The thing is, it isnt neccessarily Android that infringes. It may well be the handset makers implementation, maybe even hardware. Note Microsoft hasnt sued Google yet AFAIK. This makes it not Googles problem.
Over 300 people have died (not huge, I know, but still not small... and the fact that I can say with all honesty that 300 deaths seems small says volumes by itself), homes and lives are ruined, ancient temples are threatened... and what Americans are most worried about is the fact that they have to pay an extra 20-30% for hard drives. Just to put this in perspective. TFA does at least have the decency to issue a "our hearts go out blah blah" at the end.
Just watch, the next story will be something about Occupy Wall Street and people protesting those huge companies and all the cheap goods they make. Really, Americans (and most of the rest of the world) really need to look closely at the consumerism that has overcome our culture to the point people dying seems far less significant than money. I realize this is a tech/ nerd site (so it wouldn't focus on the deaths anyways), but still, this is the second story about this with no mention (as far as I remember) about all the other effects this flooding is having.
"TDL4, a rootkit that helps build a powerful botnet, is pegged by security vendor ESET as one of the most sophisticated pieces of malware in the world.
That we know about.
Stuxnet looked pretty mundane, on the surface. Anyone else wonder how many more such super-sophisticated malware are out there that we have no clue exists?
Copyright is good. Linux uses it, news sources use it, our society practically requires it to function properly. Good copyright, that is, copyright that promotes the progress of science and the useful arts. Not the life+70 (or whatever the hell it is now, I can't even keep track) bullshit we have now. That? That hinders science and progress and promotes stagnation. That's all that does. Piracy? Well, it's a counter-active force to a broken system, which is itself broken conceptually. It is a practical, if unfortunate, necessity.
To all media companies out there: give us what we want (not broken with DRM) and when we want it (not 9 months to 3 years later), and you'll see piracy decline significantly. Oh, and make new innovative product rather than coasting off the work of an earlier genius (Disney, that comment is directed precisely at you.)
I suppose this is too much to ask. So, then, is paying for the same old recycled crap the media produces. So, people won't.
While Muller specifically states the results don't take AGW off the table (at all), the study found a strong correlation with sea surface temperature in the North Atlantic (which they suspect follows a 65-70 year cycle).
I've always felt people why straight up deny there could be climate change are, well, fools. But to question the cause is not at all foolish. At best, all we can establish is correlation, not causation. Given the number of factors involved in the Earth's climate, I am skeptical about any explanation for the temperature variance. We simply do not have enough information to establish that. Yet. As I say elsewhere, we should obviously move away from fossil fuels like the plague, but you don't need AGW to know that.
Because a lot of the skeptics do want to say there is no warming trend. If they can do that, then they can say no change is needed. They are wrong to approach it as they do, whatever the reason. Scientific data is just that. If the data indicates the earth is warming, politics and scandal won't change that. Also, it makes good news which is pretty much the real reason it turned out to be so "huge" (it really wasn't.)
But as OP says, the cause of the warming is still not conclusively pinned down. Yes there is a correlation with atmospheric CO2 emissions, but correlation is only that. Whether that is really the cause, or whether it is just the Earth doing what it does... no one can really say. I firmly believe we should move away from fossil fuels for a large number of reasons in any case (whether or not AGW is happening), so for me the point is actually somewhat moot. It isn't for all the "green" companies, though, which receive massive funding from the government based on the premise of AGW.
Well, he compares a clean install of 8 against a clean install of 7, so no it doesn't leave that out. How well 8 handles the additional load is still a good question, though.
Maybe. RIMs response seems to indicate they think that the fields are far enough apart that it isn't a trademark violation, and they may be right. An OS vs a database/ toolset/ language? Just being in the tech field doesn't mean there is a trademark violation.
A search on the USPTO shows several "BBX" tms, (including BASIS), several of which are in the tech field (on is even for a telecommunications suite). This took me ~45 seconds. I'm guessing they did the same. I think RIM definitely intended to say that the terms aren't in the same specific field and are therefore not confusing. Actual practice may prove them wrong, which would really suck for them.
Quite frankly, solving these problems today should not be hard. At most a literature search should bring you the algorithmics. But what is hard is doing good, maintainable interfaces, writing high quality code, having a good design and a good architecture, having working defense-in-depth against attacks, etc. None of which a brilliant person without in-depth CS education and significant experience can do. This just keeps up the atrocious code quality responsible for so many data leaks and successful attacks. It also explains the high cost of software.
This is the wrong approach on so many levels...
It does, however, go very far in explaining Facebook's current state.
Should be: all the board members are either unfailingly honest, compulsively deceptive, or massive trolls. Might actually have real world applications.
Ads, most likely. Adblock (in Opera at least and I think Firefox too) seems to allow you to go right through the paywall (although it did block me twice. Weird.)
