"although it's a pretty disappointing way to pick the president, i basically say tough shit to those who erred on their ballots, regardless of the election officials actions."
So what you are saying is that if the ballot itself is confusing and misleading to people to the point that the actual vote itself is altered by layout or wording, we should go with it rather than what the people want?
"i don't expect it to lead to a revote, although the officials may have broken the law and get punished accordingly. i think the rest of the country doesn't care about palm county and if the democrats do try and force a revote there will be a huge public outcry against them."
Well actually, (most of) the rest of the country does care about palm county and the rest of florida, as they are the deciding 25 votes in who the next president is. The fact that the ballot was misleading and confusing should show that it needs to be changed. If they could identify those voters who voted for two different presidential candidates, which they obviously can't, and if they did so because of a misleading and/or confusing ballot, they should be allowed to revote. The news sources I have seen state that over 19,000 ballots have been thrown out because of such errors. The Florida vote could very well be decided by less.
"i expect most people to say if you're to stupid to figure out how to vote, tough shit, it's your fault, not george bush's."
I can not believe that statement. That's all I can say about it now.
"I HAVE seen the pictures of the Florida ballots."
As have I and I can understand some of the confusion that resulted. Some people said that it appeared to them that they had to vote once for president and once for VP. Thus, they ended up voting twice and their votes were thrown out. Also, several people who accidently voted for Buchanan rather than Gore were told by polesters that they 'could not' change their vote. That is wrong. If you accidently vote the 'wrong' way (wrong as in not for who you wanted), then you can recast your vote. Last I heard, at least three lawsuits have been filed. If they go to their logical conclusion, Florida will have to revote the presidential election.
I read the earlier report and this one as well and I have to say that the differences are interesting. Were all five really cracked? I would think not with the SDMI saying that they weren't. I mean after all, if the one they choose to use really was cracked, it would only be a matter of time (measured in hours) before people were out in Netspace (not to be confused with Netscape) sharing the info on how to rip off the big bad music industry. Heh. I'm sure that it would also be put here on/. as well.
Anything we coded for a class was usually trivial and not worth licensing, with the exception of classes where we were actually doing something that the professor had a grant for. Even then, because it was a class assignment, it became the property of the professor/college/grantor.
In the physics department at my school, some of the undergrads and grads were paid (sometimes) to work on projects of the staff, but anything produced was likewise owned by the university.
As for thesis and dissertations, I really don't know... I was asked to leave before I finished my Masters. I believe that they were property of both the university and student, in that they couldn't be published without the approval of both, but I really don't know.
"Er, what does this mean? They confirmed it, or didnt they? What is the Higgs boson anyway, beyond the sketchy clues the article gives? Pointers from the physicists out there?"
As the article said, they 3 of the 4 collectors saw 'shadows' of the particle. Therefore, they feel justified is saying that it exists, but it hasn't been proven yet. So, they did not confirm its' existance conclusively, but did 'hint' at its' existance.
The article goes on to state that a Higgs boson is a field that 'defines' the mass of other particles. Defines is not really the best word, but as particles pass through this field, they experience drag. The more drag, the more massive the object. The analogy isn't really good, but try to imagine a net in which everything must pass through. Now the net doesn't necessarily stop anything, but 'slows it down' depending on its mass. As I said, it's not a great analogy, an my physics friends will probably get on my case for it, but that is the best way I know how to explain it.
After reading this article, it cleared up a few things, but made others a little more difficult to understand. I was joking with a few friends a several months ago that we should start up a radio station, but now I am seriously reconsidering it.
Who thought this one up? Pay for the cd, pay for the right to play it, pay for each time you play it. I mean you are paying for the same song(s) over and over again. Doesn't really make sense. But then that explains why the record companies really want their artists to get air time.
As for the three hour limit on how often you can repeat songs and such, that explains why radio stations don't repeat songs as often as I'd like. Of course, a couple of years ago a local DJ played the same song three times in a row, just to get it out of the way (he really didn't like the song, but was told he had to play it three times during his shift).
what these politicians are putting on their sites to get blocked. While some of the recent political campaigns have degenerated to muck-racking (at best), you would think that the politicians (or someone on their staff) would make sure that their web sites were accessable from public libraries and schools. I know if I were to run for public office, I would make sure of that.
about vulnerable, but the ones I use most are (and I don't have the URLs on my work computer) are sites with information on elements and compounds. This goes beyond the periodic table of elements, but includes common (and not so common) compounds used for a variety of reasons. The information I usually need is along the lines of flash points, melting points, boiling points, reactions with other compounds, etc.
