While evolution and religious belief are compatable, evolution isn't at all compatable with a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation story. Simply saying "God's days are longer than our days" doesn't do much to solve that. Doing so still leaves you with incongruities.
For example, plants and animals are created on separate days, instead of evolving together. All the stars in the heavens were created on Day 4, separate from our own Sun.
If you find deep spiritual meaning in the Genesis account, more power to you. But don't assume that you can turn it into a historical/scientific account of the Earth's beginnings just by lengthening the days. It doesn't work that easily.
This is a fun doomsday scenario, but I don't think it's all that likely. First, it has to be agreed that Mars doesn't have much life, if it in fact has any at all. That means that whatever evolutionary "arms race" is occuring on Mars is happening relatively slowly. There just wouldn't be as much of the complex interaction needed to come up with the many clever tricks that Earth's evolutionary process has. This also means that the tricks that Martian life would have come up with would be primarily focused on defending itself against its environment.
"Note that Mars is
THEIR environment, so they already have an advantage here. So Mars may become a very unfriendly
planet to live."
To a point, you're correct. But that point ends where my spacesuit begins. Once these bugs get into my spacesuit/mouth/digestive tract, they're back on my turf.
Your point about Earth-based "oxygenophobes" may also be beside the mark. Certainly, there are bugs in our body that thrive in low O2 environments. But as far as I know, they all use nitrogen gas to survive. So in that way, it's like comparing apples to PalmPilots. OTOH, N2 is nearly as unreactive as the noble gases, so its doubtful that Martian life would find it poisonous.
It is possible that there is life on Mars that's just waiting to take advantage of the new environment we could provide. But it's highly unlikely, since evolution would have done everything to prepare Martian life for a Martian environment, and nothing to prepare it for ours. A more likely scenario would be one where the life we try to seed on Mars starts evolving rapidly and becomes dangerous to both humans and other imported life.
I've made several grand pronouncements on evolutionary theory. They're based on nothing more substantial than a few Stephen Jay Gould books I read a few years back. So if anyone out there knows better, I humbly request that you make me look stupid.
"Curiously the Vikings suggested
that Mars possess less organics than the Moon. And this is a nonsense somehow. Mars is much closer to
the Asteroid Belt and Jupiter than us. So, in its History it should have suffered more impacts than us.
IANAOMS [I Am Not An Orbital Mechanics Specialist] I think you're thinking backwards on this point. The closer a planet is to the sun, the more impacts it's going to receive. The smaller orbit means that it's more likely that the planet will actually be there when the projectile crosses the orbital path. So if an object from the asteroid belt actually fell into an orbit around the Sun, it would actually be more likely to hit the Earth than Mars (assuming its path took it across both planets' orbits).
Of course, the Moon is much smaller than Mars, so one would guess that it would suffer fewer impacts just because it's a smaller target. One would be wrong. In fact, the Earth acts like a giant vacuum cleaner, sucking debris into itself and the Moon alike.
These two facts would indicate that the Moon is in a higher traffic area than Mars is, so the fact that Mars has fewer organics isn't surprising.
Re:Details about their server:
on
Patent Warfare
·
· Score: 1
Notice that the webmaster (such as he/she is) was too lazy to bother with the [title] tag. Unless it's being dropped in HTML 5.0, in which case, these folks are obviously visionaries, and deserve. . .
Oops, I spoke wrong. I clicked on "view source," and it actually has [title]Untitled Document[/title]. I'm going with the "eight-year-old with Netscape Composer" theory. No self-respecting website creator would use two [/font] tags in a row, nor would they write [ul type="disc"] since "disc" is the default anyways.
I suggest everyone nose around their website for a while. It's a good laugh, and they're paying for the bandwidth.
"The sad political truth is that access to the Net, the Web and broadband equals
creativity, confidence and opportunity. If American schoolchildren were
provided the same kind of bandwidth college students are, just imagine the kind
of creative technological outpouring they might be capable of, not only in
primary and secondary schools, but by the time they hit colleges and
universities."
