And until it's legal to take off and land anywhere, even a true flying car could still only be used like a roadable aircraft.
Not necessarily anywhere, it could be solved by building landing ports similar to a car park for flying cars, but there needs to be plenty of them. The problems are mostly legal, with friendly legislation flying cars would be a reality by now.
Computer science is the mathematical theory behind programming, you will never really need it unless you design a language or write a compiler. In most universities CS courses are extended to provide a general theoretical background to pogramming, but those courses still lack the practical elements.
First of all, the knowledge that every children will need is user knowledge, learning how to use electronic devices for their needs. You can also teach them programming, to introduce them a profession they can choose later, but you won't need any theoretical background for school-level coding. Even if you decide to teach them some math they will be better off with stuff that has practical applications in programming like linear algebra or graph theory.
You are mistaken, Rapidshare doesn't make any money off of copyrighted material. Their income comes from selling storage space and bandwith. Granted, some people use these services for copyright infringement, but blaming Rapidshare for the crimes of others is stupid. Guess what, warez sites also buy their storage and bandwith from someone, should we make ISPs illegal too?
Skype being closed source this is always a possibility, but even if true at least only the government can eavesdrop and not every criminal/Rupert Murdoch.
On one hand it's understandable that after giving their users nearly unlimited mobile net they feel tricked when noone is paying them for phone calls anymore. On the other hand if it's cheaper to make phone calls over Skype than it is in the traditional way that means that phone calls are hugely overpriced because Skype has strong security and much better sound quality than a phone call. In any case, they should have seen this coming and plan forward, transforming from telcos to mobile net companies.
And here is the reason why. Bad science has gained a lot of ground recently. Besides, science itself is based on distrust and scepticism, so this alone would be a good thing, the problem is when distrust is applied selectively.
We can't even tell if an asteroid will hit Earth or not with reasonable precision, we can only calculate a chance. Controlling or even telling where will it hit Earth is impossible, which means anyone who tries this has a fair chance of directing the asteroid on themselves.
One solution could be to make corporations liable for loss of user data. I'm pretty sure that they would secure their systems surpisingly quickly if they are the ones who have to pay for a breach. That still wouldn't help against industrial espionage though.
I have a suspicion that they will count jailbreaking/bypassing DRM as hacking too. It's just a small step from outlawing IP spoofing. How about sentencing hackers based on the damage they have done instead of another witchhunt against technology? Only demonstrating a vulnerability: no sentence or a few month of community service; destroying data or sabotaging systems: monetary fine based on the losses that occurred if the guy can't pay then prison; stealing and selling or making public user data: long long years of prison.
I understand that it helps but I don't see why would it be a requirement. The first stars formed just well without any heavy elements and gas giants are like starts just smaller.
Lasers are just a way to transfer energy and the only energy those satellites will have comes from a few solar panels. It would be too weak to pose a threat to even a single human. It could theoretically be used for targeting though.
In northern/cloudy places solar panels are not efficient, period. Spend that money on heat insulation, heat pumps or even solar heaters and you will save more energy.
You can't expect journals to vrify the claims of a paper. That's the job of the scientific community, to try to replicate the results and see what happens. Of course, accepting unreplicated results as facts is a serious problem in some sciences.
Most people use solar panels because they can be comfortably put on rooftops. If someone has enough room for these 3D structures they could just install a Sun tracking system that's even more efficient.
If the guy is a paying student the university can suspend him if they think so, but if it's a college funded by the taxpayers they shouldn't have the right to choose between students. There are people convicted of murder studying and getting degrees in jail but a guy guilty of speechcrime can get suspended?
Slashdot Mirror
If you share your position with the whole internet then anyone will know where you are. Who would have thought?
And until it's legal to take off and land anywhere, even a true flying car could still only be used like a roadable aircraft.
Not necessarily anywhere, it could be solved by building landing ports similar to a car park for flying cars, but there needs to be plenty of them. The problems are mostly legal, with friendly legislation flying cars would be a reality by now.
