Ignoring the fact that this system has balanced itself naturally for billions of years before humans appeared
Of course the system will balance itself. Nature always restores itself. The question is whether or not we humans have a place in that future. I don't believe humans has the power to destroy the nature once and for all (at least with any of our current means) but we certainly have the means to destroy ourselves (not saying global warming is one of the means to wipe ourself out though, don't believe so personally...I believe it is existant and that we will have to adapt to it though).
Ignore the obviously farcical *facts* about "global cooling" and a imminent "New Ice Age".
You're missing something important...when people who studies ice ages talks about imminent, they are talking over ranges of thousands of years. People studying global warming interprets imminent as mere hundreds.
BTW, in Europe we are already seeing the effects of global warming, as southern Europe gets less and less rain and northern Europe gets more and more rain (our methorologists say it's the CO2, of course you are free to distrust them).
Well in this particular case I think the plot is pretty much given away anyway?
Everyone, please read the books first!! There is no chance of the film being better than the books, and if you see the film first you have spoiled the plot for the books. It's much better to spoil the plot for the films. (IMHO of course)
The movie industry is different because the movies aren't launched at theatres in other countries than US until it has finished playing in the US (due to the high production cost of the film rolls, and the translation/dubbing/texting involved). So, if they didn't have the zones, people could buy the DVDs before the movie had been shown at the theatres and so they would loose a lot of money on that.
Because, if the rest of the world followed your standards it would take about a year until we had polluted so much that the pole caps melted and, well, people in your coast cities wouldn't have an office to drive to anymore (not to mention your gas prices once the entire American economy foundation is drowned in water).
Are you serious? MSVC 6 has the worst template support I've ever encountered on (modern) compilers. GCC does on the other hand allow you to do about everything in the standard with templates these days.
Examples? Libsgic++ (ligsigc.sourceforge.net) had to be dumbed down and partially rewritten in the MSVC 6 port. I can give you an example right here as well (which I've encountered myself):
template [class C, class T, T (C::*funcPtr)()]
class someClass {};
This code won't compile for me in VC, if anyone got it working please tell me how...I fear it can't be done though. If anyone is wondering, this example would be used like this:
Meaning, it takes a class, a type, and a pointer to a function in the class returning that type. If you pass in the pointer in the constructor instead you loose four bytes of run-time memory just on this, which isn't crucial but merely irritating. (And the class would only be instantiated once for each different T anyway so no higher code size either).
([ and ] is supposed to be sharper, not feeling like writing HTML right now, sorry...)
In Schindler's List, you have brains blown out, people shot and piled up in stacks and burnt...in short extreme violence. The only thing people discuss about the movie is a ten second scene with a little nudity? When the rest of the film revolves around killing?
I'm not against Schindler's list, it's an important movie and as stated previously, brings up important historical issues. But, if I were to disallow small children to watch it (they can always watch it when they grow older and understand more of the historical context around the movie), it would certainly not be censored for the reason of those few moments of nudity...you would cut the nudity scene and let them see all those brains blown out?
PS. By "you" I probably mean the FCC, as I'm not offended at all by the posts I'm replying too...
And since when did low tax rates guarantee a good life? What use is really money anyway? Aren't those used exactly for buying a good life?
We could have low taxes as well, it's just to vote for the parties that say they want to lower the taxes. There's nothing in our system preventing it, as soon as such a party get enough votes the taxes will be lowered. But the majority of the population actually votes for parties that are rising the taxes, because they realize that what counts when it comes down to it is quality of life, not the numbers on your bank account.
I'm Norwegian BTW, and I like it. If I were offered access to the US and a really well-payed job, I wouldn't even consider it for a second.
Actually, they started out only supporting QT, and then decided they'd use the same framework in future Windows versions of Delphi and also add GTK support. You can easily (well, it's a lot of work, I mean easy as in it's all nicely documented) add your own widget lib too.
And they have a special agreement with TrollTech which gives you a license when you buy Kylix. Which is why they have such a high price I think. The GPL version, which can use the GPL version of QT, will be much cheaper. Perhaps even free as some other person here pointed out.