Alternately, imagine all the pr0n they could download. Talk about getting an education!
Before modding me back into obscurity, let me outline an opinion that many here will find controversial: Computers don't belong in schools.
An overstatement, to be sure. It would be more reasonable to say that computers are not the cure-all for the ills that plague our education system. In fact, they often create their own problems, and often the money could be better spent on less sexy but more worthwhile projects.
Moore's law is great for technogeeks and businesses, but for schools, it means that whatever money they invest in computers this year will lose half its value over the next eighteen months. By comparison, musical instruments might last through ten years of students before finally being obsoleted by a third grader who is too exuberent about playing the drum set. A physics demonstration kit would last even longer, as the laws of physics are only reworked every fifty years or so. In short, keeping up with the latest and greatest in computing technology is at best a poor investment.
Then you have to look at what the computers are actually being used for. If little Timmy uses his computer for researching photosynthesis for his science class, that's wonderful. If he uses it to find an article then cut-n-paste it into his report without doing more than skimming it, then the computer has simply enabled his innate laziness.
Finally, (and this is where I probably deserve to be blasted) most people are not going to be computer-literate. Not the way folks around here would define it. They'll never upgrade a motherboard, they'll never replace a jabbering NIC card, they'll never install software in anything other than the default directory. For them, computers are just something they use to write memos, play solitaire, maybe send e-mail and play MP3s if they're really 1337. Not every third grader typing, "i like riding mybike what do you like." in a chat room is going to write the next Napster. For them, there's nothing that having a computer in the classroom would teach them couldn't be just as well taught by an Information Tech class their Junior year of high school.
Of course, there are other kids who might become interested in computers at an early age. The best thing for such kids isn't a PIII w/ 256Megs of RAM and a nineteen inch flat-panel monitor that the teacher is afraid to let them touch. I would suggest that they would be better served by a P-90 with 16 Megs, some programming software, and a teacher with an A+ certification and some programming experience who can teach them what a "while loop" is.
Of course, I'm just irked about the many hours I wasted in school doing typing drills on a hideous green-screened Apple. So don't take my ramblings too seriously.
I humbly submit an Innovative* technique for creating a self-powered computer. The technique itself is as follows:
1) Plug all necessary computer components into a linear multi-port electrical source (called a "power strip" by the vulgar). Be sure that there is an open electrical port remaining at the end of the strip.
2) Power on the computer. Wait for it to boot up.
3) Quickly remove the plug from the wall, and plug the cord back into the strip's end port. (We must emphasize QUICKLY).
4) The power will cycle repeatedly through your system, leading to an enormous reduction in your computer's TCO.
* Note: Innovate, Innovative, Innovating, and Innovation are all registered trademarks of Microsoft. Any use of said terms to describe non-Microsoft products is strictly prohibited.
Oog make hot shiny! Oog let other cavemen use hot shiny for only three zebra skins per season! Five zebra skins if caveman want to upgrade to Executive License Fire on Stick! Much more portable than other fire!
Oog also have great deal on Sharp Pointy Stick. Come see new features of Sharp Pointy Stick v.1.2! Kill zebras to pay for hot shiny! But caveman better not make unlicensed Sharp Pointy Stick, or Oog go neanderthal on them!
"Since the book has a limited audience (AutoCad) make sure that you post negative reviews wherever you can about the book to prevent others from making the same mistake."
It looks like he's already done this. Check out Amazon.com's page on INSIDE AutoCAD Map 2000. Here's a cut-'n-paste the sole review:
[1/5 stars]
OnWord Press is cheating its customers with this book, September 25,
2000
Reviewer: Dennis Waardenburg from Charlottesville VA
I received my copy of this book just today, so I can't yet comment on its content at this point.
However, I am so outraged by one aspect of its publication that I felt it necessary to comment on it
immediately.
The last 100 pages of the text aren't published! Rather, they are included on an accompanying
CD-ROM as PDF documents! Chapter 14 - "Plotting Maps", and Appendices A and B simply
aren't there! The last page of Chapter 13 says "Book Continued on Companion CD-ROM", and
that's it!
