That solvent for your resin isn't exactly Perrier, so you have to figure out something to do with that. Semiconductor fabrication isn't exactly made from angel farts, either. Depending on how you do the math, PV can be pretty costly.
"What percentage of earth orbiting satellites are powered by anything but PV?"
When you don't have to worry about an atmosphere, or mass production, and you can't really refuel the thing, your solution set changes. PV is a really good alternative for satellites. It's less ideal for, say, houses in Portland, OR.
Your mileage certainly does vary.
(Having said that, I think an RTG would be a fun thing to have in the basement...)
Really? How do you know? Normally, there's a process called "congressional oversight", which (while the furthest thing in the world from perfect) is a damn sight better than "Trust me. I'm fighting terrorists."
"watching for calls made to "hot" areas where terrorists are known to exist."
If we've got sufficient intel to detect where these terrorists are, why aren't we dropping JDAMs on their heads instead of jacking around with telephones?
"Listening to calls to Pakistan has no effect on my life whatsoever."
And they promise promise promise to only use their new powers to fight evil. And the next administration promises too. And the next one and the next one and the next one...
I don't believe that the systems that limit the scope of the surveillance are sufficiently accurate to only select calls of interest. I think they're casting a wide net, and keeping as much data as possible.
And if by "stopping a terrorist attack", that means "erroneously break into your house, zip tie you and your family, and deport you to Syria", is that still OK?
Um, they totally lost me when they said "Stored compressed air that powers air compressors".
Buoyant flight? Sure. Advanced airship designs? Absolutely. Fuel-less flight? Well, if you've got some sort of magic fuel-less air compressor that can power air compressors, sure.
People aren't starving because there's not enough food. People are starving because their governments find it expedient to have them starve. I agree that that's a problem to be solved, but the solution is not a pretty one.
"i wrote an albeit sloppy paper on this a few years ago"
You wrote a pretty damn sloppy sentence right there. You need two adjectives to use one "albeit". Here, let's try it.
Your sentence as written is meaningless, albeit short.
See, there's a contrast between "meaningless" (which I used perjoratively), and "short" (which I used in a complimentary fashion, since I think you'd do very well to write more short sentences with fewer words. Note that this last sentence is an example of humorous redundancy. This is an advanced technique, and I'd avoid it if I were you. Since I am not you, I use it liberally and a lot of times.).
Make it right? Of course not. I never argued that it was. However, to single out America as a particularly egregious offendor in this realm is to display an ignorance of history.
Cognitive dissonance anyone? If one accepts the premise that ordinary citizens can be effective journalists, why does one need an expert to vet that premise?
"I assert that if your country is doing something that is incompatible with your values, integrity dictates you find another country. If you do not, that says something about your values."
No. I bear no responsibility for the actions of a government that I do not sanction.
"I assert that if your wife is doing something that is incompatible with your values, integrity dictates you find another wife. If you do not, that says something about your values."
Yes. Fortunately, I am proud to be judged by my association with my wife (to be).
I don't say that you should cut and run. It's none of my business what you do...but my (completely irrelevant) judgement of you is in fact colored by the fact that you work for Microsoft. That's all I'm saying.
20 separate instances is better than one program that requires a specific version, and another program that requires a different version, of the same library.
Sure, it'd be better if shared libraries could in fact be shared, but in real life, they can't.
"As an immigrant, who now owns his own multi-million dollar business, do you really think that that I should up and leave my financial security because I don't agree with the policies of the current administration, even though I currently cannot be part in changing them?"
That might be the most impressive straw man I've ever seen.
Elitism? What elite? I assert that you are judged by the company you keep. I assert that if you work for a company, you are giving them your imprimatur, to one degree or another. I assert that if your employer is doing something that is incompatible with your values, integrity dictates you find another employer. If you do not, that says something about your values.
I am responsible for my vote, not for the actions of those who I didn't vote for. Democracies are not the same as corporations. We'll leave the reliability of the current system of voting for another argument.
I am NOT responsible for the actions of my wife (well, she'll be my wife in three weeks). She is a separate human, and she does not pay me.
I'm not talking about being a martyr. I understand needing to pay the bills. I am saying, however, that your credentials work against your rhetorical stance. You benefit from MS's DRM practices. You might not like them, but you are reaping the rewards.
"IBM, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Sony, the rest of corporate america?"
"Everybody's doing it, so why can't I?" is not an acceptable answer from someone who professes integrity.
If you can fight the good fight within Microsoft, that's great. More power to you! However, unless and until that actually works, you are going to be judged by the company you keep.
"and it should be clear that not everyone is 100% thrilled with everything that gets MS's name attributed to it"
OK. What does it say on your paycheck?
It's safe to assume that you are at least partially thrilled, because you continue to work for them. Sure, your anti-DRM fifth column crusade is noble and all...but you're still taking their money, which weakens your rhetorical stance.
Do what you need to do to feed yourself, but you still work for The Man.
Mmmmkay. Weird Al's demographic is me...thirtysomething geeky types who listened to Dr. Demento in high school. You're going to find a much higher concentration of those types here on/. than on AOL.
Slashdot Mirror
What a remarkably cogent and well-reasoned post. You must be new here. : )
Is that you, pexor?
That solvent for your resin isn't exactly Perrier, so you have to figure out something to do with that. Semiconductor fabrication isn't exactly made from angel farts, either. Depending on how you do the math, PV can be pretty costly.
"What percentage of earth orbiting satellites are powered by anything but PV?"
When you don't have to worry about an atmosphere, or mass production, and you can't really refuel the thing, your solution set changes. PV is a really good alternative for satellites. It's less ideal for, say, houses in Portland, OR.
Your mileage certainly does vary.
(Having said that, I think an RTG would be a fun thing to have in the basement...)