Yes, I am serious, and no I am not going to tell you what I use them for.
Once again, the artificial benchmarking system seems to doom yet another competitor. Due to the need to translate the x86 intruction set to their own instruction set (VLIW), TransMeta's Crusoe seems to be not the choice for Compaq.
Obviously, there is going to be some slowdown when testing the entire instruction set (or a reasonable subset thereof), but Crusoe should beat out the P3 on repetitive tasks.
Just my opinion here, we need new benchmarking standards.
Looks like that this would be really useful... too bad it's so expensive... Any body wanna try to open source the book... Just kidding... Wouldn't want to screw the authors out of their royalties... If I get some money in the next couple of months, I will have to get this... or put it on my Christmas list...
Taken one way, this seems to indicate that Bush is not answering as many questions as Gore on technology issues. Also, Bush seems to be unwilling to get internet access to schools. So much for his education ideas. Of course, he has said in the past that it should be locally decided what federal school funds are used for, but I for one would like the Feds to at least lay down some guidelines. I'm fairly certain that the school system I came up through had some financial irregularities. Federal guidelines won't really stop that, but might prevent some of it.
No, that's trademark law, or Unisys wouldn't be able to collect on GIF / LZW (which they didn't enforce for many years). Patents & Copyrights can be selectively enforced, not enforced, massively enforced, whatever, with no worries."
Ahhhh... As I said, I'm not a lawyer. Thanks for the clarification. So you can enforce the copyrights against those who annoy you. Legal, but not nice.
"Is there a way to reject patents that are already accepted.
That would be useful for Amazon's patented one-click feature."
From what little I understand about patent law, no there isn't. But, unless the patent holder in question 'vigorously' defends their patent it can become 'common use'. In other words, if they don't sue everyone who is 'misusing' their technology, but instead selectively target people, then they can lose all rights to hold the patent. Please remember, I am not a lawyer and all of this is based on my imperfect understanding of patent law (a tricky subject).
"I don't think Heinlein was right. "If you don't vote you will be wrong"? He's saying that the act of voting is a moral act in and of itself. I don't believe that's true under either of the two scenarios: 1) You have no idea what your voting for. 2) You don't vote in your own self-interest. A vote under either of the circumstances unfavorably distorts the outcome of elections."
I did not get the quotation correct, hence my statement that I was paraphrasing. As I stated earlier, you (that's a general you, not a specific one) should try to find out something about the issues up for vote. For example, here in SC, we have a lottery vote, local elections, a very nasty cororner race, state elections, etc. While I do not yet know who all is running for what, I do know (generally) who is running for the things I do care about. Don't ask for names, I don't remember most of the state ones, but have a stack of their liturature at home.
My point was that by failing to vote and then complaining about the results is 'wrong.' That's not a moral wrong, nor an ethical wrong. To me it's always been a case of "You didn't have the energy to vote, but found the energy to complain?" I'm not claiming to have an ideal fix. What might me good for me might not be good for you.
As for not voting in your own self-interest, isn't that part of what voting is? Except for the people who blindly vote a specific party (and I'm not saying that is wrong), people usually vote for the person they think will benefit them the most.
I look at it like this. You should vote. Regardless of what you feel about the candidates in the major election (this year, President). There are probably several local issues that your vote could help sway. Even if the way you vote doesn't turn out to be the winning choice, you have made your voice heard.
I am tired of hearing people complain about the way the system works or that the people in office are crooks, etc. The only way to change the system is to make your voice heard. Don't like any of the candidates. Vote against the one you hate most. Your state going to elect the guy you don't like for president? Vote for a 'third-party' candidate. Maybe that person will now get 5% of the vote and their party gets matching government funds.
