There's more to Australia than crocodile men, it's spelt aborigine, we'll forgive you for calling it Ayers Rock but a big thumbs up for using the metric measurement system.
Actually the soul originally had no time limit but a daemon corrupted the original soul and all derivative souls. The original creator of the soul sent a bug fix but only a few people have applied the patch.
You have just proven that at least one person in Australia is a moron...
As opposed to the guy in Nashville who we had believe that we all have kangaroos as pets, only have paved roads in Sydney and Melbourne, that we watch out all the time for crocs and killer koalas and go walkabouts for 3 months once every year. Even worse was when I was asked how long it took to drive to America.
Sad to say that a certain proportion (hopefully smaller than I think) of Americans know that the rest of the world exists but know absolutely nothing about it. Hell your own President thinks they speak Mexican south of the border (and from memory Al Gore thought they spoke Latin in Latin America).
It's like working with boolean values in shared memory. SCO sets it to true in this some nearly unbelievable parallel universe but some universal guardian process who has access to all shared memory keeps setting it to false. Once again the forces of good prevail.
you're under the impression that the U.S. is here to solve world hunger ( or at least feed it )... it isn't!
Hell no, then they wouldn't stand a chance.
it's the presidents job to do things that benifit americans. if the "tech" we get from this only helps us
True, but try explaining that to a retired guy whose 401K has just vanished, who can't get good hospital treatment and can only afford to send his kid to a poor university. On public education and health and on social security you guys suck compared to other western countries. Perhaps your President should try fixing that before having some crater on Mars named after him.
food shortages in botswana or zimbabwe are NOT our problem.
That's good, keep it up. It is attitudes like that which have got us into the trouble we currently are in.
By the way, most famines are caused not by drought but by economic and political
Furthermore, if you take a look into the history of how third world nations got into so much debt you'd see the blood on our hands. If your God-fearing nation had cancelled third world debt in the jubilee year of 2000 then Africa and other places would be well on their way to getting back on their feet.
Nope, not really. A great advancement for those that can actually afford to benefit from the technology but that is in most cases less than 10% of the earth's population.
Great advancements for most of mankind would be three square meals and a life expectency over 60 years.
Once again you failed to read my complete post, not surprising really. I did not complain that the scale didn't take into account the climates of other people. I rebutted that the original's post notion that 0 and 100F are the absolute hottest and coldest that a bulk of the population experience.
Besides, both scales were developed in northern Europe (Netherlands and Sweden) where they don't even get anywhere near 100F, while at least Amsterdam (where Farhenheit lived) doesn't get temperatures as low as 0 either.
So neither India or America were taken into consideration with the scale. You claim that you know what the scales are based on yet you continue to drive some Us vs Them argument.
In case you forgot to read all of my post, both temperature scales were based on either water properties and/or human body properties. These tend to work pretty much the same all over the world. Amazing isn't it.
I've never seen anyone say 'Hi, I'm an ignorant, arrogant American' quite like you have.
I've been inspired to rip your argument apart bit by bit. So here goes.
0 F is roughly the coldest temperature people most people experience in and 100 F the hottest (obviously there are greater extremes, but we're talking about the bulk of the population). 0 F is basically really cold and 100 F is really hot.
India's population tips the scales at just over 1 billion, not a small number of people I would say. They generally experience temperatures between 5 and 40 degrees Celcius. The temperatures I experience here in Australia are much the same. In fact people living in Darwin would rug up in temperatures that I feel a pleasantly hot. Basing a scale on what one man at a certain place defines as really cold and really hot is not just fairly arbitrary, it's totally arbitrary. Just as well Mr. Fahrenheit actually used a fair amount science for his minimum.
Ovens also happen to work very well on the fahrenheit scale (200 F - 500 F).
Is that why my oven never works properly. I'll have to get a Fahrenheit oven instead.
Celsius is just plain silly. Basing temperature on a random molecule's states at a specific atmospheric pressure is fairly arbitrary and has little to do with the human condition.
