They could make changes and sell them all they wanted, for as much as they wanted. They just couldn't prohibit the buyer from re-selling (or giving away) it.
Yes, but then they have to give out the source code too! If they don't sell (or distribute) it, they can keep the source code secret! (c.f. GPL version 2, Terms and Conditions, item 0: "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program).")
However, if you sell something that is available as free source code, nobody will actually buy it (because you have to announce that there exists free source code). That's why agentZ says cou cannot sell it; you can try, but you will fail.
You are right. The estimate for number of atoms in the Universe is around 10^80 (provided the Universe has a finite size), which is a factor of 10^20 less than Googol - pretty much IMHO. This value is calculated using the volume of the visible Universe and the critical density of the Universe, both deduced from the Hubble constant (which can be determined experimentally) using the theory of General Relativity.
Re:Yes, and it's been said before...
on
Buried in email?
·
· Score: 1
Those rules apply for News.
I have found an email rule:
"For every question/issue you have (to a single person), send a seperate email. Otherwise only your first or last question will be answered. The others will be overlooked/forgotten."
The reason for this behaviour is simple: People don't proofread their answers.
Free services will disappear one second after the invention/establishment of micropayment infrastructure. Most people will pay "just one penny" for most services. As we all know, once there is considerable acceptance, alternatives will vanish (c.f. browser war). Those controlling this infrastructure/technology will quickly be richer than B.G.
P.S. micropayment does not necessarily mean that the amounts are small or stay small. The word is just appeasement policy.
Considering rubies are some of the better laser making crystals...
Rubies (Cr:Sapphire) are not good Laser media, they just happened to be the first used. Ti:Sapphire is far better (in terms of bandwidth the best) and very commonly used Laser medium.
Zirconium is a metal and as such not suitable as (solid state) Laser medium or for solar cells.
I have to disappoint you: 13nm wavelength is X-Ray. However, X-rays are an established technology - no need to worry about it being dangerous when done properly. The x-rays should never escape the vacuum vessel - so no need to wear lead.
He said this was the first time that neutrinos were detected
No. He said neutrinos were detected the for first time with the AMANDA detector. Or in other words, the AMANDA detector hasn't detected any neutrinos until recently.
You absoluteley have to talk to the peope you are going to work with (without the HR guy/boss standing behind you)! Look what kind of people work there, whether you could work with them, whether they know their stuff (so that you can learn from them).
Of course you have to first reduce the alternatives to a managable number - the criteria depend on you personal preferences: maybe you want a small co. where you can take over responsibility very fast or rather a bigger co. where you have more options to develop/go to different town etc. Again, best thing is to ask somebody who works there (maybe ask your prof where previous students went).
Also, look out for jobs where you can develop new skills (shouldn't be hard for just-graduates, but very important for you next job).
I recommend that only bug-free program get recognition at all. The reason is that bugs usually increase development time and costs a lot and also decrease the value of the program in the customers eye a lot.
Second point: Such a bonus system can lead to the situation that people help each other less than before (esp. if there are financial benefits) which is of course couter productive. Maybe you can reduce this by not having valuable prices..let's say just a free lunch or so - something that increases the reputation of the coder but not his wallet.
All those contradictions arise from the artificial restriction of information distribution by legal law. Mathematically spoken, the Copyright/"IP" laws are not consistent with the axiomatic structure of nature itself, therefore contradictions arise when these laws are enforced. The contradictions can only be resolved by changing the legal laws because the laws of nature cannot be changed (i.e. you cannot change the fact that to actually use information you have to give it away/duplicate it and, more important, that you cannot take back information once you gave it away unless you kill the carrier, e.g. killing unwanted witnesses).
That's exactly the reason why they chose a prime number not an arbitrary number! The prime is kind of the "plasma physics data set". The gzip stage is not important. It's only used to get a smaller prime number. The important "encoding" is the prime calculation algorithm that generates loads of prime numbers that represent copyrighted information or illegal algorithms (like DeCSS). The question is now whether this makes prime number calculation algorithms illegal or whether it is only illegal to tell which prime number represents which illegal algo./copyrighted work (as is the case now).
An engineer, a physicist and a mathematician are sitting in a train driving through the Highlands in Scotland. Suddenly they see a single black sheep munching some grass on a nearby field. The engineer says, "Oh, all sheep in Scotland are black." The physicist shakes his head, "No no, at least one sheep in Scotland is black!". Now the mathematician cannot hold back: "Nonsense! At least one sheep in Scotland is black on at least one side!".