Paraphrasing Heinlein, "If you make a choice, you may be wrong. If you don't make a choice, you will be wrong." Exercise your right to vote. Take some time to find out some of the issues for your area. Try to determine not only how the issue(s) will affect you now, but also how they will affect you in five, ten, and twenty years. Because unless it is declared unconstitutional (possible, but unlikely) or repealed (about as unlikely) the issues that are passed are likely to be around for a long time.
When you think of it, the partnership really wouldn't be too likely. I mean Nintendo (64) is a fairly popular system and has good number of games, as does the Sega Dreamcast. If both companies were getting completely spanked by Sony then maybe, but I feel that their fortunes would have to sink a little lower for them to seriously consider a partnership.
"Well no, according to this paper. It seems that anything over 72fps is just wasted as our visual pipeline is saturated past that point." On the other hand, I'm glad that companies make it possible to show crazy-fast framerates, for the trickle-down effect of cheaper "normal" cards."
I do know that sometimes when playing games with a uber-high frame rate, I sometimes get a 'bluring' effect that I don't get a lower frame rates. Plus, if you don't have a top-of-the-line graphics card, the lower frame rate will allow you to process things faster. Plus, who really needs 200 fps??
The title pretty much says it all. I am curious on why this hasn't been added before. I am not an expert on databases, but have worked with a few extensively, and it seems to me that this should be something 'standard' with any DB that is expected to handle non-trival amounts of data.
"The real problem is that alot of things that are being patented are things that if was ask by any decent programmer they would have came up with the same solution."
Let's change that to any decent system architect/systems designer (not really sure of the accurate terminology). Most of the 'decent' programmers couldn't/wouldn't write instruction set code. It is not easy. That and they can get paid more/enjoy their job writing C/C++/Java/VB/Applets/etc. I've only taken classes in this kind of thing and that convinced me that I didn't want to do it for a living.
Most of the above is opinion. Figure out which on your own.
Obviously, I'm half-joking here. Only half, as if it does state in the license agreement that you have to have permission to publish benchmarks, then they really have no choice but to sue. They will lose, as the article indicates that Ellison is _not_ publishing his results, merely demonstrating them. Others are publishing reports about his (Ellison's) demonstrations. I don't fault Ellison for making his remarks. He is the head of a rival company. I just hope MS does sue. They need to lose another case.
"LOL! You have to admit, he got you there, my friend.:)"
Probably... I felt that I was standing up for the CGI people. Having programed in graphics environments before (nothing as spiffy), I know how difficult it is. Even with excellent tools.
So I've been trolled. I have some fire spells memorized and can make one crispy troll if I really wanted to.
"Actually, I think Mr_Perl is right. True neutrals aren't really neutral. They just always fight to keep a balance between good and evil, and between law and chaos."
Well, then no one who is 'true neutral' should be voting for Bush or Gore.
"The CG does suck. Those don't look much like real dragons to me."
And when have you seen a 'real' dragon? I think that the CGI guys (and gals) did a very nice job considering the amount of time they had and the budget that they were given. I mean you have a dragon battle involving several dozen dragons per side and they make it look pretty good. I know we all have our own opinion of what dragons look like, but I feel that what I say did a very good job of capturing the 'big fire-breathing lizard' thing.
Technically true. AFAIK there are no established Wicca churches (not sure about California), and they don't get tax freedom/breaks like recognized religions (in the US). However, I know several Wiccans and have done some research on it as part of the discussions I have had with them. And what I have been able to determine is that Wicca is not wholly based on anything found in history. It _draws_ from the Druidic, Celtic, and Wotanic (sp?) faiths in varying degrees, but for all intents and purposes is a 'new religion.' The biggest thing that the Wiccans I know impressed me with was their philosophy on life which could be summed up as "Do as little as possible to upset or harm others." That's it. I don't know whether or not they deserve religious protection. Heck, some of them might be upset to be put in the same grouping as Scientoligists.
Slashdot Mirror
"although it's a pretty disappointing way to pick the president, i basically say tough shit to those who erred on their ballots, regardless of the election officials actions."
So what you are saying is that if the ballot itself is confusing and misleading to people to the point that the actual vote itself is altered by layout or wording, we should go with it rather than what the people want?
"i don't expect it to lead to a revote, although the officials may have broken the law and get punished accordingly. i think the rest of the country doesn't care about palm county and if the democrats do try and force a revote there will be a huge public outcry against them."