It is one thing to include supplemental, extra, or "bonus" materials on a CD, but quite another to put
integral parts of the text on one! When I ordered this book, I thought I was purchasing a BOOK- a
printed and bound volume! Instead I got *part* of a book, despite the fact that I paid *all* of its
selling price!
I can think of only two reasons why the publishers would chose this method of publication. Either
they did it to wring extra profits from sales of this title (it is much cheaper to press a CD than to print
and bind 100 pages of text), or they took this book to press before the authors had completed the
text. I consider neither of these reasons acceptable, and will never again purchase another book
produced by OnWord Press.
And as a final insult, the companion CD-ROM is sealed in its jacket with a sticker that reads, "If the
disk package seal is broken, the purchaser forfeits all return rights and privileges to the seller." That's
right, in order to examine the text of this "book" that you've paid for, you must forfeit your legal right
of return! I doubt very much that this is even legal, but the audacity of the publisher to try to take
away my legal right is appalling!
Business Software Alliance, a U.S. anti-piracy lobby, estimates piracy levels in South Africa at 49 percent, with the loss to the South African economy estimated at US$94.2 million.
Someone (either the author of the article or the Business Software Alliance) needs to take some lessons on economics. If a South African rips a copy of Win98, and that piece of software retails for $80, that's not eighty dollars lost to the South African economy. That's sixty bucks that won't be shipped back to Redmond, Washington (presuming the retailer is taking a decent cut).
Plus, the eighty dollars which the pirate saved himself will be used to purchase other goods and services he finds desirable (as opposed to flushing the money down the toilet, as the BSA model probably presumes).
In short, the only South Africans this hurts are the software retailers. When a continent as bad off as Africa can purchase American goods like Windows 98 for pennies on the dollar, I have a hard time sympathizing with the wealthy corporations who are trying to get tough on piracy.
Hmm. . . Since Microsoft is losing so much to African piracy anyways, why don't they start "donating" their software as a humanitarian service. For the cost of a CD and [optional] documentation, they could get a tax break for the full price of a copy. Heck, they might make more money that way than they do now. [Note: Bill, if you're reading this, remember that IANAL. Run it by your own people first.]
I have zero moderation points, and I feel truly helpless. As depressing as the message is, it's important.
Of course, barring other difficulties, this still is an improvement from.14 to.02, which improves the circuit density by a factor of forty-nine. After that, I'm not sure what would be the next leap. Nanotechnology? Those electricity-conducting DNA strands? Etching with electron beams?
I think his point is stronger than you make it out to be. The security hole in Outlook is that it automatically downloads attachments and runs them. Is this bad design? Yes. But it seems that the initial purpose of this "feature" was to save people all the trouble of downloading and executing the attachment themselves. This is what happens when "ease of use" becomes the sine qua non (literally: Trigonometry? Qua NO!) of software design. Had the original coders (or the PHB's thereof) been balancing ease of use with security, it never would have happened.
Ease of use isn't bad. The point of the article is that, by taking such drastic steps to hide the actual workings of the computer from the end users, it does them a disservice. It makes it impossible for them to take their understanding of one program in one environment and apply their knowledge more generally.
So long as they can keep their engineers from being eaten by dingos or koalas or whatever the heck they have down there, it's a good choice of locale.
The best radio telescopes right now are primarily situated in the Northern hemisphere. VLA, Arecibo, that new one Senator Byrd bought. . . all of them are scanning the Northern skies. My impression is that the Southern skies have been relatively ignored. It's also nice that there are still areas in Auzzieland that are almost unpopulated (making the cellphone ban workable).
I'll believe it in 50 years time when I see it in 50 years time. Just more fancifull PR drek in an attempt to keep the masses interested in space exploration/sciences, and nothing more than that.