Tesla was a genius, and in the quote you gave I believe he was right... but also wrong. Space cannot curve if space is nothing. But space is not nothing. The work of people like Riemann and Lobachevski have shown that space can in fact possess properties inherently. This makes a kind of sense: when we talk about 5 feet of space, that space has an objective reality and possesses some property (namely, dimension) that allows use to quantify it. Einstein deals with this question somewhat BTW.
Interestingly enough, if you go back to the philosophy of people like Aristotle, "matter" can possess any level of properties, including (in theory) insensate but quantitative dimensionality (i.e. "empty" space). So space could be "material" in this original sense, allowing for curvature, yet be "empty", in the sense that it lacks tangibility (which is really what we mean by "empty" anyways).
I think it can be stated much simpler than that, actually. The only accurate predictions of future technology that can be made are those for technology that we can build at this very moment. So, the US Navy can make reasonable estimates to when rail-gun technology will be in use on their ships because they have working rail-guns, but no one can say when fusion power will be deployed. This is simply because science cannot predict it's own discoveries. And if it requires something we haven't discovered yet, than no accurate estimate whatsoever can be made. A guess, sure, but that is all.
Right now the only way to get serious amounts of RAM is to go with XEON or Opteron. And those chips are pretty expensive without offering a whole lot of extra, or event less computing power (assuming single socket).
Yep, that would be the point. You don't think Intel would make server-level RAM capability available for less than server-level costs, do you?
Sort of. This sounds like a pretty difficult attack vector, so if someone is using this kind of attack against you, you can bet creating profiles for Dvorak won't be an issue for them. Not to say there aren't good reasons to switch to Dvorak anyways, just that this isn't one of them.
Note that this technique can't be used to recover passwords, since it is essentially a dictionary attack. Unless you use a password that can be broken by a dictionary attack, in which case you shouldn't be working on anything anyone would want to steal. Oh, and keeping your phone in your pocket also circumvents it.
Habitats fabricated in free space can provide thousands of times more habitable surface area than Earth.
Sure they can. At some impressive energy cost (remember the gravity well, it sucks pretty hard). It would be much easier to make floating / submerged habitats than ones in outer space.
Until you come up with essentially unlimited, cheap energy, space is not going to be the place for the huddled masses yearning to be free.
It's too bad there isn't a massive effectively limitless energy source somewhere pretty near us in space./sarcasm
Yes, getting to space is expensive now. The thing is, the actual energy cost to get into space is much less than you would think. Here is an interesting comparison. At ~7.7km/s (escape velocity is ~11km/s) and 277 tonnes, the ISS has less orbital kinetic energy (orbital kinetic energy=1/2 gravitational) potential energy than that contained by the fuel in an Airbus A380. Only ~100 times that which the average car in the US used in 2000. A single decent power plant can produce that much energy in a day (actually, a 1000MW power plant will produce ~10 times that. In one day.)
The trouble is, rockets are not very efficient and extremely heavy. And expensive to build. And, well, you're launching yourself into space on a pile of burning extremely combustible material. If we can find a better way to get into space (space elevators would be awesome), going to space won't be a problem. A single power plant could lift an ISS into space every day (figuring ~10% efficiency). Yes, spaceflight could be the answer. Not terribly soon, but yes.
It's more than 4 months old. I've been using Google SSL searches since last summer some time. Basically, all this news means is that Google feels their SSL search is ready for wider deployment.
Yes, good point. Interestingly, there are various ways our universe "prefers" certain directions to others. TFA points out that amino acids tend to form left-handed. AFAIK no one really knows why. And of course there is the whole matter-antimatter thing (there should, by symmetry, be equal amounts of both. There isn't, as far was we can tell.)
As far as saying whether the universe is objectively spinning, I think you still can under relativity (we can, for instance, say without doubt that the Earth is spinning), but even for such spinning points the generalized laws of the universe still hold valid. They don't under Newtonian physics or special relativity for that matter. The essential statement of the general theory is that the laws of motion are equally valid in all Guassian coordinate systems, however we can still say that certain objects are in a gravitational field of some sort and distinguish the kind with some effort (rotational, massive, or uniform accelerative). So come to think of it, you were actually right about the objectivity (I think), I was just nitpicking. Sorry:).
To nitpick further: your head and feet do experience different accelerations in a gravitational field. Gravity is 1/R^2, remember? You just don't notice it because of the size involved. You wouldn't on a sufficiently large disc (such as the universe) either.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is, it isnt neccessarily Android that infringes. It may well be the handset makers implementation, maybe even hardware. Note Microsoft hasnt sued Google yet AFAIK. This makes it not Googles problem.