Well actually, (most of) the rest of the country does care about palm county and the rest of florida, as they are the deciding 25 votes in who the next president is. The fact that the ballot was misleading and confusing should show that it needs to be changed. If they could identify those voters who voted for two different presidential candidates, which they obviously can't, and if they did so because of a misleading and/or confusing ballot, they should be allowed to revote. The news sources I have seen state that over 19,000 ballots have been thrown out because of such errors. The Florida vote could very well be decided by less.
"i expect most people to say if you're to stupid to figure out how to vote, tough shit, it's your fault, not george bush's."
I can not believe that statement. That's all I can say about it now.
Eric Gearman
--
"I HAVE seen the pictures of the Florida ballots."
As have I and I can understand some of the confusion that resulted. Some people said that it appeared to them that they had to vote once for president and once for VP. Thus, they ended up voting twice and their votes were thrown out. Also, several people who accidently voted for Buchanan rather than Gore were told by polesters that they 'could not' change their vote. That is wrong. If you accidently vote the 'wrong' way (wrong as in not for who you wanted), then you can recast your vote. Last I heard, at least three lawsuits have been filed. If they go to their logical conclusion, Florida will have to revote the presidential election.
Eric Gearman
--
I read the earlier report and this one as well and I have to say that the differences are interesting. Were all five really cracked? I would think not with the SDMI saying that they weren't. I mean after all, if the one they choose to use really was cracked, it would only be a matter of time (measured in hours) before people were out in Netspace (not to be confused with Netscape) sharing the info on how to rip off the big bad music industry. Heh. I'm sure that it would also be put here on /. as well.
Eric Gearman
--
Anything we coded for a class was usually trivial and not worth licensing, with the exception of classes where we were actually doing something that the professor had a grant for. Even then, because it was a class assignment, it became the property of the professor/college/grantor.
In the physics department at my school, some of the undergrads and grads were paid (sometimes) to work on projects of the staff, but anything produced was likewise owned by the university.
As for thesis and dissertations, I really don't know... I was asked to leave before I finished my Masters. I believe that they were property of both the university and student, in that they couldn't be published without the approval of both, but I really don't know.
Eric Gearman
--
"Er, what does this mean? They confirmed it, or didnt they? What is the Higgs boson anyway, beyond the sketchy clues the article gives? Pointers from the physicists out there?"
As the article said, they 3 of the 4 collectors saw 'shadows' of the particle. Therefore, they feel justified is saying that it exists, but it hasn't been proven yet. So, they did not confirm its' existance conclusively, but did 'hint' at its' existance.
The article goes on to state that a Higgs boson is a field that 'defines' the mass of other particles. Defines is not really the best word, but as particles pass through this field, they experience drag. The more drag, the more massive the object. The analogy isn't really good, but try to imagine a net in which everything must pass through. Now the net doesn't necessarily stop anything, but 'slows it down' depending on its mass. As I said, it's not a great analogy, an my physics friends will probably get on my case for it, but that is the best way I know how to explain it.
Eric Gearman
--
After reading this article, it cleared up a few things, but made others a little more difficult to understand. I was joking with a few friends a several months ago that we should start up a radio station, but now I am seriously reconsidering it.
Who thought this one up? Pay for the cd, pay for the right to play it, pay for each time you play it. I mean you are paying for the same song(s) over and over again. Doesn't really make sense. But then that explains why the record companies really want their artists to get air time.
As for the three hour limit on how often you can repeat songs and such, that explains why radio stations don't repeat songs as often as I'd like. Of course, a couple of years ago a local DJ played the same song three times in a row, just to get it out of the way (he really didn't like the song, but was told he had to play it three times during his shift).
Eric Gearman
--
what these politicians are putting on their sites to get blocked. While some of the recent political campaigns have degenerated to muck-racking (at best), you would think that the politicians (or someone on their staff) would make sure that their web sites were accessable from public libraries and schools. I know if I were to run for public office, I would make sure of that.
Eric Gearman
--
about vulnerable, but the ones I use most are (and I don't have the URLs on my work computer) are sites with information on elements and compounds. This goes beyond the periodic table of elements, but includes common (and not so common) compounds used for a variety of reasons. The information I usually need is along the lines of flash points, melting points, boiling points, reactions with other compounds, etc.
