And as it radiates energy out it will grow weaker.
Energy emissions from a black hole are from matter falling INTO the black hole, not the hole itself. Because the escape velovity of a black hole is greater than the speed of light, stuff don't tend to emit from it so well. Once it gets in, it ain't coming out.
How so? As stars gather more matter into themselves their "gravitational force grows stronger."
Sure, but by solar wind and radiation they lose matter/mass over time. Regardless of that, I would doubt that many stars will increase in mass the way that a black hole could under the same galactic circumstances(matter density primarily). In other words, by virtue of the greater gravitational pull/escape velocity of a black hole we could assume that objects will be much more likely to be captured by a black hole than a regular star. Therefore, a black hole will grow in mass/gravitational force much faster than a star would in the same circumstances. The difference here is a matter of scale and of rate of change.
It's like this, we expect that the earth will eventually be consumed by the sun when it runs out of hydrogen and goes red giant. The photosphere of the sun will expand to a size greater than our orbit. However, if we were orbiting a black hole , we could expect different results. Over the same duration, it is plausible that the gravitational force of the black hole could become great enough to pull the earth in, or at least significantly increase our orbital velocity; This by virtue of infalling matter/energy.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
No one likes to drink their cocaine, much less slurp it off the table. Tastes horrible and your whole mouth goes numb! Plus you have to kill the guy who spilled the drink and burying the body when your mouth is numb is quite inconvenient. If you get dirt in your mouth while shoveling out the shallow grave you can't feel it and it is hard as hell to spit it out...yada-yada-yada...
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
A similar kind of unequal reaction led to the discovery of the anesthetic properties of nitrous oxide. The anecdotal evidence I have read states that some guy named Gardner Quincy Colton used to give people nitrous oxide at parties and at lectures to his friends and associates. At one lecture he attended a man reacted in a violent manner instead of the usual happy-go-lucky manner associated with those who inhale nitrous oxide. The man hurt himself while under the influence, but did not notice it. This led a dentist in the audience to try using nitrous oxide as a pain reliever. Which led to me being able to get a free high from my dentist. Observe...
Nurse: Ok, I'm going to put this on your nose. Just breathe in through your nose and out through your mouth for a minute and tell me when your feet start to tingle. I'll be right back.
Me: Suuuuure. No problem.
(Exit nurse)
Me: (Breathing DEEPLY!!!)
(Enter nurse after about a minute and a half)
Nurse: How ya doin' in here? Feet tingling?
Me: Nope, not yet. (Feet are actually NUMB! Knees are tingling)
Nurse: Ok, I'm just going to step down the hall and get the instruments ready for your wisdom teeth. Just call me when your feet tingle, ok?
Me: Okie dokie.
(nurse exits)
Me: (HUMONGOID INHALATION!!)
(enter nurse after another two minutes)
Nurse: How are you doing in here? Your feet tingling yet?
Me: Nope, don't really feel much of anything. (Numb to the waist, chest is tingling now)
Nurse: Ok, I'm going to step out again for just a second.
Me: No problem, I'll be right here.
(nurse exits)
Me: (trying to take deep breaths but failing because of numb abdomen)
Probably some sort of collusion with/. and the article writers.
"Psst! Hey! Throw in some M$ whack and we'll promise you a/.'load of hits on your site in no time. Just cut us in for a bit o' the advertising revenue from all the banners, matey."
It is completely impossible to say anything enlightening or intelligent in a space this size, excep
Do you have any idea how much pollution has been released into the atmosphere by the earth itself?
Mt. St. Helens' eruption released more krap into the atmosphere than humans have since we discovered fire. If you think that there is no correction in place on this planet maybe you should look at the quantity of poisonous chemicals that have been relessed by volcanoes just in the last century. Also consider that during one of the most prolific periods of bio-density on the earth (generally speaking: the dinosaur age), scientists speculate that volcanoes were MUCH more active than they are now. If there were no correction methods in place on the Earth we would all be breathing carbondioxide and hydrogen sulfide by now.