Americans don't really need region-free players as the sole purpose of region free players in Europe is to play American sone 1 films...
Of course there's Japanese anime but in my opinion the market for that isn't all that big...not when you compare it with the whole European market for Hollywood DVDs.
No market, no goods. That's why you don't have region-free DVD players.
This was the issue I was trying to point out in my last paragraph.
Since patents are necesarry if the medical comapanies are going to have a reason to research, in my opinion it really boils down to a good old capitalism/socialism debate.
I think money will find it's way to medicine research no matter what happens because it's so crucial to modern life. However, instead of being a long time investment like it is today, it would only be about pure donation. On the other hand, all the medicines would get a lot cheaper, so the whoever is buying medicines today would a lot more money for research. For instance, in many countries the state fund a great part of the medicine cost to get the prices down at an acceptable level. That money could go to funding research instead...
Personally I feel that health is more important than computer software and that it's more important to have "open source" medicine as well, BUT I can't see that happen anytime soon, the companies gets more and more powerful every second and abolishing medicine patents is only hypotethical.
What should have been done is to lift the patents in critical cases. The UN has an international permission to list patents in special cases when it is important enough, and I really feel that should have been done in South America and other countries where AIDS will not only cause personal disaster but undermine an already terrible economy.
at least something like the formula for Asprin is patented so that I don't die..
I think you've got something wrong...
Example: In South Africa people die because the AIDS medicine (actually, medicine lifting some of the symptoms of AIDS, as you'll know there isn't a cure) is patented. Local companies tried to produce cheap AIDS medicine, but got sued for it by the company inventing it on the grounds of patenting. If they had continued production FN would have taken action against South America. So now South-Americans die because they don't have the money to pay for the way-too-expensive medicine.
On the other hand, perhaps those medicines wouldn't have been invented in the first place if the company didn't see a golden opportunity to patent it and make big money...*shrug*
You can't copy books. It's against the law. You can lend CDs to a friend. Even if you're perhaps not allowed to do that legally (IANAL), that would probably be the case for books too. They suffer from the same laws. Books are also intellectual property, it's just that it's not that that big an industry and therefore people don't care as much.
You can remix your CD tracks all you want same as you can scrible in a book. As long as you don't play it in public (you can't copy books to the public either).
It's the technology behind that is patented, not the concept of using keys to charge up the batteries? If so it could be easy to circumvent in some way.
...is what I miss most in the current filesystems. Currently, I need to set up my filetypes again and again, Apache, gmc, you name it, and I really think there should be a better solution for it. Anyone else feel that deciding filetypes by extension isn't necesarry the optimal solution?
What if filetype was included as an attribute for each file in the filesystem itself? I guess changes would need to be done to the actual Linux system and just not the FS, but implementing it in the FS is at least a start.
Example: I've got a set of HTML I'm currently editing. I change their type to HTML-edit instead of HTML so that when I double-click I open it in a text editor instead of a browser...
I believe it could be used for lots of other stuff too...
In case you hadn't noticed, minidiscs are amazingly popular many places in Europe, it's just in US it's a failure. I know of perhaps 30 people with minidiscs (not just Sony, but also Sharp and one have a Phillips I think...)
Basically, you create particle accelerators to prove that the nature actually acts the way our mathematical models presume it does...running simulations on a 3D card really doesn't prove anything as it will always work after our mathematical models...after all humans program it!
We have no way of knowing for absolutely sure that black holdes works the way the 3D cards say...I once read that you could travel through dimensions/time through a black hole. I'm not saying you can, I'm saying thatyou certainly can't prove it (or the opposite) by programming in OpenGL.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bite...
Ignoring the fact that this system has balanced itself naturally for billions of years before humans appeared
Of course the system will balance itself. Nature always restores itself. The question is whether or not we humans have a place in that future. I don't believe humans has the power to destroy the nature once and for all (at least with any of our current means) but we certainly have the means to destroy ourselves (not saying global warming is one of the means to wipe ourself out though, don't believe so personally...I believe it is existant and that we will have to adapt to it though).