"Actually, these are limited to calls overseas."
Really? How do you know? Normally, there's a process called "congressional oversight", which (while the furthest thing in the world from perfect) is a damn sight better than "Trust me. I'm fighting terrorists."
"watching for calls made to "hot" areas where terrorists are known to exist."
If we've got sufficient intel to detect where these terrorists are, why aren't we dropping JDAMs on their heads instead of jacking around with telephones?
"Listening to calls to Pakistan has no effect on my life whatsoever."
And they promise promise promise to only use their new powers to fight evil. And the next administration promises too. And the next one and the next one and the next one...
I don't believe that the systems that limit the scope of the surveillance are sufficiently accurate to only select calls of interest. I think they're casting a wide net, and keeping as much data as possible.
And if by "stopping a terrorist attack", that means "erroneously break into your house, zip tie you and your family, and deport you to Syria", is that still OK?
Straight up lust for power. It's been around since the first proto-human picked up the first stick.
Um, they totally lost me when they said "Stored compressed air that powers air compressors".
Buoyant flight? Sure. Advanced airship designs? Absolutely. Fuel-less flight? Well, if you've got some sort of magic fuel-less air compressor that can power air compressors, sure.
People aren't starving because there's not enough food. People are starving because their governments find it expedient to have them starve. I agree that that's a problem to be solved, but the solution is not a pretty one.
"i wrote an albeit sloppy paper on this a few years ago"
You wrote a pretty damn sloppy sentence right there. You need two adjectives to use one "albeit". Here, let's try it.
Your sentence as written is meaningless, albeit short.
See, there's a contrast between "meaningless" (which I used perjoratively), and "short" (which I used in a complimentary fashion, since I think you'd do very well to write more short sentences with fewer words. Note that this last sentence is an example of humorous redundancy. This is an advanced technique, and I'd avoid it if I were you. Since I am not you, I use it liberally and a lot of times.).
Maybe the place where Wikipedia fails is that it assumes that some people have critical thinking skills.
I can see how that might present a challenge for you.
"I still listen to a wide variety of radio stations"
Wow. Where do you find that? I get sixteen flavors of ClearChannel, and NPR. Thank GOD for NPR.
Make it right? Of course not. I never argued that it was. However, to single out America as a particularly egregious offendor in this realm is to display an ignorance of history.
"US government has meddled in the politics of other nations to ensure access to favourable trade"
And, of course, the US Government invented that particular practice, didn't it?
Cognitive dissonance anyone? If one accepts the premise that ordinary citizens can be effective journalists, why does one need an expert to vet that premise?
You may indeed judge me by my strong desire to not get an all expenses paid trip to Guantanamo, or Syria.
"I assert that if your country is doing something that is incompatible with your values, integrity dictates you find another country. If you do not, that says something about your values."
No. I bear no responsibility for the actions of a government that I do not sanction.
"I assert that if your wife is doing something that is incompatible with your values, integrity dictates you find another wife. If you do not, that says something about your values."
Yes. Fortunately, I am proud to be judged by my association with my wife (to be).
I don't say that you should cut and run. It's none of my business what you do...but my (completely irrelevant) judgement of you is in fact colored by the fact that you work for Microsoft. That's all I'm saying.
20 separate instances is better than one program that requires a specific version, and another program that requires a different version, of the same library.
Sure, it'd be better if shared libraries could in fact be shared, but in real life, they can't.
"Well, you live in the United States, so your position against the current government is essentially invalid where it counts."
See my other points. I didn't vote for the current administration, and I accept no responsibility for their actions.
If I was being paid by the RNC, I would have to accept responsibility for their actions, to some degree.
"As an immigrant, who now owns his own multi-million dollar business, do you really think that that I should up and leave my financial security because I don't agree with the policies of the current administration, even though I currently cannot be part in changing them?"
That might be the most impressive straw man I've ever seen.
Elitism? What elite? I assert that you are judged by the company you keep. I assert that if you work for a company, you are giving them your imprimatur, to one degree or another. I assert that if your employer is doing something that is incompatible with your values, integrity dictates you find another employer. If you do not, that says something about your values.
Is integrity elitist?
I am responsible for my vote, not for the actions of those who I didn't vote for. Democracies are not the same as corporations. We'll leave the reliability of the current system of voting for another argument.
I am NOT responsible for the actions of my wife (well, she'll be my wife in three weeks). She is a separate human, and she does not pay me.
I'm not talking about being a martyr. I understand needing to pay the bills. I am saying, however, that your credentials work against your rhetorical stance. You benefit from MS's DRM practices. You might not like them, but you are reaping the rewards.
"IBM, Oracle, Intel, AMD, Sony, the rest of corporate america?"
"Everybody's doing it, so why can't I?" is not an acceptable answer from someone who professes integrity.
If you can fight the good fight within Microsoft, that's great. More power to you! However, unless and until that actually works, you are going to be judged by the company you keep.
"and it should be clear that not everyone is 100% thrilled with everything that gets MS's name attributed to it"
OK. What does it say on your paycheck?
It's safe to assume that you are at least partially thrilled, because you continue to work for them. Sure, your anti-DRM fifth column crusade is noble and all...but you're still taking their money, which weakens your rhetorical stance.
Do what you need to do to feed yourself, but you still work for The Man.
So I'm going to spend $600 for somebody else's science project? Uh, no. And I don't really feel like writing my own operating system.
I think you've got the question backwards. The question is, how do doctors make money off of coming up with new diagnoses?
Mmmmkay. Weird Al's demographic is me...thirtysomething geeky types who listened to Dr. Demento in high school. You're going to find a much higher concentration of those types here on /. than on AOL.
*draws visual aid*
Dude. It's Weird Al.