Over 300 people have died (not huge, I know, but still not small... and the fact that I can say with all honesty that 300 deaths seems small says volumes by itself), homes and lives are ruined, ancient temples are threatened... and what Americans are most worried about is the fact that they have to pay an extra 20-30% for hard drives. Just to put this in perspective. TFA does at least have the decency to issue a "our hearts go out blah blah" at the end.
Just watch, the next story will be something about Occupy Wall Street and people protesting those huge companies and all the cheap goods they make. Really, Americans (and most of the rest of the world) really need to look closely at the consumerism that has overcome our culture to the point people dying seems far less significant than money. I realize this is a tech/ nerd site (so it wouldn't focus on the deaths anyways), but still, this is the second story about this with no mention (as far as I remember) about all the other effects this flooding is having.
"TDL4, a rootkit that helps build a powerful botnet, is pegged by security vendor ESET as one of the most sophisticated pieces of malware in the world.
That we know about.
Stuxnet looked pretty mundane, on the surface. Anyone else wonder how many more such super-sophisticated malware are out there that we have no clue exists?
I included that (mentally) under the "what" part, but yes, that too.
Copyright is good. Linux uses it, news sources use it, our society practically requires it to function properly. Good copyright, that is, copyright that promotes the progress of science and the useful arts. Not the life+70 (or whatever the hell it is now, I can't even keep track) bullshit we have now. That? That hinders science and progress and promotes stagnation. That's all that does. Piracy? Well, it's a counter-active force to a broken system, which is itself broken conceptually. It is a practical, if unfortunate, necessity.
To all media companies out there: give us what we want (not broken with DRM) and when we want it (not 9 months to 3 years later), and you'll see piracy decline significantly. Oh, and make new innovative product rather than coasting off the work of an earlier genius (Disney, that comment is directed precisely at you.)
I suppose this is too much to ask. So, then, is paying for the same old recycled crap the media produces. So, people won't.
While Muller specifically states the results don't take AGW off the table (at all), the study found a strong correlation with sea surface temperature in the North Atlantic (which they suspect follows a 65-70 year cycle).
I've always felt people why straight up deny there could be climate change are, well, fools. But to question the cause is not at all foolish. At best, all we can establish is correlation, not causation. Given the number of factors involved in the Earth's climate, I am skeptical about any explanation for the temperature variance. We simply do not have enough information to establish that. Yet. As I say elsewhere, we should obviously move away from fossil fuels like the plague, but you don't need AGW to know that.
Because a lot of the skeptics do want to say there is no warming trend. If they can do that, then they can say no change is needed. They are wrong to approach it as they do, whatever the reason. Scientific data is just that. If the data indicates the earth is warming, politics and scandal won't change that. Also, it makes good news which is pretty much the real reason it turned out to be so "huge" (it really wasn't.)
But as OP says, the cause of the warming is still not conclusively pinned down. Yes there is a correlation with atmospheric CO2 emissions, but correlation is only that. Whether that is really the cause, or whether it is just the Earth doing what it does... no one can really say. I firmly believe we should move away from fossil fuels for a large number of reasons in any case (whether or not AGW is happening), so for me the point is actually somewhat moot. It isn't for all the "green" companies, though, which receive massive funding from the government based on the premise of AGW.
Well, he compares a clean install of 8 against a clean install of 7, so no it doesn't leave that out. How well 8 handles the additional load is still a good question, though.
Maybe. RIMs response seems to indicate they think that the fields are far enough apart that it isn't a trademark violation, and they may be right. An OS vs a database/ toolset/ language? Just being in the tech field doesn't mean there is a trademark violation.
A search on the USPTO shows several "BBX" tms, (including BASIS), several of which are in the tech field (on is even for a telecommunications suite). This took me ~45 seconds. I'm guessing they did the same. I think RIM definitely intended to say that the terms aren't in the same specific field and are therefore not confusing. Actual practice may prove them wrong, which would really suck for them.
I can. "Bullshit." An amazing phrase, I recommend you try it out sometime :)
Same thing that has been going on for the past 3000+ years.
Now we have nukes, though.
Also this. And the one I posted above. Maybe Slashdot should just start putting these in the summary.
Quite frankly, solving these problems today should not be hard. At most a literature search should bring you the algorithmics. But what is hard is doing good, maintainable interfaces, writing high quality code, having a good design and a good architecture, having working defense-in-depth against attacks, etc. None of which a brilliant person without in-depth CS education and significant experience can do. This just keeps up the atrocious code quality responsible for so many data leaks and successful attacks. It also explains the high cost of software.
This is the wrong approach on so many levels...
It does, however, go very far in explaining Facebook's current state.
Should be: all the board members are either unfailingly honest, compulsively deceptive, or massive trolls. Might actually have real world applications.
Also, oblig xkcd.
Am I missing something here?