There's nothing wrong with keeping "the masses" interested in space exploration. In fact, that's been one of NASA's major problems: Lack of public interest. I still think the physics behind the concept are sound (though my physics teacher disagreed with me). Since the major problem is a lack of sufficiently strong materials, I don't see why speculation should bother anybody.
It also gives a new lease to 'scientists' who can't get a job anywhere else to do makework for more than their worth (scientific welfare).
Hello? Scientific welfare, if you want to call it that, is probably the most important thing the government does. Even if you're willing to ignore all the incredible scientific advances such funding brings us, you can't ignore these two simple facts: They're smart, and they know how to make really big bombs. Somebody needs to keep them distracted.
As a programmer who spent several years working with Logo (specifically, fourth to ninth grade), I can tell you that Logo suffers from several fundamental issues that must be overcome before it can become the language of the future:
1) Lack of multithreading/multiprocessing capability.
2) Memory allocation is very non-intuitive.
3) Exception handling is almost non-existant.
4) The blasted turtle never does what you want.
I would suggest (and I think my views are shared by a large percentage of the computer industry) that a better programming language for large-scale, team based software design must combine the data abstration of COBOL with the versatility of INTERCAL.
If one takes this "rule" and applies it to just about anything involving the Internet, the results become laughable.
For example, say someone in the loathsome and decadent state of New York starts up a pornsite. The material being put on the web is legal, because we all know what horrible and godless people New Yorkers are.
Say a man living in the bastion of morality known as Draper, Utah decides to download images from this site. According to their interpretation of the "bullet guideline," the New York website owner has fired these images into Draper, violating their community standards, and causing the collapse of family values across Utah.
The specifics aren't important. The porn site could be replaced by "hate speech," information about an encryption algorithm, schematics for a device which can be used for illegal purposes, or any other piece of information that somebody, somewhere, felt to be somehow dangerous. Everyone, everywhere would have to abide by the most stringent laws of any state or locality in America.
Apologies in advance, but it's customary: MPAA legal briefs. . . Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of those babies?
The thing I always liked about MST3K was their willingness to let jokes go over most people's heads, while nailing the skulls of a select few. It was a strange feeling being the only one in the room who got a "gom jabbar" reference (hint: Dune). I'm busting up laughing while the rest of the family is giving me dirty looks. Obscure jokes like those are part of what keeps Fraiser so enjoyable.
I would go so far as to say that jokes like those really defined the series: Not everyone is going to appreciate a guy and two robots mocking such Hollywood classics as "The Pod People" and "Gammurah." Some people will sit down, watch an episode, and demand those two hours of their life back. But those who did enjoy it enjoyed it immensely.
Before I go watch "The Chicken of Tomorrow" for the bajillionth time, let me leave you with a thought that both fans and critics can agree with: As long as these guys are mocking movies, they aren't peddling drugs in your neighborhood.
We're looking into your suggestion that we give Anonymous Cowards full participation as moderators. In principle, it would allow far greater participation amongst all members of our Slashdot community. As a preliminary test of the effects of such a system, we're giving you 300 moderation points. Use them wisely. The fate of scores of First Posters rests squarely on your competent shoulders.
Sincerely,
Some guy impersonating Cmdr. Taco
Okay, okay, it's flaimbait. I promise to do fifty "hail Linus"'es as penance.
However, we all know that the real purpose of this project is to protect Earth from the fleets of Xaxxis, the evil interstellar commander.
The Air Force will most likely be borrowing it on weekends to fight off bug-eyed repo men who want to get a hold of the Roswell wreckage. I had very good sources for all of this information, but they're being mysteriously killed off one at a URK!!!
Slashdot Mirror
For example, plants and animals are created on separate days, instead of evolving together. All the stars in the heavens were created on Day 4, separate from our own Sun.
If you find deep spiritual meaning in the Genesis account, more power to you. But don't assume that you can turn it into a historical/scientific account of the Earth's beginnings just by lengthening the days. It doesn't work that easily.