Fahrenheit was actually based on on a random molecule's state at a specific atmospheric pressure with the addition of salt as well as the temperature of a healthy and fit human. Gee, which is more arbitrary. In fact the original scale has changed since originally body temperature was 96 but since pegging water's boiling point at 212 body temperature is now at 98.6. So Fahrenheit is just as dependent on water's boiling and freezing points as Celcius.
In fact many people believe that the scale was chosen to make the mathematics easy. 32 (water's freezing point) and 96 (originally body temperature) are both divisible by a relatively high amount of numbers.
Kelvin makes sense for science, but little else.
You seem to say this simply because this is what science uses. You do realise that Kelvin and Celcius use the same scale only with differing zero points?
There is still potential for a singers original work to make money even after death. It is in effect an asset and one that should rightly be controlled by the singers estate upon death.
A plumber usually only gets paid on a hourly work basis. SO if he is no longer working then obviously there is no chance of making money after his death.
It's just the different natures of the two professions. The plumber has the security of knowing that he will get paid for the hours of work he completed in a day. The singer put's in hours of work and at the end of the time (months) has to cross fingers hoping that it will reap rewards.
But you at least do make a valid point that reforming the laws would still leave them there to perform the function of promoting progress. I do however see a problem with the person's lifetime being the limit.
Here in Australia the hottest local muscial artist is also suffering from a possibly fatal disease. Now we all hope she'll make it through and I think she will, but just say she didn't. Does all her work then go into the public domain? What if she were married and had kids? Shouldn't her estate get to benefit from her work according to her will?
I do think they could come up with a more intricate formula for length of copyright than life + 50/70.
I think the better question might be what is left to hinder it?
Not everyone is going to gladly put time and money into a project, be it software or a music album, that will reap them next to no monetary reward. I've got bills and a mortgage, I need to put food on the table and wouldn't mind some creature comforts now and then (and I won't sneeze at a tropical holiday). Am I to survive on the warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that all my work is in the public domain for all to enjoy?
Free (as in liberty) software, musical, literature and scientific projects are great, don't get me wrong. And yes, especially with free software you can see just as much if not more innovation than closed software projects. But forcing everyone into that model is economically infeasible and a lot of great ideas would not see the light of day because it would not be worth it to develop them.
Copyright is restricted. The current life plus 70 years was a step in the wrong direction from the original life plus 50 years. But your suggestion, and I know it was meant only as example, of 5 years flat is too big a jump in the right direction.
You've got to remember that the entertainment industry is a very special case of copyright. It has a very large consumer base and a tight fisted distribution arm which has abused copyright laws for their own financial gain. But the war must be between the consumer and the distributors. Relaxing or repealing copyright laws attacks the rights of the producer just to get at the distributors. I for one do not see this as acceptable collateral damage.
Furthermore, what about other industries that rely on copyright. My place of employee produces specialised software models and has been doing so for over 20 years. Our models out perform all of our competitors. But if we had no copyright laws to protect our software why would we bother developing and fine tuning our models when all our hard work could simply be taken and used by our competitors.
Copyright gives producers a guarentee that they can be compensated for the work they have done if they so wish. I believe this guarentee provides an environment that supports innovation.
So we repeal copyright. What is left to 'promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries'?
I would not be able to give you a good answer to that, one that would to the theory justice anyway. Most of my legal knowledge comes from helping my wife get through law school. Perhaps google will help you out.
Slashdot Mirror
There's more to Australia than crocodile men, it's spelt aborigine, we'll forgive you for calling it Ayers Rock but a big thumbs up for using the metric measurement system.
Actually the soul originally had no time limit but a daemon corrupted the original soul and all derivative souls. The original creator of the soul sent a bug fix but only a few people have applied the patch.
As opposed to the guy in Nashville who we had believe that we all have kangaroos as pets, only have paved roads in Sydney and Melbourne, that we watch out all the time for crocs and killer koalas and go walkabouts for 3 months once every year. Even worse was when I was asked how long it took to drive to America.