Funny, I just can't escape the feeling that if we go too much further, WE might be the correction that is made to the Earth.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
Just an aside, but I am doing a great job feeding and clothing the people I have right now. My wife, my kids, and myself. When it comes to feeding people, that is the only WE that there is. As a government, or even a "civilization" it is impossible to feed other people who won't help themselves. If institutionalized, this creates a feedback loop where people are rewarded for not performing in society (ie. they get to not work and eat for free..Woo HOOO!!!) leading to an increasing problem with poverty. Some corrolary examples...
During the Great Depression there were people who would not sweep a floor or perform some other "menial" duty to support themselves and their famalies. They were either too "proud" or too lazy. These people died or suffered because of thir own choices.
The concentration of wealth in the U.S. is a great example of human nature with respect to poverty. Individuals can operate under our laws and conventions for business and achieve much higher levels of profit and efficiency than in many other nations, but we consistently see people who are in poverty here. Sure, there are many who are legitimately poor, and these people deserve our charity and compassion, but there are just as many (probably more) who are poor by their own design. Either through bad decisions or ridiculous lifestyle choices, or pure laziness they have put themselves in a position where they are unable to meet their own needs.
Worst of all, many nations who have starving people bring this on themselves and their populace because of evil/greed. Please remember that there are governments in the world that will spend lavishly, extravagantly, absurdly on parties and events for the leaders of the country and their supporters while 3/4 of the rest of the nation starves to death. There are other nations who will starve you out of existence if you hold the wrong beliefs or political views. Just pick a nation with problems feeding their population and look at their history; the flaws will be glaring. Zimbabwe is a current example, but there are many in history. Let's look at what Zimbabwe has done: 1) Kill all the white farmers or drive them away from their farms. 2) Give the land to military retirees. 3) None of these military people know how to farm. 4) Starve your nation because of greed.
So, the conclusion is this, nothing will stop poverty. Nothing will stop people from making horrible stupid choices that provent them from developing or continuing as a productive members of society. Nothing will stop some countries from feeding some and starving others. Unless you invent some way to recreate the human mind and soul you might as well get used to seeing people in poverty. Sad, but true.
BTW, I hope you have some retort that will prove me wrong. PLEASE!
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
"The computer controlled acuators do not do the same thing as my hand and left foot would do. "
Right. The computer controlled actuators are much more precise that a human. The clutch engagement is constantly modulated by precise empirical inforamtion gained through sensors in the engine, transmission,and wheels. With these slip sensors, the car can react in milliseconds, most times even before the human in the seat even knows there is a problem. Furthermore, the SMG is designed to take into consideration the physics of the automobile in a way that no human could mimic without extensive experience behind the wheel of the exact same vehicle.
Couple that with perfect shifts between gears, automatic double-clutching on downshifts, and less than 100 millisecond gear changes and you have an "F1 driver in a box", at least with regard to the function of shifting gears.
Pretty damned cool!
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
"...was first used in Formula 1 (the definitive form of motor racing) where of course BMW run an engine with the Williams Team... BMW are cashing in on their F1 success by adding 'launch control' to their sporty saloons."
It is not BMW cashing in, it is Williams F1 injecting race technology into a BMW production car. You see, Williams F1 designed and produced the SMG transmission for the M3.
BTW, this is the whole idea of the M series of cars that BMW offers. M==Motorsport. Take racing technology developed from real track experience and translate it into a publicly consumable vehicle.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
...if it would be a good idea to declare a 5 year moratorium on ALL laws pertaining to security and the internet/networks. In other words, declare the internet a "new frontier" and let the strong survive.
Not only would this spur on an intense period of security systems development, and force those individuals who languish outside the circle of the latest security enhancements to keep up with the current advancements, but it just might encourage people to recognise the true nature of network systems and digital data (...among other things, networks are insescure for MANY reasons and that the data is never permanent or secure).
Keep in mind that vigilantism would be fair play...someone cracks your network and you can retaliate. Furthermore, the thought of impending attack might encourage the right people to have a level of alertness that should ALREADY be in place with regard to their networks.
This would also give "us" some time to take a close look at how things REALLY work on the internet before "they" start legislating.