Your point about Earth-based "oxygenophobes" may also be beside the mark. Certainly, there are bugs in our body that thrive in low O2 environments. But as far as I know, they all use nitrogen gas to survive. So in that way, it's like comparing apples to PalmPilots. OTOH, N2 is nearly as unreactive as the noble gases, so its doubtful that Martian life would find it poisonous.
It is possible that there is life on Mars that's just waiting to take advantage of the new environment we could provide. But it's highly unlikely, since evolution would have done everything to prepare Martian life for a Martian environment, and nothing to prepare it for ours. A more likely scenario would be one where the life we try to seed on Mars starts evolving rapidly and becomes dangerous to both humans and other imported life.
I've made several grand pronouncements on evolutionary theory. They're based on nothing more substantial than a few Stephen Jay Gould books I read a few years back. So if anyone out there knows better, I humbly request that you make me look stupid.
Of course, the Moon is much smaller than Mars, so one would guess that it would suffer fewer impacts just because it's a smaller target. One would be wrong. In fact, the Earth acts like a giant vacuum cleaner, sucking debris into itself and the Moon alike.
These two facts would indicate that the Moon is in a higher traffic area than Mars is, so the fact that Mars has fewer organics isn't surprising.
Oops, I spoke wrong. I clicked on "view source," and it actually has [title]Untitled Document[/title]. I'm going with the "eight-year-old with Netscape Composer" theory. No self-respecting website creator would use two [/font] tags in a row, nor would they write [ul type="disc"] since "disc" is the default anyways.
I suggest everyone nose around their website for a while. It's a good laugh, and they're paying for the bandwidth.
Before modding me back into obscurity, let me outline an opinion that many here will find controversial: Computers don't belong in schools.
An overstatement, to be sure. It would be more reasonable to say that computers are not the cure-all for the ills that plague our education system. In fact, they often create their own problems, and often the money could be better spent on less sexy but more worthwhile projects.
Moore's law is great for technogeeks and businesses, but for schools, it means that whatever money they invest in computers this year will lose half its value over the next eighteen months. By comparison, musical instruments might last through ten years of students before finally being obsoleted by a third grader who is too exuberent about playing the drum set. A physics demonstration kit would last even longer, as the laws of physics are only reworked every fifty years or so. In short, keeping up with the latest and greatest in computing technology is at best a poor investment.
Then you have to look at what the computers are actually being used for. If little Timmy uses his computer for researching photosynthesis for his science class, that's wonderful. If he uses it to find an article then cut-n-paste it into his report without doing more than skimming it, then the computer has simply enabled his innate laziness.
Finally, (and this is where I probably deserve to be blasted) most people are not going to be computer-literate. Not the way folks around here would define it. They'll never upgrade a motherboard, they'll never replace a jabbering NIC card, they'll never install software in anything other than the default directory. For them, computers are just something they use to write memos, play solitaire, maybe send e-mail and play MP3s if they're really 1337. Not every third grader typing, "i like riding mybike what do you like." in a chat room is going to write the next Napster. For them, there's nothing that having a computer in the classroom would teach them couldn't be just as well taught by an Information Tech class their Junior year of high school.
Of course, there are other kids who might become interested in computers at an early age. The best thing for such kids isn't a PIII w/ 256Megs of RAM and a nineteen inch flat-panel monitor that the teacher is afraid to let them touch. I would suggest that they would be better served by a P-90 with 16 Megs, some programming software, and a teacher with an A+ certification and some programming experience who can teach them what a "while loop" is.
Of course, I'm just irked about the many hours I wasted in school doing typing drills on a hideous green-screened Apple. So don't take my ramblings too seriously.
1) Plug all necessary computer components into a linear multi-port electrical source (called a "power strip" by the vulgar). Be sure that there is an open electrical port remaining at the end of the strip.
2) Power on the computer. Wait for it to boot up.
3) Quickly remove the plug from the wall, and plug the cord back into the strip's end port. (We must emphasize QUICKLY).
4) The power will cycle repeatedly through your system, leading to an enormous reduction in your computer's TCO.
