The private sector will not finance anything like this. They want quick, guaranteed profits. This is why governments should pioneer space travel: the private sector will never go further than LEO unless they are sure it's profitable.
Yes, "history" shouldn't be about the dates or specifications but the advancements themselves. Problem is, the "basics" of computing are very hard to grasp. Even if you start from the very beginning, how do you explain the results of Turing to kids who never heard of Gödel?
Well I did stop computer class (it was optional) and went to football instead. It wasn't until a few years later when my grandfather showed me his old Spectrum and I started learning Basic when I realized that this is actually interesting. Then I asked my father (he works in IT), who also taught me. Then we got Internet connection which opened up endless possibilities. After that, I was enthusiastic enough that neither these lessons, nor the torture with Logo and Pascal later broke my spirits.
But that was just me, most of the other guys I knew didn't come back. Later, when computer classes became mandatory, I wrote the tests for the majority of the class as I was the only one knowing what to do.
And mind you I didn't say that computing history shouldn't be taught, I argued that it shouldn't be taught first.
When I was a kid we had to learn the "history of computing" from the abacus to the first personal computers. We had to memorise the specifications of every IBM processor. Needless to say, it was as much fun as learning the phone book. If you want to get kids into programming teach them fucking programming! It was only when I knew a lot of things that I could appreciate what the pioneers did. History only becomes interesting once you know how stuff works, and you can actually understand what a certain development meant. The reason many schools prefer teaching history in computing classe is that they don't have a teacher who actually understands how computers work, and history can be taught by anyone.
It will sure divide their voterbase. It would also ruin the internationality of Pirate Parties if they weren't just defenders of internet freedoms but started to mess with national politics.
And what if Google added the phrase on purpose? Freedom of opinion is protected in most cultured countries. Does this mean French restaurants can now sue Michelin for a negative review?
There were many advancements in fuel efficiency, but very few of them are actually used in American cars. American engines still have the simple design they had 40 years ago. With fuel prices kept low, there is just no incentive.
"Quantum levitation" is just a new fancy buzzword for superconductivity to make sound like something new what's essentially a hundred year old discovery.
The humans rights are those what the UN claims they are. Whether or not we add internet access to the list depends on whether or not would we want to enforce it in the developed part of the world. The list of human rights is already fairly overblown, so arguing that internet access is not a fundamental right is pointless as there are many other bullshit that far less "natural" than internet access on the list.
This guy wanted to sell a worthless product and then blames it on the payment model when he failes. The only lesson from it is that people won't pay for shit.
Television is regulated everywhere in the world. TV channels being a finite resource, a free market of channels couldn't exist, thus regulation is required. What programmes can air and when, the amount of ads etc. And while some would say that China's regulations are overextensive, I think that a tightly government-controlled TV is still better than one controlled by the Big Media cartel. The customers don't really decide anything, the success or failure of a show is determined by survey groups of a few dozen. The problem with Chinese TV regulation is not the ban of low-quality shows, but the ban of politically sensitive topics.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not the accounts that get stolen but the money. Just like a train robbery doesn't mean a theft of trains.
So causing inconvenience is now on equal ground with murder? And a sin is much worse when the assailant gains nothing from it?
The private sector will not finance anything like this. They want quick, guaranteed profits. This is why governments should pioneer space travel: the private sector will never go further than LEO unless they are sure it's profitable.
Libel requires the statement to be false. An opinion, by default, can't be false.
Yes, "history" shouldn't be about the dates or specifications but the advancements themselves. Problem is, the "basics" of computing are very hard to grasp. Even if you start from the very beginning, how do you explain the results of Turing to kids who never heard of Gödel?
Well I did stop computer class (it was optional) and went to football instead. It wasn't until a few years later when my grandfather showed me his old Spectrum and I started learning Basic when I realized that this is actually interesting. Then I asked my father (he works in IT), who also taught me. Then we got Internet connection which opened up endless possibilities. After that, I was enthusiastic enough that neither these lessons, nor the torture with Logo and Pascal later broke my spirits.
But that was just me, most of the other guys I knew didn't come back. Later, when computer classes became mandatory, I wrote the tests for the majority of the class as I was the only one knowing what to do.
And mind you I didn't say that computing history shouldn't be taught, I argued that it shouldn't be taught first.
When I was a kid we had to learn the "history of computing" from the abacus to the first personal computers. We had to memorise the specifications of every IBM processor. Needless to say, it was as much fun as learning the phone book. If you want to get kids into programming teach them fucking programming! It was only when I knew a lot of things that I could appreciate what the pioneers did. History only becomes interesting once you know how stuff works, and you can actually understand what a certain development meant. The reason many schools prefer teaching history in computing classe is that they don't have a teacher who actually understands how computers work, and history can be taught by anyone.
More like physics. If you use an equipment to irradiate others, you will get some of that radiation too.
It will sure divide their voterbase. It would also ruin the internationality of Pirate Parties if they weren't just defenders of internet freedoms but started to mess with national politics.
And what if Google added the phrase on purpose? Freedom of opinion is protected in most cultured countries. Does this mean French restaurants can now sue Michelin for a negative review?
Even so, the competitors of Google are also subject of the same laws, so there is no other service to leave Google for because of that.
It is summer there.
There were many advancements in fuel efficiency, but very few of them are actually used in American cars. American engines still have the simple design they had 40 years ago. With fuel prices kept low, there is just no incentive.
Why is it so special, it's a consequence of zero resistance. Any superconductor will levitate not just specific ones.
"Quantum levitation" is just a new fancy buzzword for superconductivity to make sound like something new what's essentially a hundred year old discovery.
The humans rights are those what the UN claims they are. Whether or not we add internet access to the list depends on whether or not would we want to enforce it in the developed part of the world. The list of human rights is already fairly overblown, so arguing that internet access is not a fundamental right is pointless as there are many other bullshit that far less "natural" than internet access on the list.
Knowing the Germans, they would likely choose to work instead of watching porn.
If the US does embargo Spain they will just route the trade through another EU country.
An embargo is not a blockade.
You can already restore Windows to a previous state.
You just change the content. A huge LED display on the ceiling can be used to view anything.
This guy wanted to sell a worthless product and then blames it on the payment model when he failes. The only lesson from it is that people won't pay for shit.
Television is regulated everywhere in the world. TV channels being a finite resource, a free market of channels couldn't exist, thus regulation is required. What programmes can air and when, the amount of ads etc. And while some would say that China's regulations are overextensive, I think that a tightly government-controlled TV is still better than one controlled by the Big Media cartel. The customers don't really decide anything, the success or failure of a show is determined by survey groups of a few dozen. The problem with Chinese TV regulation is not the ban of low-quality shows, but the ban of politically sensitive topics.
Most GUIs on PC work perfectly accross different look and feels why is it such a big problem on mobile?
If they had done the math before testing they could have saved themselves the costs.