First off -- I'm quite doubtful about the credibility of the eco-folks who cry Global Warming out loud every other week.
That said, long term generic predictions are easier than short-term precision predictions simply due to the fact that you have more information and flexibility.
However, we do not really have all that much information from our past to begin with and the system is too chaotic for folks to even begin formulating "predictions".
But that does not seem to stop our "climatologists" though.
Personally, I've had great experiences with all of the above OSes. While issues do crop up from time to time, it would be unwise to assume that they would not, in the future.
Well, for starters how about giving hard evidence of the connection between rise in greenhouse gases and rise in Earth's temperature?
All you eco-fanatics keep talking about stuff but all the global warming papers are so opinionated that it stinks. If you want people to trust you, do science - not consensus science.
Look at what Crutzen, Rowland and Molina did - they proved conclusively that CFCs were responsible for Ozone layer depletion and they won the Nobel. Prove the link conclusively and perhaps people will believe.
Weather forcasters have trouble predicting the next day's weather or even the generic pattern of yearly weathers. The system is so complex, but still at some point or the other some cock-a-hoop "scientist"^Wclimatologist brings up Global Warming.
Talk about faster than light travel attached to some pop-sci articles. Atleast if you'd linked to a few respectablejournals or archives, it would make sense.
Well, even if one out of the 100 reviewers presented a vaguely positive review, marketing would ensure that the opinions of those that disagreed are just drowned and the opinion of this one guy is pumped up and used as a marketing tool.
All the PhDs I know are quite well off, earning 5 figures and doing extremely well for them - the school and your advisor quite obviously play an important role in your future prospects.
That said, most people do a PhD not for the financial renumeration but because they like what they do.
I'd beg to differ. I cannot talk for other areas, but I can tell you that unless you're a prodigy or some sort of genius, you cannot be a half decent scientist without the background that colleges provide.
More than anything, the resources and expertise that good colleges provide can seldom be matched.
There is a reason people put in so many years in their PhDs:-)
I mean, why bother sending all those probes to learn about the Universe when we all could be busy farming to produce more food. Bring down those buildings and rear more cattle so that can can feed everyone.
Get over it. Just because there is a section of underprivileged population does not mean you do not work on other things. Civilization is a cumulative point of achievement of everything that's happened before it - unless you can provide for that, you're not going to progress.
Sure, the Universe is not going to end tomorrow. But if we did try and understand it better, we might stumble upon something cool (like building wormholes or faster-than-light travel). That might probably change our lives a lot more.
And tomorrow if we are spread out there in the galaxy and a piece of rock decides to knock Earth off our solar system, you might just have saved the species.
Science just is. Just because there are other problems does not mean you do not do science.
I'll quote something from HL Mencken that seems apt -
The value the world sets upon motives is often grossly unjust and inaccurate. Consider, for example, two of them: mere insatiable curiosity and the desire to do good. The latter is put high above the former, and yet it is the former that moves one of the most useful men the human race has yet produced: the scientific investigator. What actually urges him on is not some brummagem idea of Service, but a boundless, almost pathological thirst to penetrate the unknown, to uncover the secret.... His prototype is not the liberator releasing slaves, the good Samaritan lifting up the fallen, but a dog sniffing tremendously at an infinite series of rat-holes. -- H. L. Mencken
While it is unfortunate that there are so many underprivileged people, it is unfair to stifle science with that as an excuse.
There are SMEs in other areas, particularly in Asia and Eastern Europe that cannot afford to have their own mail server. However, you're right - they would rather sign up for their own domain and have a mailserver there, than use Hotmail or Yahoo.
You've hit the nail on the head. I'm taking a class on IP Law this semester; when I brought up something about the law being equal, the professor said something along the lines of, "You have fallen for the myth of law being equal and a bringer of justice of sorts - that has never been the case. It has been to help preserve the status quo of the powerplay in the society".
Wonder why we bother with all the equality and all that bullshit, though.
When I worked for a certain National Lab (one that particularly had the habit of getting entangled into losing classified stuff), they did provide the employees with Legal Insurance.
When asked, the guy just said, "For obvious reasons". Makes you wonder what those would be =)
Slashdot Mirror
First off -- I'm quite doubtful about the credibility of the eco-folks who cry Global Warming out loud every other week.
That said, long term generic predictions are easier than short-term precision predictions simply due to the fact that you have more information and flexibility.
However, we do not really have all that much information from our past to begin with and the system is too chaotic for folks to even begin formulating "predictions".
But that does not seem to stop our "climatologists" though.
...Or for that matter, any cameras without this "feature".
And once the market demand goes down, people will just stop using them.
As simple as that.
Just what we need. Hear yet another of those blokes talk out loud in public places and show off the cool features to the whole population.
Not to mention those irritating ringtones.
While the service may have its benefits, to imply that these would just mean cool phones is a tad disturbing, really.
I agree. Sex with an alien.
Humanoid, preferably. Female would be nice, too.
Given my chances with human females, that's probably the only hope that my genes have for the future.
There are several that are quite good, IMHO.
And ultimately, it depends on what you want, too.
Personally, I've had great experiences with all of the above OSes. While issues do crop up from time to time, it would be unwise to assume that they would not, in the future.
