While I can understand a concern for this in hospitals where peoples immune systems are already comprimised, for the rest of this, this should be irrelevent.
Living in a purely sterile enviroment weaks your immune system. Our bodies require a "tainted" enviroment. While we don't need to be "dirty" all the time, if make sure everything is always clean, don't be surprised when that flu lasts a month.
"I heard a rumor that they were going to rename it Hip-Hop and Dumb Hotel Heiress Network."
Personally, I've been calling MTV the Shiney Things Network for over a decade now. I swear the programming directory must suffer from ADD or something.
"there are far bigger problems we need to resolve on earth, such as oil dependency. if these countries dumped this money into a "alternative fuel race" instead of a space race, we would have more expendable income because we would be free from the harness of oil. lets worry about this planet first before we start wasting tax money again."
No problem is two dimensional. In the real world, society is intertwined, you change one part of society, you can and usually will change it all. It's in part reflected in the law of unintended consequences. It is unreasonable to look at the worlds problems from a purely utilitarian point of view. It doesn't reflect the fact that yes we are humans and as such there are no simple answers.
This kind of reasoning is the same kind of reasoning that leads to people cutting funding for theoretical scientific work because there is no practical use for it, as you clearly are suggesting. How to use knowledge typically is not obvious when it is discovered.
I suggest you examine the possibility that people can tackle multiple problems at the same time. It is also worth considering that attacking problems from a two dimension point of view will end up causing new problems and is not the most efficient way of running a human society.
"Perhaps it would be best if we were to convince the Japanese that they should take over the stewardship of the Hubble Space Telescope and the Voyager Probe, both of which are now slated for abandonment by the Bush administration"
You are incorrect. The current congress/adminstration has specifically budgeted money for Hubble to remain in use and it is NASA that is not spending that money and cancelling Hubble.
National prestige. That's why. Not all money spent needs to be justified on a quantifiable physical or economic asset. Somethings just can't be graphed on paper. In the end, the feeling people get seeing their citizens on another planet can arguable have more of an impact on that society than spending the same resources on robot missions.
People are allowed to be people, you know. Naturally curious and sometimes doing dangerous and expensive things that have no obvious economic interest.
Sounds like Canada needs US style grand jury investigations. You know, with gag orders on everyone involved inside the courtroom with no media access.
The quaintness doesn't arise from the fact that an judicial inquiry can lead to a biased jury and hence you keep it secret. It's from the fact that it's a PUBLIC inquiry, with full media access, cameras and common people off the street in the room that can't talked about. It's unreasable and violates all notions of common sense.
Every year slashdot does this, every year people complain. The joke is being fooled into complaining. The joke is people revisit the site like every normal day hoping for it to end and it doesn't. The editors are having a laugh at YOUR expense and you don't even know it.
Relax, go over to Fark, who's random joke page can actually be amusing and read about the Pope being note quite dead yet and come back to Slashdot tomorrow. If you actually miss anything real, you can read it then.
Certainly a step in the right direction, only in the sense from what the page says, it's a vast improvement in the interface over gimp. That being said, it does fall into the same trap as other OSS project like to be in, mimicking. If a developer wants his/her project to be noticed not only does it have to do what the competition does, it has to have some added value over the competition. Price isn't necessarily a good way to standout, people are more than willing to pay for something they perceive as better. It would be nice if there were more publicly done research into interface design, OSS projects would benefit greatly from it.
As a OS X user, I would also say anything that requires X11 is not a native OS X application. With no core OS X technology support (little things like colorsync, quicktime, etc), Gimp will really never take off on OS X. I personally will stick to using photoshop.
Don't raise someone else's kid for them. Let them live in a closet. They have the right to limit all forms of media from their child.
Second, school is for education. Evolution is part of that. If the parents don't like it, they can send their kid to a school that doesn't teach the truth or teach them at home. Again, they have the right to do that.
There are some among the liberals who think much differently than what you suggest. I personally would like to see research into the impact media has on youth, positive or negative. I would like to see all media being banned (with the exception of Libraries) for purchase by those under the age of 18. Parents should be empowered. I don't kids to have no access, they're smart, but every little bit of empowment for the parents is a good thing. It's not the goverment raising your kid, it's being empowered by taking power back from the market system and putting it in the hands of adults. Buy what you want, publish what you want, but if you want to see it to kids, good luck.