Sad to say that a certain proportion (hopefully smaller than I think) of Americans know that the rest of the world exists but know absolutely nothing about it. Hell your own President thinks they speak Mexican south of the border (and from memory Al Gore thought they spoke Latin in Latin America).
Is this the new way to get tech support from /. for something you're having trouble with?
It's like working with boolean values in shared memory. SCO sets it to true in this some nearly unbelievable parallel universe but some universal guardian process who has access to all shared memory keeps setting it to false. Once again the forces of good prevail.
No use working on Linux anymore guys, or any GPL'ed project for that matter. These projects are not driven by profit and are therefore not innovative.
Sorry to bring you the bad news.
Should we have a -1 Googless for people who forget to google for the correct information and just rattle of some 'facts' from the top of their head.
Hell no, then they wouldn't stand a chance.
it's the presidents job to do things that benifit americans. if the "tech" we get from this only helps usTrue, but try explaining that to a retired guy whose 401K has just vanished, who can't get good hospital treatment and can only afford to send his kid to a poor university. On public education and health and on social security you guys suck compared to other western countries. Perhaps your President should try fixing that before having some crater on Mars named after him.
food shortages in botswana or zimbabwe are NOT our problem.That's good, keep it up. It is attitudes like that which have got us into the trouble we currently are in.
By the way, most famines are caused not by drought but by economic and political
Furthermore, if you take a look into the history of how third world nations got into so much debt you'd see the blood on our hands. If your God-fearing nation had cancelled third world debt in the jubilee year of 2000 then Africa and other places would be well on their way to getting back on their feet.
Did I say that? I simply said that space technology has not been beneficial for most of mankind.
Are you suggesting that space exploration will help solve world hunger?
What a great advancement for mankind!
Nope, not really. A great advancement for those that can actually afford to benefit from the technology but that is in most cases less than 10% of the earth's population.
Great advancements for most of mankind would be three square meals and a life expectency over 60 years.
I believe that at least in old English law you actually had to work the land and fence it.
In the web case it seems it was just forwarding on to some other site. You would hardly say that the site was developed.
Once again you failed to read my complete post, not surprising really. I did not complain that the scale didn't take into account the climates of other people. I rebutted that the original's post notion that 0 and 100F are the absolute hottest and coldest that a bulk of the population experience.
Besides, both scales were developed in northern Europe (Netherlands and Sweden) where they don't even get anywhere near 100F, while at least Amsterdam (where Farhenheit lived) doesn't get temperatures as low as 0 either.
So neither India or America were taken into consideration with the scale. You claim that you know what the scales are based on yet you continue to drive some Us vs Them argument.
In case you forgot to read all of my post, both temperature scales were based on either water properties and/or human body properties. These tend to work pretty much the same all over the world. Amazing isn't it.
Oh I tried to rip into the idiot but you did it so much better. Please teach me your ways.
I've never seen anyone say 'Hi, I'm an ignorant, arrogant American' quite like you have.
I've been inspired to rip your argument apart bit by bit. So here goes.
0 F is roughly the coldest temperature people most people experience in and 100 F the hottest (obviously there are greater extremes, but we're talking about the bulk of the population). 0 F is basically really cold and 100 F is really hot.
India's population tips the scales at just over 1 billion, not a small number of people I would say. They generally experience temperatures between 5 and 40 degrees Celcius. The temperatures I experience here in Australia are much the same. In fact people living in Darwin would rug up in temperatures that I feel a pleasantly hot. Basing a scale on what one man at a certain place defines as really cold and really hot is not just fairly arbitrary, it's totally arbitrary. Just as well Mr. Fahrenheit actually used a fair amount science for his minimum.
Ovens also happen to work very well on the fahrenheit scale (200 F - 500 F).
Is that why my oven never works properly. I'll have to get a Fahrenheit oven instead.
