient. Once downloaded, they are already compressed for your computer and MP3 devices and you can burn to cd for your car.
EVEN IF THEY WERE GIVING AWAY CDs at the music store, it still requires more effort to go there, wait in line, take it home, bust it down to MP3 so its small enough to stay parked on your computer and MP3 devices, and then just use that CD in your car. Its about convenience.
Its also about choice. Its frustrating to go to buy a CD, especially if you are like me and you are old and you want to buy a CD that came out 15 years ago, and you can't find it. Why would I go to the store to look for a CD that I KNOW isn't there, when I can do a quick search and find a reasonably decent copy in 5 to 30 minutes.
Another problem is all the security they are trying to use. Lets say I legally purchase a downloadable song (it could happen). I have several computers I use daily (office, home office, laptop in the only room the wife lets me smoke in) plus a portable MP3 player. Its a hassle to get PERMISSION for all these devices, to play a song I have legally purchased. Then I replace one of my computers (rinse, repeat) Plus, I front a band of old farts that play old rock, country and blues. They can't play the song on a CD I burn for our "learn music" either. The purpose of the CD is to learn the music, not enjoy it, so we can play at clubs that pay BMI and ASCAP royalties.
Screw it, I would just get a non protected version of the song so I didn't have to hassle with it, even if I had already purchased it. The problem isn't what I will pay, its the hoops I will jump through to use what I own.
I have said it before, and I will say it again...
I love Metalica. I have all their MP3s.
The RIAA has sucessfully made their own customers hate them, similar to Microsoft. When your customers think you are a schmuck, they don't feel too bad stealing from you. Of course, half the rappers ARE convicts. Don't be shocked if people break the law getting a copy of their latest songs. Its almost poetic justice.
That is true up until a point. However, once energy consumption peeks out in the next few years, we will be in a global zero sum game with the sum shrinking over time. Like it or not, the GDP is constrained by the availability of energy.
Sorry, but there is no shortage of energy, nor an anticipated peak in a few years. The amount of untapped energy on this planet is thousands of times more than all the oil, wood and coal that has been been burned since man first rubbed two sticks together.
Plants can grown and converted into alcohol very easily. Just add water. Solar energy is improving, and we have yet to see its potential. Hydrogen is the most abundent element in the universe, and we are just now beginning to develop ways to utilize it. If plants were allowed to be built, we could produce more nuclear power than we could use. The fact is, we have not even scratched the surface of our energy on this planet.
Up to now, we have used mainly the easy, and dirty, fuel. We use oil NOT because its the only fuel available, but because its so cheap, and we have developed infrastructure that converts it into usable fuel. There is so much potential fuel to run factories and transportation, it is beyond what words can express. The problem has been the costs to extract the energy. We are entering an age where alternative energy will become more cost effective. Infrastructure will be built, the cost will go down. It will get cleaner.
We are also mandating more energy efficiency in our homes, with refrigerators, air conditioners and other appliances required to meet higher and higher standards. Slowly but surely, cars are being forced to get better milage. Every few years, we create better insulation, more efficient electronics and more.
People once believed you couldn't go 70 miles an hour, or your skin would tear off. They were wrong. Then people said you could never go faster than the speed of sound because the turbulence would tear the craft apart. They were wrong. At one time people even believed the earth was flat, and the sun and stars rotated around a fixed Earth. Of course the Earth isn't moving, if it was, we would feel it, right?
We have yet to scratch the surface of our potential. Within my lifetime of 38 years, we have landed on the moon, sent probes all over the solar system, irradicated Small Pox, increased farm production many times over, and have taken the power of a computer than once required a room the size of an office building, and put it in a device that is the size of the average novel.
Some heart problems that would have been a death sentence just 20 years ago are treated regularly all over the US and other western countries, and is being delivered to the world. Before the 1980s, DNA fingerprinting was unheard of, and 20 years later we are mapping the entire human genome. We are able to communicate with other humans virtually anywhere on the planet via sataltite phone. GPS has allowed us to pinpoint our location within a few meters, anywhere on the globe. Life expectancy has skyrocketted in the last 100 years. Through our combined efforts, we have been able to devote 1326.945 years worth of computer time to look for intellegence in space, by using a simple screen saver by seti@home.
I'm pretty sure we can figure out how to keep the lights on.
I'm not sure, but I've heard people pronounce "warez" as "war-ez" instead of as "wares", and swear up and down that they know what they're talking about. Morons.