Considering most of these games are bought by adults anyways, I really don't see how it would be much different, except people would have one less thing to bitch about.
I personally don't like the GTA line of games, I'm more of a Unreal Tournment kind of guy. I think more games like "Singles" and "Playboy:The mansion" should exist.
"Last time I bought a car, it came with a stereo already in it, yet, this wasn't an antitrust or monopoly concern."
This analogy completely fails.
1. No one has a monopoly on cars. 2. The stereo that came with your car has standard plugs so that it can be swapped with another stereo from another manufacturer from another store 3. The stereo you bought plays standard media, a standard that developed in a competitive and open market. This inherently allows number 2 to happen.
"The bottom line is, that in spite of my distaste for Microsoft, I don't see how bundling Windows Media Player with Windows fits into the category of antitrust."
Monopolists are not allowed to take a monopoly in one market and use it to extend a monopoly in another market. Microsoft has a monopoly in operating systems. They have abused their monopoly, here in the States (Apple Quicktime/MS Word, OEM contracts, etc) and in Europe (which I know less about). There is NO functional or technological reason what so ever that OEMs can not decide what media player comes with their computers. The market won't fragment no more than the market for stereos has done (they all play the same media, save for Sony's individual attempts to push their stuff). Standards will be set, including API standards, that will allow for a computer from HP to work with media that a computer from Dell works with. The same could be said about web browsers. As we have it now, MS has single handedly held back the web by not updating any underlying technology in IE for years. Developers have no choice but to cling to poorly implemented standards and MS only technologies for their pages, just so a majority market can use their web pages. This is exactly why monopolies are not allowed to abuse their position. This problem would not exist at all if IE wasn't bundled with Windows and OEMs were allowed to ship any browser they chose, which I'm sure given multiple browsers would be pretty much standards compliant much like all browsers except IE are.
You can always limit the bandwidth that's allocated for p2p application in your network.
That is a dangerous precedent, it means the Uni acknowledges the "illegal activities", which typically can means they need to continue to take "good faith" measures to stop "illegal network activity" or end up getting it worse in a potential lawsuit. I think the solution the University I work at was perfect, limit the bandwidth of dorms during work hours. I think it's been piped down to 10% of total network traffic when the Uni is open for business, then turned on full the rest of the time. The students in the dorms were annoyed, but they got over it.
It is interesting to note that if Windows didn't ship with these modules that got it in legal trouble in the first place, your PC would be a lot less functional out of the box.
This is under the completely invalid assumption that the OEMs wouldn't have bundled web browsers or media players with their machines. This assumes that only a convicted monolopist has the right to decide how things will be bundled with it's monolopy product and that the OEMs can and should have no say in this. If IE had never been written and never had been bundled with the OS, all of the OEMs would have distributed web browsers with their machines. Same could be said for media players. Yes, in most likelyhood they would all be standards compliant, because HP has an interest in showing that the web from an HP is no different than the web from a DELL and vis versa.
So some guy sets up a warez server in a computer lab. At least one of his friends that he has known for four years gets involved. For some reason, guy decides to busy his own warez server. Suspicious, yes. Worth investigating, certainly. Entrapment, probably not, unless it can be shown that he set up and maintained the server under the auspices of the legal authorities.
I'm a chemist. I know a little something about thermo and the photo-electric effect.
You are wrong..
Free Energy is more relevant in how it relates to the work that is done within the system.
When the energy is used up in the form of work, it does not magically become light. Some of the energy that goes into the system comes off as light, in the form of waste, but the energy that is used up in work is stored in some other medium: atomic bonds, gravitational, heat; just to name a few. Heat being the only one on the list that gives off light.
I'm also going to take this moment, because repliers have put words in my mouth to say: there was never a point in this thread where I said solar is better than fossil fuels. The thread topic was always nuclear vs solar. Put in the light of the original poster who claimed solar was infinite, which is clearly wrong, with the overwhelming assumption that solar had no ill effects, which is also wrong.
"you'd realize how absurd the idea of man's affecting the climate in any measurable way is. All the global warming BS ignores the fact that in times past the Earth was so warm, that tropical life forms abounded in the arctic lands and oceans of this planet."