Also, the desire to have a secure OS would drastically change the current marketplace. The average consumer would now HAVE to learn a little bit more about what they were actually spending their money on, and the execs of companies would pay better attention to which systems were designed with security in mind. Those systems with blatant, glaring, abundant, security holes (Hmmm, wonder who that could be?!) would find themselves out on their proverbial asses, maybe even overnight!
While this does run contrary to my feeling about law, property, and justice it is an idea that keeps popping up in my head...maybe my manifesto will be out next spring....hehe. Please comment.
Could you imagine...you and your wardriving buddies are out, ya know, wardriving...
You notice Fred, your closest bud and hackmeister supreme, is actin' a little weird and won't let you see his laptop screen. So you, being the larger of the two pasties and, as a result of the steriods in a clandestinely doped meal replacement bar you had that morning, pry it out of his hands...Only to find a STREAM of outgoing "Enlarge you penis NOW by working from home!" emails! ACK!!! Fred's a SPAMMER!!!
What would you DO?!?!?
"Sophocles...Euripides...Meet my cousin---Testacles."
1. the idiots will try and hack and abuse. 2. the companies will slowly gain awareness, try to figure out how to secure themsleves, secure funding, initiate sucurity protocols, fix holes, etc.
WOOOOHOOOO!!!!!
The sooner that this happens the better.
Now all my laid off IT buddies can get back to work securing the wireless networks for all the companies that fired them last year. Course, maybe some of them could pose as "the idiots," (see above) thereby hastening and ensuring their return to gainful employment!
Maybe then they'll lay off buggin' me for the $20 I borrowed in highschool that I never paid back.
"Sophocles...Euripides...Meet my cousin---Testacles."
1) Yes, you do take a risk by trying to make school "Fun," particularly if this is done at the expense of true education. There is no substitute for mathematical exercises, spelling list memorizations, reading etc. Thes things are irrepalcable, no matter how many multimedia presentations you try to substitute them with.
2) However, I can see the value in trying to excite students about a subject that mignt not, according to the students' perception, be exciting. The aim of course, is to expose students to a subject in a way that may stimulate their enthusiasm, and therefore have them motivated from their own desire and curiosity, rather than the simple reason of "I have to take this course." To restate, an engaged and motivated student will perform better, and will, hopefully, WANT to learn more. This is the kind of thinking that can overcome the doldrums of all the rote, sometimes boring, mechanical processes that are required to learn higher math and science.
The real victory for the student, and to a lesser degree the teacher, is when a student begins to enjoy the hard stuff. For myself, the turning point was in Algebra 2 in high school. Until that point, the exercises and problems were, naturally, a chore. Then, when we studied matricies with 3 and more variables, something changed. I actually stared to enjoy the "work" of math. The fun was in the process, in getting the right answer. I was able to carry this into college with me and it was by far the most important thing I learned in High School.
I think you have misinterpreted what they are doing here. They are measuring the speed of propogation of gravity. Sure, things in a gravity well will accelerate toward the center of the well. What is being measured here is how fast the effects of gravity are felt at a distance.
In other words, if a black hole with 10 million times the gravitational force of the sun instantly appeared in place of the sun would it:
a) take the 8 minutes (that's how long light takes to get to earth) for us to all get sucked off the face of the earth, or will it
So if we can patent business practices, then what is to stop me from patenting, say, the idea of exchanging (Dr. Evil finger quotes) "money" for (Dr. Evil finger quotes) "goods and services." Then I could demand that for each such (yet again!) "exchange" that takes place I get a royalty fee. Every time someone makes a pay phone call or buys a yacht I would get a cut... Hmmmmm.
What a diabolical idea. This would spell the end of useful commerce as we know it. The entire economic structure of the world would collapse! Chaos would reign supreme in the marketplace and all would suffer the most horrible fate of total insolvency!!! With an idea like this I could bring the world's economy to it's knees!!!! Total domination!!!!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!
(Frantically dials the patent office)
Oops! I have just been informed that the government already holds that patent: --TAXES--
The first round of winners evolved to win by cheating -- they found a bug in my software that allowed them to make three moves all at once and win on the first move!