Celsius is just plain silly. Basing temperature on a random molecule's states at a specific atmospheric pressure is fairly arbitrary and has little to do with the human condition.
Fahrenheit was actually based on on a random molecule's state at a specific atmospheric pressure with the addition of salt as well as the temperature of a healthy and fit human. Gee, which is more arbitrary. In fact the original scale has changed since originally body temperature was 96 but since pegging water's boiling point at 212 body temperature is now at 98.6. So Fahrenheit is just as dependent on water's boiling and freezing points as Celcius.
In fact many people believe that the scale was chosen to make the mathematics easy. 32 (water's freezing point) and 96 (originally body temperature) are both divisible by a relatively high amount of numbers.
Kelvin makes sense for science, but little else.
You seem to say this simply because this is what science uses. You do realise that Kelvin and Celcius use the same scale only with differing zero points?
Someone mod parent +1 Funny
Well I visited Canberra zoo and you could probably get close enough to touch one of the penguins.
There is still potential for a singers original work to make money even after death. It is in effect an asset and one that should rightly be controlled by the singers estate upon death.
A plumber usually only gets paid on a hourly work basis. SO if he is no longer working then obviously there is no chance of making money after his death.
It's just the different natures of the two professions. The plumber has the security of knowing that he will get paid for the hours of work he completed in a day. The singer put's in hours of work and at the end of the time (months) has to cross fingers hoping that it will reap rewards.
And don't forget the ACT is the home of Tux! There is even a sign about Linux at the penguin exhibit at the zoo.
Wasn't it just a flood of Linux license payments?
Also interesting that in Shakespeare's time they used to dismember real people alive or dead on stage. Funny how things change over time.
Actually the grandparent did say repeal.
But you at least do make a valid point that reforming the laws would still leave them there to perform the function of promoting progress. I do however see a problem with the person's lifetime being the limit.
Here in Australia the hottest local muscial artist is also suffering from a possibly fatal disease. Now we all hope she'll make it through and I think she will, but just say she didn't. Does all her work then go into the public domain? What if she were married and had kids? Shouldn't her estate get to benefit from her work according to her will?
I do think they could come up with a more intricate formula for length of copyright than life + 50/70.
I think the better question might be what is left to hinder it?
Not everyone is going to gladly put time and money into a project, be it software or a music album, that will reap them next to no monetary reward. I've got bills and a mortgage, I need to put food on the table and wouldn't mind some creature comforts now and then (and I won't sneeze at a tropical holiday). Am I to survive on the warm fuzzy feeling of knowing that all my work is in the public domain for all to enjoy?
Free (as in liberty) software, musical, literature and scientific projects are great, don't get me wrong. And yes, especially with free software you can see just as much if not more innovation than closed software projects. But forcing everyone into that model is economically infeasible and a lot of great ideas would not see the light of day because it would not be worth it to develop them.
Copyright is restricted. The current life plus 70 years was a step in the wrong direction from the original life plus 50 years. But your suggestion, and I know it was meant only as example, of 5 years flat is too big a jump in the right direction.
You've got to remember that the entertainment industry is a very special case of copyright. It has a very large consumer base and a tight fisted distribution arm which has abused copyright laws for their own financial gain. But the war must be between the consumer and the distributors. Relaxing or repealing copyright laws attacks the rights of the producer just to get at the distributors. I for one do not see this as acceptable collateral damage.
Furthermore, what about other industries that rely on copyright. My place of employee produces specialised software models and has been doing so for over 20 years. Our models out perform all of our competitors. But if we had no copyright laws to protect our software why would we bother developing and fine tuning our models when all our hard work could simply be taken and used by our competitors.
Copyright gives producers a guarentee that they can be compensated for the work they have done if they so wish. I believe this guarentee provides an environment that supports innovation.
So we repeal copyright. What is left to 'promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries'?
I would not be able to give you a good answer to that, one that would to the theory justice anyway. Most of my legal knowledge comes from helping my wife get through law school. Perhaps google will help you out.