Yea, warez is NOT a city in Mexico, lol.
Some people have a "zero sum" perspective, which is wrong. If someone gets rich, it doesn't mean it was at the expense of someone else, but so many socialists seem to think this.
If I make a better widget, and sell it and get rich, I am creating jobs for my widget builders, and lower costs for those who buy my widgets. The people who make inferior widgets might have to find new jobs, but those losts jobs are LESS (on average) than the new wealth created by the new improved widgets.
Some people believe that there is a "fixed amount of wealth" so when one person gets more, someone one else must have less. This is utterly incorrect. My success helps others, it doesnt take away from them. Obviously, I could do things detrimental to others by my success, anyone can, but free market capitalism is what prevents me from over charging for my widgets. Free market capitalism prevents me from underpaying my employees, according to what market conditions are in my area. If I treat my employees like crap, they leave and I can't build more widgets.
Zero sum believers simply do not get the fact that wealth is relative, not absolute. A perfect example is "poor Americans". In America, if you work for $7 an hour and you are married with one child, you are considered poor. Odds are, this poor person has heat and air, a roof that doesn't leak, a vcr, a tv, a phone, a car and a decent meal 3x a day.
In many countries, especially countries that do not have free market capitalism (China, N. Korea, etc), this would be considered quite wealthy.
Nothing is perfect. Capitalism is like democracy. It's a rotten system, and the only system worse than democracy and capitalism is everything else.
just show me the poor people who get better from the outsourcing of the production of computer parts (or anything, like jeans, furniture, etc). they are being exploited for lower wages than you could imagine, and they are left no other option.
If you live in China, a job for $1 a day is better than no job for $0 a day. They can only pay $1 a day as long as people will work for it, as their economy improves, the universe of persons willing to work for $1 a day shrinks, thus they have to pay $2 a day to get workers (rinse, repeat).
The fact that some can work so cheap means I buy new computers every year, instead of every 3 years. This means everyone in the chain gets 3x the work, from shippers, builders, etc. It also means that I am significanly more productive (my computer speed is very relative to my productivity). It also means that there are jobs for 3 persons in China instead of 1.
free market economy only works within the boundaries of the self-proclaimed "free world". this does not include the countries outside this "free world" where people *are* poor and exploited by the "free world". think of this next time you buy one of your upgrades, levis, or ikea furniture.
I do agree with your general point. I am not for worker exploitation, but I also know that if we do $1billion in trade with China (as an example) then we are more likely to have influence than if we do $1million. If you refuse to do any trade, then not only do they not care what you think, but it reduces China's economy and their average income.
As an example: Over the last 20 years, China has invested greatly in manufacturing of electronics, building a lot of plants (with the help of western companies). As a result, they are better invested for the future, last year China was the only country experiencing double digit growth in their economy, the average citizen, while still poor, is much better off. This is also leading to small improvements in the political system as well. Very small, but at least in the right direction.
In order to make China a "free" place, you have to empower the people there. Opening our markets to them, trading with them, exchanging culture with them, helps do this. As long as we do the OTHER things necessary (push them to reforms, etc) then it the long run, the average Chinese citizen will be better. Even in the short run they are better than 20 years ago.
And now, instead of producing trinkets, China is producing some pretty damn good stuff. Their quality has good up dramatically. Its not a perfect world, but at least its moving in the right direction, thanks to Capitalism.
My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!
Reminds me of the Beverly Hillbillies:
Two pinches = one dash
Two dashes = one smidgen
Two smidgens = one wallop
Therefore I am modded -1:flamebait?
My guess is that your "feed the poor people" comment smells very much like one of the running gags on The Simpsons. When something bad happens, someone always says "Won't someone please think of the children!" whether or not the event is remotely related.
Those of us who work hard to build businesses and hire people get tired of hearing about "feeding the poor people" especially when we can't get decent employees to show up sober for $10 an hour for an entry level job. (almost twice minimum wage).
Personally, I'm tired of guys with "will work for food" signs that if you offer a job, they refuse. From my experience, most poor people suffer from bad life choices, not "big bad companies".
We gave you the mobile phone, and now the world's biggest/best passenger plane. So what have the Americans ever done for us?
:)
So, you're French I assume?
... how many poor people could eat a year with $260m.
perosnally, i don't see the benefit of a huge plane like this. somebody convince me.