Just like the article's writers, you are attributing anthropomorphised characteristics to code when what you have is an experiment that was poorly designed or had faulty initial conditions. Because the experiment yeilded unexpected results, you say that it "cheated," when in reality the conditions of the experiment (which you as the designer SET) determined the results. I don't know if you guys took the same programming classes that I did, but we learned that computers and software do EXACTLY what we program them to do. If the results are unexpected, WE have not done our due dilligence.
The same holds true for the scientists in the article. If they had put in a check in their flow chart to determine the source of the oscilations, they would have had more iterations of evolution until some other result was achieved. Furthermore, if they had shielded the experiment from outside EMF they could have had better results as well. There are probably a hundred things they could have done to get the results that they wanted, but they didn't do it.
My daddy used to say that when people say things about you behind your back it says more about them than it does about you. Likewise, IMHO what we are seeing is more indicative of the people who set up the experiemnts than of the code/experiments themselves.
In essence what we have here is a poorly designed experiment with ironic/humorous results and therefore it is not anything of interest. Go back to the ol' drawing board guys...and this time get it RIGHT.
I'm hoping and hoping that startling achievements in fighting "natural causes" will reach some sort of threshold where we might be expected to live for a ridiculously long time.:)
Herbert said "If, until this point in time, death had not yet been invented, there would be a need to do so." (paraphrased)
The desire to procreate and the lifespan of humanity have been in imbalance since recorded history. Imagine if we lived unrealistically long lives what population pressure would be like then? Scarcity of resources would cause massive unrest, and eventually, if war was avoided, famine would ensue.
Furthermore, the technology for long life, if not universally available, would encourage frightful animosity between the haves and the have-nots. With limited immortality as the prize, what lengths do you think people would go to?
In this situation, the "cure" could be worse than the "illness".
I think I like things as they are. To misquote Gordon Gecko: "Death is good. Death works."
Vincit qui se vincit.
Re:intersting, but one bigass plot hole
on
0wnz0red
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Are you sure that he didn't plan to just eat a few of the Somalians each day?
He could just program himself to have them all taste like ice cream!
As he aimed his remote at it and initiated the cryptographic handshake -- i.e., unlocked the doors -- When I read this I actually laughed. It seemed to me to be a kind of punch at the way that techno-speak is infiltrating the language. Sort of a glipse of the future of euphamism and linguistic vapidity.
I mean can you see the commerical? "The new Toyota Hybrid! Now with new and improved cryptographic handshake doomaflagie whiz-bang action!"
only a small minority of the judeo/christian community finds it necessary to use the bible as a source for infallible scientific and historical truth. And the only reason they do so is to advance a moral agenda the particulars of which are rejected by the majority of devout christians.
I personally use the Bible in exactly the manner in which you describe, ie. it is infallible with respect to science and history, as well as in its main purpose, revealing the character of God. I do not, however propose to advance any moral agenda on anyone.
I do believe, however, that the evidence we observe in nature, and the account in the Bible are reconcilable. This is why I find it so interesting that the Bible and observed scientific facts coincide. I should not have asked if it was interesting to you or anyone else, as that is a matter of personal preference and therefore subjective at best.
I have found that both camps (evolutionist and creationist) have done a piss poor job of providing accurate information in an intelligent and dispassionate manner. From falsifications of evolutionary evidence and empirical results, to indoctrination of antiquated theories, to glossing over of theoretical holes and vaguely supported points, evolution science has made a poor showing of academic excellence. To be fair, most Christians can't theologize themselves out of a wet paper bag, and have no business discussing matters of creation when they haven't even properly studied the pertinent materials themselves.
Therefore, I will bide my time, study dilligently on BOTH sides of the street, and carefully observe the facts as they are revealed.
There are so many errors of science in the bible that finding one statement that is by happenstance scientifically correct (there are certainly more) means little.
Please elaborate on these errors. I have been a student of the Bible for quite a long time and by no means is my knowledge complete. I would really like to have evidence of this. It is quite possible that I have been lead away from these points where the Bible has provided inaccurate scientific information. Please provide as many as you can.
Not all of the facts of creation and it's account exist in Genesis. Furthermore there are other passages that have to to with the angelic conflict that preceded the creation of man that make reference to the Earth and even to the garden of eden existing BEFORE man was on the Earth. There is even reference to the garden of eden being a place where Satan would entertain angels that he was trying to convince to oppose God.