Ignore the obviously farcical *facts* about "global cooling" and a imminent "New Ice Age".
You're missing something important...when people who studies ice ages talks about imminent, they are talking over ranges of thousands of years. People studying global warming interprets imminent as mere hundreds.
BTW, in Europe we are already seeing the effects of global warming, as southern Europe gets less and less rain and northern Europe gets more and more rain (our methorologists say it's the CO2, of course you are free to distrust them).
Well in this particular case I think the plot is pretty much given away anyway?
Everyone, please read the books first!! There is no chance of the film being better than the books, and if you see the film first you have spoiled the plot for the books. It's much better to spoil the plot for the films. (IMHO of course)
The movie industry is different because the movies aren't launched at theatres in other countries than US until it has finished playing in the US (due to the high production cost of the film rolls, and the translation/dubbing/texting involved). So, if they didn't have the zones, people could buy the DVDs before the movie had been shown at the theatres and so they would loose a lot of money on that.
Because, if the rest of the world followed your standards it would take about a year until we had polluted so much that the pole caps melted and, well, people in your coast cities wouldn't have an office to drive to anymore (not to mention your gas prices once the entire American economy foundation is drowned in water).
Are you serious? MSVC 6 has the worst template support I've ever encountered on (modern) compilers. GCC does on the other hand allow you to do about everything in the standard with templates these days.
Examples? Libsgic++ (ligsigc.sourceforge.net) had to be dumbed down and partially rewritten in the MSVC 6 port. I can give you an example right here as well (which I've encountered myself):
template [class C, class T, T (C::*funcPtr)()]
class someClass {};
This code won't compile for me in VC, if anyone got it working please tell me how...I fear it can't be done though. If anyone is wondering, this example would be used like this:
someClass[MyClass, int, &MyClass::GetSomeInt()] myVar;
Meaning, it takes a class, a type, and a pointer to a function in the class returning that type. If you pass in the pointer in the constructor instead you loose four bytes of run-time memory just on this, which isn't crucial but merely irritating. (And the class would only be instantiated once for each different T anyway so no higher code size either).
([ and ] is supposed to be sharper, not feeling like writing HTML right now, sorry...)
This really puzzles me...
In Schindler's List, you have brains blown out, people shot and piled up in stacks and burnt...in short extreme violence. The only thing people discuss about the movie is a ten second scene with a little nudity? When the rest of the film revolves around killing?
I'm not against Schindler's list, it's an important movie and as stated previously, brings up important historical issues. But, if I were to disallow small children to watch it (they can always watch it when they grow older and understand more of the historical context around the movie), it would certainly not be censored for the reason of those few moments of nudity...you would cut the nudity scene and let them see all those brains blown out?
PS. By "you" I probably mean the FCC, as I'm not offended at all by the posts I'm replying too...
And since when did low tax rates guarantee a good life? What use is really money anyway? Aren't those used exactly for buying a good life?
We could have low taxes as well, it's just to vote for the parties that say they want to lower the taxes. There's nothing in our system preventing it, as soon as such a party get enough votes the taxes will be lowered. But the majority of the population actually votes for parties that are rising the taxes, because they realize that what counts when it comes down to it is quality of life, not the numbers on your bank account.
I'm Norwegian BTW, and I like it. If I were offered access to the US and a really well-payed job, I wouldn't even consider it for a second.
The funny thing is that the "me too" post was moderated higher than the original...
Something tells me you aren't familiar with the square-millimeter unit? If this is humour then I guess you're excused in some way...
I guess this is a bit redundant but people keep on complaining about the price tag...
Actually, they started out only supporting QT, and then decided they'd use the same framework in future Windows versions of Delphi and also add GTK support. You can easily (well, it's a lot of work, I mean easy as in it's all nicely documented) add your own widget lib too.
And they have a special agreement with TrollTech which gives you a license when you buy Kylix. Which is why they have such a high price I think. The GPL version, which can use the GPL version of QT, will be much cheaper. Perhaps even free as some other person here pointed out.