You have to take into account that most scientists are very careful about their statements.
Also, when expressed in everdays language, the statements tend to sound more diffuse because that language is not exact enough. I often observe this effect when reading about my field of science in newspapers: I can hardly understand what they mean - I wonder how lay people could ?
The paper mentioned in the article is Journal of Applied Physics Vol. 89, No. 3, pp. 1625-- 1633, 1 February 2001. You can access the full text here if you have a subscription. Unfortunately I don't understand their technique. Can you explain it to us ?
Yeah, lets just go slap on a new OS. How often does that happen in production. Give me a break
it happens from time to time - and then you are *glad* when you can just export the database and import it into the new server. Where I worked, we had in the last 10-15 years the transitions VMS ->DOS,Novell -> WinNT -> Linux with Oracle DBs and there were no major problems. Sure you have to be careful with version transitions as there can be subtle changes that break one or the other application but you don't have to completely rebuild your DB from scratch.
You can also cut with high pressure water jets (several hundred bar). However, I don't know the costs of this technique. Look for "water jet cutting" with google or take a look here.
Also, in order for the connects to function as an antenna their length has to be of comparable size of the radiation wavelength, which is 3cm for 10 GHz (not taking into account the dielectric constant of the surrounding material). Anyway, 3cm is much larger than typical connects on the die, so they won't be efficient antennas. Connections on the motherboard will be more problematic though.
The gate oxide is 3 atoms thick. The gate oxide is just the insulating layer between the channel and the gate. It's only one *part* of a transistor (the smallest one). You can see a schematic of a MOSFET here. The gate oxide is the yellow structure. Obviously, the transistor is larger than the gate oxide.
Slashdot Mirror
They could make changes and sell them all they wanted, for as much as they wanted. They just couldn't prohibit the buyer from re-selling (or giving away) it.
Yes, but then they have to give out the source code too! If they don't sell (or distribute) it, they can keep the source code secret! (c.f. GPL version 2, Terms and Conditions, item 0: "Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program).")
However, if you sell something that is available as free source code, nobody will actually buy it (because you have to announce that there exists free source code). That's why agentZ says cou cannot sell it; you can try, but you will fail.
You are right. The estimate for number of atoms in the Universe is around 10^80 (provided the Universe has a finite size), which is a factor of 10^20 less than Googol - pretty much IMHO. This value is calculated using the volume of the visible Universe and the critical density of the Universe, both deduced from the Hubble constant (which can be determined experimentally) using the theory of General Relativity.
Those rules apply for News. I have found an email rule:
"For every question/issue you have (to a single person), send a seperate email. Otherwise only your first or last question will be answered. The others will be overlooked/forgotten."
The reason for this behaviour is simple: People don't proofread their answers.
Free services will disappear one second after the invention/establishment of micropayment infrastructure. Most people will pay "just one penny" for most services. As we all know, once there is considerable acceptance, alternatives will vanish (c.f. browser war). Those controlling this infrastructure/technology will quickly be richer than B.G.
P.S. micropayment does not necessarily mean that the amounts are small or stay small. The word is just appeasement policy.
Considering rubies are some of the better laser making crystals...
Rubies (Cr:Sapphire) are not good Laser media, they just happened to be the first used. Ti:Sapphire is far better (in terms of bandwidth the best) and very commonly used Laser medium.
Zirconium is a metal and as such not suitable as (solid state) Laser medium or for solar cells.
I have to disappoint you: 13nm wavelength is X-Ray. However, X-rays are an established technology - no need to worry about it being dangerous when done properly. The x-rays should never escape the vacuum vessel - so no need to wear lead.
He said this was the first time that neutrinos were detected
No. He said neutrinos were detected the for first time with the AMANDA detector. Or in other words, the AMANDA detector hasn't detected any neutrinos until recently.
I would've thought there would be nothing but solid chunks of ice by the South Pole.
No, There is land below the ice at the SP. You are thinking of the North Pole, which doesn't have land below the ice.
There is an inaccurate statement in the article that has mislead you:
Neutrinos travel through Earth all the time without being detected.
This should read: Most Neutrinos travel through Earth all the time without being detected.
There is a nice introduction into the discovery of the neutrino at
http://wwwlapp.in2p3.fr/neutrinos/aneut.html
But is the Cerenkov radiation visible through 1km of ice ? I doubt this.