If you are a student of the Bible, PLEASE find a teacher who has at least 10+ years of study of the Bible in the ORIGINAL languages and who is familiar with the more accurate and earlier scripture evidence of the Bible. If you are studying from the King James or any modern english translation you are most probably missing the boat.
Slashdot Mirror
And as it radiates energy out it will grow weaker.
Energy emissions from a black hole are from matter falling INTO the black hole, not the hole itself. Because the escape velovity of a black hole is greater than the speed of light, stuff don't tend to emit from it so well. Once it gets in, it ain't coming out.
How so? As stars gather more matter into themselves their "gravitational force grows stronger."
Sure, but by solar wind and radiation they lose matter/mass over time. Regardless of that, I would doubt that many stars will increase in mass the way that a black hole could under the same galactic circumstances(matter density primarily). In other words, by virtue of the greater gravitational pull/escape velocity of a black hole we could assume that objects will be much more likely to be captured by a black hole than a regular star. Therefore, a black hole will grow in mass/gravitational force much faster than a star would in the same circumstances. The difference here is a matter of scale and of rate of change.
It's like this, we expect that the earth will eventually be consumed by the sun when it runs out of hydrogen and goes red giant. The photosphere of the sun will expand to a size greater than our orbit. However, if we were orbiting a black hole , we could expect different results. Over the same duration, it is plausible that the gravitational force of the black hole could become great enough to pull the earth in, or at least significantly increase our orbital velocity; This by virtue of infalling matter/energy.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
Good rule for powdered drug substances as well.
No one likes to drink their cocaine, much less slurp it off the table. Tastes horrible and your whole mouth goes numb! Plus you have to kill the guy who spilled the drink and burying the body when your mouth is numb is quite inconvenient. If you get dirt in your mouth while shoveling out the shallow grave you can't feel it and it is hard as hell to spit it out...yada-yada-yada...
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
Don't forget to consider that the gravity that the black hole exerts on the star will change over time.
As it gathers more matter into itself it's gravitational force will grow stronger. In this case, it is not like orbiting another star.
It is impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
You sir, Kick Ass! That is all.
A similar kind of unequal reaction led to the discovery of the anesthetic properties of nitrous oxide. The anecdotal evidence I have read states that some guy named Gardner Quincy Colton used to give people nitrous oxide at parties and at lectures to his friends and associates. At one lecture he attended a man reacted in a violent manner instead of the usual happy-go-lucky manner associated with those who inhale nitrous oxide. The man hurt himself while under the influence, but did not notice it. This led a dentist in the audience to try using nitrous oxide as a pain reliever. Which led to me being able to get a free high from my dentist. Observe...
!
Nurse: Ok, I'm going to put this on your nose. Just breathe in through your nose and out through your mouth for a minute and tell me when your feet start to tingle. I'll be right back.
Me: Suuuuure. No problem.
(Exit nurse)
Me: (Breathing DEEPLY!!!)
(Enter nurse after about a minute and a half)
Nurse: How ya doin' in here? Feet tingling?
Me: Nope, not yet. (Feet are actually NUMB! Knees are tingling)
Nurse: Ok, I'm just going to step down the hall and get the instruments ready for your wisdom teeth. Just call me when your feet tingle, ok?
Me: Okie dokie.
(nurse exits)
Me: (HUMONGOID INHALATION!!)
(enter nurse after another two minutes)
Nurse: How are you doing in here? Your feet tingling yet?
Me: Nope, don't really feel much of anything. (Numb to the waist, chest is tingling now)
Nurse: Ok, I'm going to step out again for just a second.
Me: No problem, I'll be right here.
(nurse exits)
Me: (trying to take deep breaths but failing because of numb abdomen)
(nurse returns, quickly this time)
Nurse: Are you SURE you don't feel anything??
Me: Um...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
Nurse: (Smiling) I think you've had about enough of that now.
Me: (Slober SLOBBER Slober!) Wheee!
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
Probably some sort of collusion with /. and the article writers.