Flame-bait, I'll bite.
Three points.
Cities are proven to change the weather of an area. Studies have shown it does rain more on the weekend. The study done on plane contrails forming into clouds.
Global warming because of human activity is a fact. The only people who deny it are the ones who have a business interest in it not being true.
Just because life did exist at time, doesn't make up for the fact Miami and New York will be under water if caps melt. Deal with that economic disaster. It isn't about whether or not life did exist at that time, it's about whether we as a species want to live on a plant that is that warm or if those conditions will drive us to extinction.
Judging from your reply, I don't think you fully understand. Today, a known amount of energy from the Sun will arrive at earth. This energy current powers wind, tides, and the weather. You start using that energy on a large scale, there WILL be changes in weather. That simple. Solar is a great idea, , but it's not going to meet the needs of an advanced industrial society without accepting that there will be changes to weather patterns.
"Truth is, there's many energy sources in this world that are infinite. Solar, Wind, Hydro and Tidal are not going to run out any time soon."
They are not "infinite". The total output of power that the earth gets is a known finite number. Also, If you actually use enough power from these sources to power the needs of humans, the weather pattern changes would be quite large. Ultimately, it's why that's not a complete solution. Though it would help if all new houses had solar cells.
If they actually cared about developers, which they don't, they would make absolute, float, and hover work as expected and on arbitrary elements. For those of you who don't know of these issues, check out this for some nice examples of stuff IE can't handle. It's also work looking at the Zen Garden too.
Bad CSS support in Windows is the main reason I use IE7 (no, that's not from microsoft).
If history is any lesson, Microsoft will do exactly what they are doing with their security initiative for Windows: Stop releasing updates on a timely basis except to the government and those pay for them (partners)...
Slashdot Mirror
While I can understand a concern for this in hospitals where peoples immune systems are already comprimised, for the rest of this, this should be irrelevent.
Living in a purely sterile enviroment weaks your immune system. Our bodies require a "tainted" enviroment. While we don't need to be "dirty" all the time, if make sure everything is always clean, don't be surprised when that flu lasts a month.
"I heard a rumor that they were going to rename it Hip-Hop and Dumb Hotel Heiress Network."
Personally, I've been calling MTV the Shiney Things Network for over a decade now. I swear the programming directory must suffer from ADD or something.
Yeah, but my back gets sore carrying around my TV everywhere I go.
"there are far bigger problems we need to resolve on earth, such as oil dependency. if these countries dumped this money into a "alternative fuel race" instead of a space race, we would have more expendable income because we would be free from the harness of oil. lets worry about this planet first before we start wasting tax money again."
No problem is two dimensional. In the real world, society is intertwined, you change one part of society, you can and usually will change it all. It's in part reflected in the law of unintended consequences. It is unreasonable to look at the worlds problems from a purely utilitarian point of view. It doesn't reflect the fact that yes we are humans and as such there are no simple answers.
This kind of reasoning is the same kind of reasoning that leads to people cutting funding for theoretical scientific work because there is no practical use for it, as you clearly are suggesting. How to use knowledge typically is not obvious when it is discovered.
I suggest you examine the possibility that people can tackle multiple problems at the same time. It is also worth considering that attacking problems from a two dimension point of view will end up causing new problems and is not the most efficient way of running a human society.
"Perhaps it would be best if we were to convince the Japanese that they should take over the stewardship of the Hubble Space Telescope and the Voyager Probe, both of which are now slated for abandonment by the Bush administration"
You are incorrect. The current congress/adminstration has specifically budgeted money for Hubble to remain in use and it is NASA that is not spending that money and cancelling Hubble.
National prestige. That's why. Not all money spent needs to be justified on a quantifiable physical or economic asset. Somethings just can't be graphed on paper. In the end, the feeling people get seeing their citizens on another planet can arguable have more of an impact on that society than spending the same resources on robot missions.
People are allowed to be people, you know. Naturally curious and sometimes doing dangerous and expensive things that have no obvious economic interest.
You can tell them yourself, here's the phone number to the payphone outside the theater. Word is, they will actually answer it.