You absoluteley have to talk to the peope you are going to work with (without the HR guy/boss standing behind you)! Look what kind of people work there, whether you could work with them, whether they know their stuff (so that you can learn from them).
Of course you have to first reduce the alternatives to a managable number - the criteria depend on you personal preferences: maybe you want a small co. where you can take over responsibility very fast or rather a bigger co. where you have more options to develop/go to different town etc.
Again, best thing is to ask somebody who works there (maybe ask your prof where previous students went).
Also, look out for jobs where you can develop new skills (shouldn't be hard for just-graduates, but very important for you next job).
I recommend that only bug-free program get recognition at all. The reason is that bugs usually increase development time and costs a lot and also decrease the value of the program in the customers eye a lot.
Second point: Such a bonus system can lead to the situation that people help each other less than before (esp. if there are financial benefits) which is of course couter productive. Maybe you can reduce this by not having valuable prices..let's say just a free lunch or so - something that increases the reputation of the coder but not his wallet.
Sorry, I couldn't resist *g*. It's probably better to say 'axiom structure' instead of 'axiomatic structure' - have to ask the grammar nazi.
All those contradictions arise from the artificial restriction of information distribution by legal law. Mathematically spoken, the Copyright/"IP" laws are not consistent with the axiomatic structure of nature itself, therefore contradictions arise when these laws are enforced. The contradictions can only be resolved by changing the legal laws because the laws of nature cannot be changed (i.e. you cannot change the fact that to actually use information you have to give it away/duplicate it and, more important, that you cannot take back information once you gave it away unless you kill the carrier, e.g. killing unwanted witnesses).
That's exactly the reason why they chose a prime number not an arbitrary number! The prime is kind of the "plasma physics data set".
The gzip stage is not important. It's only used to get a smaller prime number. The important "encoding" is the prime calculation algorithm that generates loads of prime numbers that represent copyrighted information or illegal algorithms (like DeCSS). The question is now whether this makes prime number calculation algorithms illegal or whether it is only illegal to tell which prime number represents which illegal algo./copyrighted work (as is the case now).
How about this one:
An engineer, a physicist and a mathematician are sitting in a train driving through the Highlands in Scotland. Suddenly they see a single black sheep munching some grass on a nearby field. The engineer says, "Oh, all sheep in Scotland are black." The physicist shakes his head, "No no, at least one sheep in Scotland is black!". Now the mathematician cannot hold back: "Nonsense! At least one sheep in Scotland is black on at least one side!".
You have to take into account that most scientists are very careful about their statements.
Also, when expressed in everdays language, the statements tend to sound more diffuse because that language is not exact enough. I often observe this effect when reading about my field of science in newspapers: I can hardly understand what they mean - I wonder how lay people could ?
I can email you the PDF if you like. You can find my email address in my user info.
The paper mentioned in the article is Journal of Applied Physics Vol. 89, No. 3, pp. 1625-- 1633, 1 February 2001. You can access the full text here if you have a subscription. Unfortunately I don't understand their technique. Can you explain it to us ?
There is something interesting at www.oracle.com/guarantee/.
Yeah, lets just go slap on a new OS. How often does that happen in production. Give me a break
it happens from time to time - and then you are *glad* when you can just export the database and import it into the new server. Where I worked, we had in the last 10-15 years the transitions VMS ->DOS,Novell -> WinNT -> Linux with Oracle DBs and there were no major problems. Sure you have to be careful with version transitions as there can be subtle changes that break one or the other application but you don't have to completely rebuild your DB from scratch.
You can also cut with high pressure water jets (several hundred bar). However, I don't know the costs of this technique. Look for "water jet cutting" with google or take a look here.
Also, in order for the connects to function as an antenna their length has to be of comparable size of the radiation wavelength, which is 3cm for 10 GHz (not taking into account the dielectric constant of the surrounding material). Anyway, 3cm is much larger than typical connects on the die, so they won't be efficient antennas. Connections on the motherboard will be more problematic though.
The gate oxide is 3 atoms thick. The gate oxide is just the insulating layer between the channel and the gate. It's only one *part* of a transistor (the smallest one). You can see a schematic of a MOSFET here. The gate oxide is the yellow structure. Obviously, the transistor is larger than the gate oxide.
The gap is on the energy scale not in "real space".
Lead isn't radioactive. The problem is that the cosmic rays produce alpha particles when they hit lead.