Increases productivity, increases profits for companies, company expands, company hires new people, poor people get jobs, poor people eat. I trust that they feel they need to build this, that someone wants to buy it, or they would not bother.
Every time I hear how a company is investing millions in a new project, and someone says "think of all the poor people it could feed" I just want to spit up.
HOW the plane is used is irrelevent. How many many people NEED the fastest computer? Since I upgrade every year, it creates jobs. From Dell, to UPS, in China (for parts), on the docks in California. It doesn't matter HOW or WHY I need the new computer, it creates jobs.
Capitolism: Works every time it's tried.
Um, dude, yes, you can read text at 300bps. You might have trouble reading a novel at that speed, but you can certainly read text from a chatroom (or teleconference, as they were called in those days). Assuming N81 (no parity, 8 bits per byte and one stop bit), that's 33 characters per second, which is about 5 words or so. Maybe 6 or 7 if they're short.
:) lol, rofl, btw, wtf
And thus abbreviations were born. ie:
I also think 300 baud modems are partially to blame for L33+ 5p34k, in some way. I wonder how many people claim to have invented that. Algore perhaps?
At absolute zero, you would not have to take a measurement to know what state the system was in. The reason that you have to make measurements noramlly is that a system is really a combonation of multiple states that all exist at once. Taking the measurement collapses the state into only one of the possible states. However, there is no way of knowing the state of the system without taking the measurement, for the very reason that the system is, in effect, in all the possible states at once (until you take the meausurement) (btw i think this is either ppostulate 4 or 5 of quantum mechanics) I know all this sounds confusing, and that is becuase it is confusing. The difference at absulute zero is that all the infinite energy that it took to lower the temp (or that you extracted, it really doesn't make a difference how you think about it) in effect went into collapsing the vectors into there lowest state. Thus you already know, just by knowing the temp, what states the system is in.
:) At least thats what it sounds like (although Im sure I spell it wrong), and I understand that (as well as one could, I suppose) I just thought of something else. Ok, bear with me (and thanks for intellegent conversation so far).
As in Schrodenger's cat?
Ok, keeping in mind that "black holes have hair", and assuming the Uncertainty Priciple is correct, isn't it possible (however improbable) that if you take a given area "A" and it is either at absolute zero or just above. Now area "B", which is at any temperature, "borrows" energy from "A" for a brief period of time. During this time, A has a temperature that is less than zero, say -.00000001. I'm sure this violates several laws, including common sense, but to not allow it violates Uncertainty. Catch 22.
Now, Im only a high school graduate, and self taught from there (38, so I have had a few years to learn) but this is how I understand it. Now my brain REALLY hurts.
Ever notice when someone wants to talk crap, they post as ACs? But I digress...
Either way, the worse that can happen is you give up your domain.
Actually, as those who have opposed M$ have learned, even if you are right, you can inccur so many legal fees that you go out of business. I am dealing with a "similar but different" problem as we speak, thus the basis of my point.
EVERYTHING your parents ever tell you to do or not do is dead on the money.
My mother told me computers were a passing fad, and refused to help pay for college when I wanted to study them, 10th grade in 1981. Said it was a waste of time. She would only help if I became a Geologist, to enter the oil industry.
There is joke in Texas after 1983: How do you get a Geologists attention? Yell "Hey waiter!"
So obviously, I is not a collage gradiate. But I don't wait tables either.
Actually cocacola.com, nike.com and others could have cost you more than it made you.
Because the names are trademarked, more than a few "owners" have found themselves without their domain, and with a legal bill.
Very interesting. Just for grins and giggles, I have a thought. First, you said...
What absolute zero means is that each atom, or molecule, or whatever, is perfectly ordered (as far as quantum mecanics will allow) Each atom, ect. is in its lowest allowed quantum states. every one of them. Thus you know what state every atom is in at absolute zero.
In order to observe the atom or particle, would you not have to introduce some energy into it, raising the temperature anyway (to observe, you gotta bounce some photons off of it).
Also, now that I think about it, the idea that a group of molecules can be moving and then go into a state of rest may violate the rules of entropy. Granted, somewhere else some molecules may have gained more entropy than this 0 degree group lost (thanks to the uncertainty principle).
Thus it takes more and more energy to cool a substance a unit of temperature......Therefore, it would take an infinite amount of energy to bring a substance to absolute zero.
Or is it that you would have to REMOVE an infinite amount of energy to reach absolute 0?
Ok, now my brain hurts.