Yes, I am serious, and no I am not going to tell you what I use them for.
Eric Gearman
--
Once again, the artificial benchmarking system seems to doom yet another competitor. Due to the need to translate the x86 intruction set to their own instruction set (VLIW), TransMeta's Crusoe seems to be not the choice for Compaq.
Obviously, there is going to be some slowdown when testing the entire instruction set (or a reasonable subset thereof), but Crusoe should beat out the P3 on repetitive tasks.
Just my opinion here, we need new benchmarking standards.
Eric Gearman
--
Looks like that this would be really useful... too bad it's so expensive... Any body wanna try to open source the book... Just kidding... Wouldn't want to screw the authors out of their royalties... If I get some money in the next couple of months, I will have to get this... or put it on my Christmas list...
Eric Gearman
--
Taken one way, this seems to indicate that Bush is not answering as many questions as Gore on technology issues. Also, Bush seems to be unwilling to get internet access to schools. So much for his education ideas. Of course, he has said in the past that it should be locally decided what federal school funds are used for, but I for one would like the Feds to at least lay down some guidelines. I'm fairly certain that the school system I came up through had some financial irregularities. Federal guidelines won't really stop that, but might prevent some of it.
Eric Gearman
--
No, that's trademark law, or Unisys wouldn't be able to collect on GIF / LZW (which they didn't enforce for many years). Patents & Copyrights can be selectively enforced, not enforced, massively enforced, whatever, with no worries."
Ahhhh... As I said, I'm not a lawyer. Thanks for the clarification. So you can enforce the copyrights against those who annoy you. Legal, but not nice.
Eric Gearman
--
"Is there a way to reject patents that are already accepted.
That would be useful for Amazon's patented one-click feature."
From what little I understand about patent law, no there isn't. But, unless the patent holder in question 'vigorously' defends their patent it can become 'common use'. In other words, if they don't sue everyone who is 'misusing' their technology, but instead selectively target people, then they can lose all rights to hold the patent. Please remember, I am not a lawyer and all of this is based on my imperfect understanding of patent law (a tricky subject).
Eric Gearman
--
"I don't think Heinlein was right. "If you don't vote you will be wrong"? He's saying that the act of voting is a moral act in and of itself. I don't believe that's true under either of the two scenarios: 1) You have no idea what your voting for. 2) You don't vote in your own self-interest. A vote under either of the circumstances unfavorably distorts the outcome of elections."
I did not get the quotation correct, hence my statement that I was paraphrasing. As I stated earlier, you (that's a general you, not a specific one) should try to find out something about the issues up for vote. For example, here in SC, we have a lottery vote, local elections, a very nasty cororner race, state elections, etc. While I do not yet know who all is running for what, I do know (generally) who is running for the things I do care about. Don't ask for names, I don't remember most of the state ones, but have a stack of their liturature at home.
My point was that by failing to vote and then complaining about the results is 'wrong.' That's not a moral wrong, nor an ethical wrong. To me it's always been a case of "You didn't have the energy to vote, but found the energy to complain?" I'm not claiming to have an ideal fix. What might me good for me might not be good for you.
As for not voting in your own self-interest, isn't that part of what voting is? Except for the people who blindly vote a specific party (and I'm not saying that is wrong), people usually vote for the person they think will benefit them the most.
Eric Gearman
--
I look at it like this. You should vote. Regardless of what you feel about the candidates in the major election (this year, President). There are probably several local issues that your vote could help sway. Even if the way you vote doesn't turn out to be the winning choice, you have made your voice heard.
I am tired of hearing people complain about the way the system works or that the people in office are crooks, etc. The only way to change the system is to make your voice heard. Don't like any of the candidates. Vote against the one you hate most. Your state going to elect the guy you don't like for president? Vote for a 'third-party' candidate. Maybe that person will now get 5% of the vote and their party gets matching government funds.
Paraphrasing Heinlein, "If you make a choice, you may be wrong. If you don't make a choice, you will be wrong." Exercise your right to vote. Take some time to find out some of the issues for your area. Try to determine not only how the issue(s) will affect you now, but also how they will affect you in five, ten, and twenty years. Because unless it is declared unconstitutional (possible, but unlikely) or repealed (about as unlikely) the issues that are passed are likely to be around for a long time.