Dear Monknoke,
This is the NSA. You have discovered our secret. You cannot be allowed to live. We're coming.
Kind Regards.
Well, for starters how about giving hard evidence of the connection between rise in greenhouse gases and rise in Earth's temperature?
All you eco-fanatics keep talking about stuff but all the global warming papers are so opinionated that it stinks. If you want people to trust you, do science - not consensus science.
Look at what Crutzen, Rowland and Molina did - they proved conclusively that CFCs were responsible for Ozone layer depletion and they won the Nobel. Prove the link conclusively and perhaps people will believe.
Weather forcasters have trouble predicting the next day's weather or even the generic pattern of yearly weathers. The system is so complex, but still at some point or the other some cock-a-hoop "scientist"^Wclimatologist brings up Global Warming.
You're right.
In fact, John Preskill won that famous bet against Hawking.
Actually, arXiv is not the new URL, it's the original archive.
LANL and a few others host arXiv mirrors to reduce the load.
You're joking - but in truth, our Universal constants cannot exactly be called that - they have been changing, albeit very gradually.
So, the speed of light need not necessarily be a constant for all time (and need not have been a constant for all time).
Oh yes.
Talk about faster than light travel attached to some pop-sci articles. Atleast if you'd linked to a few respectable journals or archives, it would make sense.
How about linking to the original Space.com article?
Blazing Speed: The Fastest Stuff in the Universe.
Well, even if one out of the 100 reviewers presented a vaguely positive review, marketing would ensure that the opinions of those that disagreed are just drowned and the opinion of this one guy is pumped up and used as a marketing tool.
:-)
That's how marketing works
All the PhDs I know are quite well off, earning 5 figures and doing extremely well for them - the school and your advisor quite obviously play an important role in your future prospects.
That said, most people do a PhD not for the financial renumeration but because they like what they do.
> Will the electronics companies attribute sales
:-)
> loss to piracy too?
Yes.
You don't really expect them to admit it to be because of greed or poor quality content, do you?
Have _you_ tried?
College is not necessary?
:-)
I'd beg to differ. I cannot talk for other areas, but I can tell you that unless you're a prodigy or some sort of genius, you cannot be a half decent scientist without the background that colleges provide.
More than anything, the resources and expertise that good colleges provide can seldom be matched.
There is a reason people put in so many years in their PhDs
Tell me, what is stopping you from going to India?
It's just as easy for you to get a job and move in to India -- one of my good friends married an American and he's now settled in Bangalore with her.
There is nothing stopping Americans from packing up their bags and going to India - except for the culture shock and difference in lifestyle.
Are ya'll thinking what am thinking?
Eh?
Oh yeah. Excellent attitude.
I mean, why bother sending all those probes to learn about the Universe when we all could be busy farming to produce more food. Bring down those buildings and rear more cattle so that can can feed everyone.
Get over it. Just because there is a section of underprivileged population does not mean you do not work on other things. Civilization is a cumulative point of achievement of everything that's happened before it - unless you can provide for that, you're not going to progress.
Sure, the Universe is not going to end tomorrow. But if we did try and understand it better, we might stumble upon something cool (like building wormholes or faster-than-light travel). That might probably change our lives a lot more.
And tomorrow if we are spread out there in the galaxy and a piece of rock decides to knock Earth off our solar system, you might just have saved the species.
Science just is. Just because there are other problems does not mean you do not do science.
I'll quote something from HL Mencken that seems apt -
The value the world sets upon motives is often grossly unjust and inaccurate. Consider, for example, two of them: mere insatiable curiosity and the desire to do good. The latter is put high above the former, and yet it is the former that moves one of the most useful men the human race has yet produced: the scientific investigator. What actually urges him on is not some brummagem idea of Service, but a boundless, almost pathological thirst to penetrate the unknown, to uncover the secret.... His prototype is not the liberator releasing slaves, the good Samaritan lifting up the fallen, but a dog sniffing tremendously at an infinite series of rat-holes.
-- H. L. Mencken
While it is unfortunate that there are so many underprivileged people, it is unfair to stifle science with that as an excuse.
I'm an Indian from Atlanta, you insensitive clod x-(
You're thinking IT companies.
There are SMEs in other areas, particularly in Asia and Eastern Europe that cannot afford to have their own mail server. However, you're right - they would rather sign up for their own domain and have a mailserver there, than use Hotmail or Yahoo.
You've hit the nail on the head. I'm taking a class on IP Law this semester; when I brought up something about the law being equal, the professor said something along the lines of, "You have fallen for the myth of law being equal and a bringer of justice of sorts - that has never been the case. It has been to help preserve the status quo of the powerplay in the society".
Wonder why we bother with all the equality and all that bullshit, though.
*adjusts tinfoil hat*
You know, you're probably joking but you do have a point.
Perhaps the whole point of this was to have an increase in SCOs stocks so that folks have the opportunity to dump and jump the ship.
These days when laws are written by the rich and bought over by the powerful, you never know =)
When I worked for a certain National Lab (one that particularly had the habit of getting entangled into losing classified stuff), they did provide the employees with Legal Insurance.
When asked, the guy just said, "For obvious reasons". Makes you wonder what those would be =)