(323) 462-9609
At least we're not going to the wrong web site to do it. Imagine Karma Whoring over at NY Times.
Sounds like Canada needs US style grand jury investigations. You know, with gag orders on everyone involved inside the courtroom with no media access.
The quaintness doesn't arise from the fact that an judicial inquiry can lead to a biased jury and hence you keep it secret. It's from the fact that it's a PUBLIC inquiry, with full media access, cameras and common people off the street in the room that can't talked about. It's unreasable and violates all notions of common sense.
Every year slashdot does this, every year people complain. The joke is being fooled into complaining. The joke is people revisit the site like every normal day hoping for it to end and it doesn't. The editors are having a laugh at YOUR expense and you don't even know it.
Relax, go over to Fark, who's random joke page can actually be amusing and read about the Pope being note quite dead yet and come back to Slashdot tomorrow. If you actually miss anything real, you can read it then.
Certainly a step in the right direction, only in the sense from what the page says, it's a vast improvement in the interface over gimp. That being said, it does fall into the same trap as other OSS project like to be in, mimicking. If a developer wants his/her project to be noticed not only does it have to do what the competition does, it has to have some added value over the competition. Price isn't necessarily a good way to standout, people are more than willing to pay for something they perceive as better. It would be nice if there were more publicly done research into interface design, OSS projects would benefit greatly from it.
As a OS X user, I would also say anything that requires X11 is not a native OS X application. With no core OS X technology support (little things like colorsync, quicktime, etc), Gimp will really never take off on OS X. I personally will stick to using photoshop.
Don't raise someone else's kid for them. Let them live in a closet. They have the right to limit all forms of media from their child.
Second, school is for education. Evolution is part of that. If the parents don't like it, they can send their kid to a school that doesn't teach the truth or teach them at home. Again, they have the right to do that.
There are some among the liberals who think much differently than what you suggest. I personally would like to see research into the impact media has on youth, positive or negative. I would like to see all media being banned (with the exception of Libraries) for purchase by those under the age of 18. Parents should be empowered. I don't kids to have no access, they're smart, but every little bit of empowment for the parents is a good thing. It's not the goverment raising your kid, it's being empowered by taking power back from the market system and putting it in the hands of adults. Buy what you want, publish what you want, but if you want to see it to kids, good luck.
Considering most of these games are bought by adults anyways, I really don't see how it would be much different, except people would have one less thing to bitch about.
I personally don't like the GTA line of games, I'm more of a Unreal Tournment kind of guy. I think more games like "Singles" and "Playboy:The mansion" should exist.
"Last time I bought a car, it came with a stereo already in it, yet, this wasn't an antitrust or monopoly concern."
This analogy completely fails.
1. No one has a monopoly on cars.
2. The stereo that came with your car has standard plugs so that it can be swapped with another stereo from another manufacturer from another store
3. The stereo you bought plays standard media, a standard that developed in a competitive and open market. This inherently allows number 2 to happen.
"The bottom line is, that in spite of my distaste for Microsoft, I don't see how bundling Windows Media Player with Windows fits into the category of antitrust."
Monopolists are not allowed to take a monopoly in one market and use it to extend a monopoly in another market. Microsoft has a monopoly in operating systems. They have abused their monopoly, here in the States (Apple Quicktime/MS Word, OEM contracts, etc) and in Europe (which I know less about). There is NO functional or technological reason what so ever that OEMs can not decide what media player comes with their computers. The market won't fragment no more than the market for stereos has done (they all play the same media, save for Sony's individual attempts to push their stuff). Standards will be set, including API standards, that will allow for a computer from HP to work with media that a computer from Dell works with. The same could be said about web browsers. As we have it now, MS has single handedly held back the web by not updating any underlying technology in IE for years. Developers have no choice but to cling to poorly implemented standards and MS only technologies for their pages, just so a majority market can use their web pages. This is exactly why monopolies are not allowed to abuse their position. This problem would not exist at all if IE wasn't bundled with Windows and OEMs were allowed to ship any browser they chose, which I'm sure given multiple browsers would be pretty much standards compliant much like all browsers except IE are.
You can always limit the bandwidth that's allocated for p2p application in your network.