Americans don't really need region-free players as the sole purpose of region free players in Europe is to play American sone 1 films...
Of course there's Japanese anime but in my opinion the market for that isn't all that big...not when you compare it with the whole European market for Hollywood DVDs.
No market, no goods. That's why you don't have region-free DVD players.
I was too tired when I wrote this it seems...
It's South Africa. The nation, not the continent. And FN is supposed to be UN
This was the issue I was trying to point out in my last paragraph.
Since patents are necesarry if the medical comapanies are going to have a reason to research, in my opinion it really boils down to a good old capitalism/socialism debate.
I think money will find it's way to medicine research no matter what happens because it's so crucial to modern life. However, instead of being a long time investment like it is today, it would only be about pure donation. On the other hand, all the medicines would get a lot cheaper, so the whoever is buying medicines today would a lot more money for research. For instance, in many countries the state fund a great part of the medicine cost to get the prices down at an acceptable level. That money could go to funding research instead...
Personally I feel that health is more important than computer software and that it's more important to have "open source" medicine as well, BUT I can't see that happen anytime soon, the companies gets more and more powerful every second and abolishing medicine patents is only hypotethical.
What should have been done is to lift the patents in critical cases. The UN has an international permission to list patents in special cases when it is important enough, and I really feel that should have been done in South America and other countries where AIDS will not only cause personal disaster but undermine an already terrible economy.
Ouch! Sorry about that. FN is supposed to be UN!!!
at least something like the formula for Asprin is patented so that I don't die..
I think you've got something wrong...
Example: In South Africa people die because the AIDS medicine (actually, medicine lifting some of the symptoms of AIDS, as you'll know there isn't a cure) is patented. Local companies tried to produce cheap AIDS medicine, but got sued for it by the company inventing it on the grounds of patenting. If they had continued production FN would have taken action against South America. So now South-Americans die because they don't have the money to pay for the way-too-expensive medicine.
On the other hand, perhaps those medicines wouldn't have been invented in the first place if the company didn't see a golden opportunity to patent it and make big money...*shrug*
You can't copy books. It's against the law. You can lend CDs to a friend. Even if you're perhaps not allowed to do that legally (IANAL), that would probably be the case for books too. They suffer from the same laws. Books are also intellectual property, it's just that it's not that that big an industry and therefore people don't care as much.
You can remix your CD tracks all you want same as you can scrible in a book. As long as you don't play it in public (you can't copy books to the public either).
...which saves us from slashdotting the newspaper.
It's the technology behind that is patented, not the concept of using keys to charge up the batteries? If so it could be easy to circumvent in some way.
...is what I miss most in the current filesystems. Currently, I need to set up my filetypes again and again, Apache, gmc, you name it, and I really think there should be a better solution for it. Anyone else feel that deciding filetypes by extension isn't necesarry the optimal solution? What if filetype was included as an attribute for each file in the filesystem itself? I guess changes would need to be done to the actual Linux system and just not the FS, but implementing it in the FS is at least a start. Example: I've got a set of HTML I'm currently editing. I change their type to HTML-edit instead of HTML so that when I double-click I open it in a text editor instead of a browser... I believe it could be used for lots of other stuff too...
In case you hadn't noticed, minidiscs are amazingly popular many places in Europe, it's just in US it's a failure. I know of perhaps 30 people with minidiscs (not just Sony, but also Sharp and one have a Phillips I think...)
Why isn't this moderated up???
I love Pascal too. The property keyword is something I really feel missing in C++. But then again C++ has operator overloading. Which is a GOOD thing!
Basically, you create particle accelerators to prove that the nature actually acts the way our mathematical models presume it does...running simulations on a 3D card really doesn't prove anything as it will always work after our mathematical models...after all humans program it!
We have no way of knowing for absolutely sure that black holdes works the way the 3D cards say...I once read that you could travel through dimensions/time through a black hole. I'm not saying you can, I'm saying thatyou certainly can't prove it (or the opposite) by programming in OpenGL.
So what you are really saying is that Microsoft is the world largest producer of DoS?