* Note: Innovate, Innovative, Innovating, and Innovation are all registered trademarks of Microsoft. Any use of said terms to describe non-Microsoft products is strictly prohibited.
Oog also have great deal on Sharp Pointy Stick. Come see new features of Sharp Pointy Stick v.1.2! Kill zebras to pay for hot shiny! But caveman better not make unlicensed Sharp Pointy Stick, or Oog go neanderthal on them!
In short, the only South Africans this hurts are the software retailers. When a continent as bad off as Africa can purchase American goods like Windows 98 for pennies on the dollar, I have a hard time sympathizing with the wealthy corporations who are trying to get tough on piracy.
Hmm. . . Since Microsoft is losing so much to African piracy anyways, why don't they start "donating" their software as a humanitarian service. For the cost of a CD and [optional] documentation, they could get a tax break for the full price of a copy. Heck, they might make more money that way than they do now. [Note: Bill, if you're reading this, remember that IANAL. Run it by your own people first.]
Of course, barring other difficulties, this still is an improvement from .14 to .02, which improves the circuit density by a factor of forty-nine. After that, I'm not sure what would be the next leap. Nanotechnology? Those electricity-conducting DNA strands? Etching with electron beams?
Ease of use isn't bad. The point of the article is that, by taking such drastic steps to hide the actual workings of the computer from the end users, it does them a disservice. It makes it impossible for them to take their understanding of one program in one environment and apply their knowledge more generally.
The best radio telescopes right now are primarily situated in the Northern hemisphere. VLA, Arecibo, that new one Senator Byrd bought. . . all of them are scanning the Northern skies. My impression is that the Southern skies have been relatively ignored. It's also nice that there are still areas in Auzzieland that are almost unpopulated (making the cellphone ban workable).
Hello? Scientific welfare, if you want to call it that, is probably the most important thing the government does. Even if you're willing to ignore all the incredible scientific advances such funding brings us, you can't ignore these two simple facts: They're smart, and they know how to make really big bombs. Somebody needs to keep them distracted.
1) Lack of multithreading/multiprocessing capability.
2) Memory allocation is very non-intuitive.
3) Exception handling is almost non-existant.
4) The blasted turtle never does what you want.
I would suggest (and I think my views are shared by a large percentage of the computer industry) that a better programming language for large-scale, team based software design must combine the data abstration of COBOL with the versatility of INTERCAL.
If one takes this "rule" and applies it to just about anything involving the Internet, the results become laughable.
For example, say someone in the loathsome and decadent state of New York starts up a pornsite. The material being put on the web is legal, because we all know what horrible and godless people New Yorkers are.
Say a man living in the bastion of morality known as Draper, Utah decides to download images from this site. According to their interpretation of the "bullet guideline," the New York website owner has fired these images into Draper, violating their community standards, and causing the collapse of family values across Utah.
The specifics aren't important. The porn site could be replaced by "hate speech," information about an encryption algorithm, schematics for a device which can be used for illegal purposes, or any other piece of information that somebody, somewhere, felt to be somehow dangerous. Everyone, everywhere would have to abide by the most stringent laws of any state or locality in America.
Apologies in advance, but it's customary: MPAA legal briefs. . . Can you imagine a beowulf cluster of those babies?
I would go so far as to say that jokes like those really defined the series: Not everyone is going to appreciate a guy and two robots mocking such Hollywood classics as "The Pod People" and "Gammurah." Some people will sit down, watch an episode, and demand those two hours of their life back. But those who did enjoy it enjoyed it immensely.
Before I go watch "The Chicken of Tomorrow" for the bajillionth time, let me leave you with a thought that both fans and critics can agree with: As long as these guys are mocking movies, they aren't peddling drugs in your neighborhood.
Okay, okay, it's flaimbait. I promise to do fifty "hail Linus"'es as penance.
What is Mel Brooks doing these days?
The Air Force will most likely be borrowing it on weekends to fight off bug-eyed repo men who want to get a hold of the Roswell wreckage. I had very good sources for all of this information, but they're being mysteriously killed off one at a URK!!!