That is a dangerous precedent, it means the Uni acknowledges the "illegal activities", which typically can means they need to continue to take "good faith" measures to stop "illegal network activity" or end up getting it worse in a potential lawsuit. I think the solution the University I work at was perfect, limit the bandwidth of dorms during work hours. I think it's been piped down to 10% of total network traffic when the Uni is open for business, then turned on full the rest of the time. The students in the dorms were annoyed, but they got over it.
It is interesting to note that if Windows didn't ship with these modules that got it in legal trouble in the first place, your PC would be a lot less functional out of the box.
This is under the completely invalid assumption that the OEMs wouldn't have bundled web browsers or media players with their machines. This assumes that only a convicted monolopist has the right to decide how things will be bundled with it's monolopy product and that the OEMs can and should have no say in this. If IE had never been written and never had been bundled with the OS, all of the OEMs would have distributed web browsers with their machines. Same could be said for media players. Yes, in most likelyhood they would all be standards compliant, because HP has an interest in showing that the web from an HP is no different than the web from a DELL and vis versa.
So some guy sets up a warez server in a computer lab. At least one of his friends that he has known for four years gets involved. For some reason, guy decides to busy his own warez server. Suspicious, yes. Worth investigating, certainly. Entrapment, probably not, unless it can be shown that he set up and maintained the server under the auspices of the legal authorities.
I'm a chemist. I know a little something about thermo and the photo-electric effect.
You are wrong..
Free Energy is more relevant in how it relates to the work that is done within the system.
When the energy is used up in the form of work, it does not magically become light. Some of the energy that goes into the system comes off as light, in the form of waste, but the energy that is used up in work is stored in some other medium: atomic bonds, gravitational, heat; just to name a few. Heat being the only one on the list that gives off light.
I'm also going to take this moment, because repliers have put words in my mouth to say: there was never a point in this thread where I said solar is better than fossil fuels. The thread topic was always nuclear vs solar. Put in the light of the original poster who claimed solar was infinite, which is clearly wrong, with the overwhelming assumption that solar had no ill effects, which is also wrong.
"you'd realize how absurd the idea of man's affecting the climate in any measurable way is. All the global warming BS ignores the fact that in times past the Earth was so warm, that tropical life forms abounded in the arctic lands and oceans of this planet."
Flame-bait, I'll bite.
Three points.
Cities are proven to change the weather of an area. Studies have shown it does rain more on the weekend. The study done on plane contrails forming into clouds.
Global warming because of human activity is a fact. The only people who deny it are the ones who have a business interest in it not being true.
Just because life did exist at time, doesn't make up for the fact Miami and New York will be under water if caps melt. Deal with that economic disaster. It isn't about whether or not life did exist at that time, it's about whether we as a species want to live on a plant that is that warm or if those conditions will drive us to extinction.
I use this. Though, it's not a "plugin", it works quite well.
"he only reason Microsoft doesn't support CSS properly is that they don't OWN it."
Considering Microsoft has sucessfully patented CSS, I don't see how they don't "own" it. Even if they have given W3C a license to it.
Judging from your reply, I don't think you fully understand. Today, a known amount of energy from the Sun will arrive at earth. This energy current powers wind, tides, and the weather. You start using that energy on a large scale, there WILL be changes in weather. That simple. Solar is a great idea, , but it's not going to meet the needs of an advanced industrial society without accepting that there will be changes to weather patterns.
"Truth is, there's many energy sources in this world that are infinite. Solar, Wind, Hydro and Tidal are not going to run out any time soon."
They are not "infinite". The total output of power that the earth gets is a known finite number. Also, If you actually use enough power from these sources to power the needs of humans, the weather pattern changes would be quite large. Ultimately, it's why that's not a complete solution. Though it would help if all new houses had solar cells.
If they actually cared about developers, which they don't, they would make absolute, float, and hover work as expected and on arbitrary elements. For those of you who don't know of these issues, check out this for some nice examples of stuff IE can't handle. It's also work looking at the Zen Garden too.
Bad CSS support in Windows is the main reason I use IE7 (no, that's not from microsoft).
If history is any lesson, Microsoft will do exactly what they are doing with their security initiative for Windows: Stop releasing updates on a timely basis except to the government and those pay for them (partners)...
I can't wait.