Computer science is the mathematical theory behind programming, you will never really need it unless you design a language or write a compiler. In most universities CS courses are extended to provide a general theoretical background to pogramming, but those courses still lack the practical elements.
First of all, the knowledge that every children will need is user knowledge, learning how to use electronic devices for their needs. You can also teach them programming, to introduce them a profession they can choose later, but you won't need any theoretical background for school-level coding. Even if you decide to teach them some math they will be better off with stuff that has practical applications in programming like linear algebra or graph theory.
I don't think many people are willing to trust politicians with their card information.
I mostly agree with you except that computer science has little to do with how computers work.
And of course what is true or false is decided by the government.
You are mistaken, Rapidshare doesn't make any money off of copyrighted material. Their income comes from selling storage space and bandwith. Granted, some people use these services for copyright infringement, but blaming Rapidshare for the crimes of others is stupid. Guess what, warez sites also buy their storage and bandwith from someone, should we make ISPs illegal too?
Apparently slashdot still does it even if you set your post style to plain HTML. You can evade this by using the pre tag: http://www.slashdot.org/
Skype being closed source this is always a possibility, but even if true at least only the government can eavesdrop and not every criminal/Rupert Murdoch.
On one hand it's understandable that after giving their users nearly unlimited mobile net they feel tricked when noone is paying them for phone calls anymore. On the other hand if it's cheaper to make phone calls over Skype than it is in the traditional way that means that phone calls are hugely overpriced because Skype has strong security and much better sound quality than a phone call. In any case, they should have seen this coming and plan forward, transforming from telcos to mobile net companies.
And here is the reason why. Bad science has gained a lot of ground recently. Besides, science itself is based on distrust and scepticism, so this alone would be a good thing, the problem is when distrust is applied selectively.
We can't even tell if an asteroid will hit Earth or not with reasonable precision, we can only calculate a chance. Controlling or even telling where will it hit Earth is impossible, which means anyone who tries this has a fair chance of directing the asteroid on themselves.
One solution could be to make corporations liable for loss of user data. I'm pretty sure that they would secure their systems surpisingly quickly if they are the ones who have to pay for a breach. That still wouldn't help against industrial espionage though.
I have a suspicion that they will count jailbreaking/bypassing DRM as hacking too. It's just a small step from outlawing IP spoofing.
How about sentencing hackers based on the damage they have done instead of another witchhunt against technology?
Only demonstrating a vulnerability: no sentence or a few month of community service; destroying data or sabotaging systems: monetary fine based on the losses that occurred if the guy can't pay then prison; stealing and selling or making public user data: long long years of prison.
If corporations don't care about their own security why is it so important to the US government?
Like this I guess.
I understand that it helps but I don't see why would it be a requirement. The first stars formed just well without any heavy elements and gas giants are like starts just smaller.
Lasers are just a way to transfer energy and the only energy those satellites will have comes from a few solar panels. It would be too weak to pose a threat to even a single human. It could theoretically be used for targeting though.
Provided he owns the copyright and the pictures weren't made by others.
In northern/cloudy places solar panels are not efficient, period. Spend that money on heat insulation, heat pumps or even solar heaters and you will save more energy.
Start the vote a day or two earlier to offset the delays caused by possible attacks, it's not like voting requires realtime access.
You can't expect journals to vrify the claims of a paper. That's the job of the scientific community, to try to replicate the results and see what happens. Of course, accepting unreplicated results as facts is a serious problem in some sciences.
Most people use solar panels because they can be comfortably put on rooftops. If someone has enough room for these 3D structures they could just install a Sun tracking system that's even more efficient.
If the guy is a paying student the university can suspend him if they think so, but if it's a college funded by the taxpayers they shouldn't have the right to choose between students. There are people convicted of murder studying and getting degrees in jail but a guy guilty of speechcrime can get suspended?
They don't want to get sued for spreading hatespeech.