That's my political message for the day.
Eric Gearman
--
When you think of it, the partnership really wouldn't be too likely. I mean Nintendo (64) is a fairly popular system and has good number of games, as does the Sega Dreamcast. If both companies were getting completely spanked by Sony then maybe, but I feel that their fortunes would have to sink a little lower for them to seriously consider a partnership.
Eric Gearman
--
"Nyarlahotep (sp??) should be coming to deal with those astronomers..."
I thought it was Azathoth who sat out in space.... Of course, I'm not really up on my Cthulhu mythos...
Eric Gearman
--
"Well no, according to this paper. It seems that anything over 72fps is just wasted as our visual pipeline is saturated past that point." On the other hand, I'm glad that companies make it possible to show crazy-fast framerates, for the trickle-down effect of cheaper "normal" cards."
I do know that sometimes when playing games with a uber-high frame rate, I sometimes get a 'bluring' effect that I don't get a lower frame rates. Plus, if you don't have a top-of-the-line graphics card, the lower frame rate will allow you to process things faster. Plus, who really needs 200 fps??
Eric Gearman
--
The title pretty much says it all. I am curious on why this hasn't been added before. I am not an expert on databases, but have worked with a few extensively, and it seems to me that this should be something 'standard' with any DB that is expected to handle non-trival amounts of data.
Any ideas on why it took so long to add this?
Eric Gearman
--
"The real problem is that alot of things that are being patented are things that if was ask by any decent programmer they would have came up with the same solution."
Let's change that to any decent system architect/systems designer (not really sure of the accurate terminology). Most of the 'decent' programmers couldn't/wouldn't write instruction set code. It is not easy. That and they can get paid more/enjoy their job writing C/C++/Java/VB/Applets/etc. I've only taken classes in this kind of thing and that convinced me that I didn't want to do it for a living.
Most of the above is opinion. Figure out which on your own.
Eric Gearman
--
Obviously, I'm half-joking here. Only half, as if it does state in the license agreement that you have to have permission to publish benchmarks, then they really have no choice but to sue. They will lose, as the article indicates that Ellison is _not_ publishing his results, merely demonstrating them. Others are publishing reports about his (Ellison's) demonstrations. I don't fault Ellison for making his remarks. He is the head of a rival company. I just hope MS does sue. They need to lose another case.
Eric Gearman
--
"LOL! You have to admit, he got you there, my friend. :)"
Probably... I felt that I was standing up for the CGI people. Having programed in graphics environments before (nothing as spiffy), I know how difficult it is. Even with excellent tools.
So I've been trolled. I have some fire spells memorized and can make one crispy troll if I really wanted to.
Eric Gearman
--
"Actually, I think Mr_Perl is right. True neutrals aren't really neutral. They just always fight to keep a balance between good and evil, and between law and chaos."
Well, then no one who is 'true neutral' should be voting for Bush or Gore.
Eric Gearman
--
"The CG does suck. Those don't look much like real dragons to me."
And when have you seen a 'real' dragon? I think that the CGI guys (and gals) did a very nice job considering the amount of time they had and the budget that they were given. I mean you have a dragon battle involving several dozen dragons per side and they make it look pretty good. I know we all have our own opinion of what dragons look like, but I feel that what I say did a very good job of capturing the 'big fire-breathing lizard' thing.
Eric Gearman
--
"Wicca is not a religion."
Technically true. AFAIK there are no established Wicca churches (not sure about California), and they don't get tax freedom/breaks like recognized religions (in the US). However, I know several Wiccans and have done some research on it as part of the discussions I have had with them. And what I have been able to determine is that Wicca is not wholly based on anything found in history. It _draws_ from the Druidic, Celtic, and Wotanic (sp?) faiths in varying degrees, but for all intents and purposes is a 'new religion.' The biggest thing that the Wiccans I know impressed me with was their philosophy on life which could be summed up as "Do as little as possible to upset or harm others." That's it. I don't know whether or not they deserve religious protection. Heck, some of them might be upset to be put in the same grouping as Scientoligists.
Eric Gearman
--