Ads, most likely. Adblock (in Opera at least and I think Firefox too) seems to allow you to go right through the paywall (although it did block me twice. Weird.)
They aren't. There are 800,000 people who've done that. The 300,000 are just digital subscribers.
Tesla was a genius, and in the quote you gave I believe he was right... but also wrong. Space cannot curve if space is nothing. But space is not nothing. The work of people like Riemann and Lobachevski have shown that space can in fact possess properties inherently. This makes a kind of sense: when we talk about 5 feet of space, that space has an objective reality and possesses some property (namely, dimension) that allows use to quantify it. Einstein deals with this question somewhat BTW.
Interestingly enough, if you go back to the philosophy of people like Aristotle, "matter" can possess any level of properties, including (in theory) insensate but quantitative dimensionality (i.e. "empty" space). So space could be "material" in this original sense, allowing for curvature, yet be "empty", in the sense that it lacks tangibility (which is really what we mean by "empty" anyways).
It'll be a kin to the Zune, yeah.
I think it can be stated much simpler than that, actually. The only accurate predictions of future technology that can be made are those for technology that we can build at this very moment. So, the US Navy can make reasonable estimates to when rail-gun technology will be in use on their ships because they have working rail-guns, but no one can say when fusion power will be deployed. This is simply because science cannot predict it's own discoveries. And if it requires something we haven't discovered yet, than no accurate estimate whatsoever can be made. A guess, sure, but that is all.
Right now the only way to get serious amounts of RAM is to go with XEON or Opteron. And those chips are pretty expensive without offering a whole lot of extra, or event less computing power (assuming single socket).
Yep, that would be the point. You don't think Intel would make server-level RAM capability available for less than server-level costs, do you?
Sort of. This sounds like a pretty difficult attack vector, so if someone is using this kind of attack against you, you can bet creating profiles for Dvorak won't be an issue for them. Not to say there aren't good reasons to switch to Dvorak anyways, just that this isn't one of them.
Note that this technique can't be used to recover passwords, since it is essentially a dictionary attack. Unless you use a password that can be broken by a dictionary attack, in which case you shouldn't be working on anything anyone would want to steal. Oh, and keeping your phone in your pocket also circumvents it.
Penguins might take issue with that assessment :)
Habitats fabricated in free space can provide thousands of times more habitable surface area than Earth.
Sure they can. At some impressive energy cost (remember the gravity well, it sucks pretty hard). It would be much easier to make floating / submerged habitats than ones in outer space.
Until you come up with essentially unlimited, cheap energy, space is not going to be the place for the huddled masses yearning to be free.
It's too bad there isn't a massive effectively limitless energy source somewhere pretty near us in space. /sarcasm
Yes, getting to space is expensive now. The thing is, the actual energy cost to get into space is much less than you would think. Here is an interesting comparison. At ~7.7km/s (escape velocity is ~11km/s) and 277 tonnes, the ISS has less orbital kinetic energy (orbital kinetic energy=1/2 gravitational) potential energy than that contained by the fuel in an Airbus A380. Only ~100 times that which the average car in the US used in 2000. A single decent power plant can produce that much energy in a day (actually, a 1000MW power plant will produce ~10 times that. In one day.)
The trouble is, rockets are not very efficient and extremely heavy. And expensive to build. And, well, you're launching yourself into space on a pile of burning extremely combustible material. If we can find a better way to get into space (space elevators would be awesome), going to space won't be a problem. A single power plant could lift an ISS into space every day (figuring ~10% efficiency). Yes, spaceflight could be the answer. Not terribly soon, but yes.
It's more than 4 months old. I've been using Google SSL searches since last summer some time. Basically, all this news means is that Google feels their SSL search is ready for wider deployment.
Yes, good point. Interestingly, there are various ways our universe "prefers" certain directions to others. TFA points out that amino acids tend to form left-handed. AFAIK no one really knows why. And of course there is the whole matter-antimatter thing (there should, by symmetry, be equal amounts of both. There isn't, as far was we can tell.)
As far as saying whether the universe is objectively spinning, I think you still can under relativity (we can, for instance, say without doubt that the Earth is spinning), but even for such spinning points the generalized laws of the universe still hold valid. They don't under Newtonian physics or special relativity for that matter. The essential statement of the general theory is that the laws of motion are equally valid in all Guassian coordinate systems, however we can still say that certain objects are in a gravitational field of some sort and distinguish the kind with some effort (rotational, massive, or uniform accelerative). So come to think of it, you were actually right about the objectivity (I think), I was just nitpicking. Sorry :).
To nitpick further: your head and feet do experience different accelerations in a gravitational field. Gravity is 1/R^2, remember? You just don't notice it because of the size involved. You wouldn't on a sufficiently large disc (such as the universe) either.