/.'load of hits on your site in no time. Just cut us in for a bit o' the advertising revenue from all the banners, matey."
"Psst! Hey! Throw in some M$ whack and we'll promise you a
It is completely impossible to say anything enlightening or intelligent in a space this size, excep
Do you have any idea how much pollution has been released into the atmosphere by the earth itself?
Mt. St. Helens' eruption released more krap into the atmosphere than humans have since we discovered fire. If you think that there is no correction in place on this planet maybe you should look at the quantity of poisonous chemicals that have been relessed by volcanoes just in the last century. Also consider that during one of the most prolific periods of bio-density on the earth (generally speaking: the dinosaur age), scientists speculate that volcanoes were MUCH more active than they are now. If there were no correction methods in place on the Earth we would all be breathing carbondioxide and hydrogen sulfide by now.
Funny, I just can't escape the feeling that if we go too much further, WE might be the correction that is made to the Earth.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
Just an aside, but I am doing a great job feeding and clothing the people I have right now. My wife, my kids, and myself. When it comes to feeding people, that is the only WE that there is. As a government, or even a "civilization" it is impossible to feed other people who won't help themselves. If institutionalized, this creates a feedback loop where people are rewarded for not performing in society (ie. they get to not work and eat for free..Woo HOOO!!!) leading to an increasing problem with poverty. Some corrolary examples...
During the Great Depression there were people who would not sweep a floor or perform some other "menial" duty to support themselves and their famalies. They were either too "proud" or too lazy. These people died or suffered because of thir own choices.
The concentration of wealth in the U.S. is a great example of human nature with respect to poverty. Individuals can operate under our laws and conventions for business and achieve much higher levels of profit and efficiency than in many other nations, but we consistently see people who are in poverty here. Sure, there are many who are legitimately poor, and these people deserve our charity and compassion, but there are just as many (probably more) who are poor by their own design. Either through bad decisions or ridiculous lifestyle choices, or pure laziness they have put themselves in a position where they are unable to meet their own needs.
Worst of all, many nations who have starving people bring this on themselves and their populace because of evil/greed. Please remember that there are governments in the world that will spend lavishly, extravagantly, absurdly on parties and events for the leaders of the country and their supporters while 3/4 of the rest of the nation starves to death. There are other nations who will starve you out of existence if you hold the wrong beliefs or political views. Just pick a nation with problems feeding their population and look at their history; the flaws will be glaring. Zimbabwe is a current example, but there are many in history. Let's look at what Zimbabwe has done:
1) Kill all the white farmers or drive them away from their farms.
2) Give the land to military retirees.
3) None of these military people know how to farm.
4) Starve your nation because of greed.
So, the conclusion is this, nothing will stop poverty. Nothing will stop people from making horrible stupid choices that provent them from developing or continuing as a productive members of society. Nothing will stop some countries from feeding some and starving others. Unless you invent some way to recreate the human mind and soul you might as well get used to seeing people in poverty. Sad, but true.
BTW, I hope you have some retort that will prove me wrong. PLEASE!
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
Oh, I thought is was a contraction of fruckin hrell.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
"The computer controlled acuators do not do the same thing as my hand and left foot would do. "
Right. The computer controlled actuators are much more precise that a human. The clutch engagement is constantly modulated by precise empirical inforamtion gained through sensors in the engine, transmission,and wheels. With these slip sensors, the car can react in milliseconds, most times even before the human in the seat even knows there is a problem. Furthermore, the SMG is designed to take into consideration the physics of the automobile in a way that no human could mimic without extensive experience behind the wheel of the exact same vehicle.
Couple that with perfect shifts between gears, automatic double-clutching on downshifts, and less than 100 millisecond gear changes and you have an "F1 driver in a box", at least with regard to the function of shifting gears.
Pretty damned cool!
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
"...was first used in Formula 1 (the definitive form of motor racing) where of course BMW run an engine with the Williams Team... BMW are cashing in on their F1 success by adding 'launch control' to their sporty saloons."
It is not BMW cashing in, it is Williams F1 injecting race technology into a BMW production car. You see, Williams F1 designed and produced the SMG transmission for the M3.
BTW, this is the whole idea of the M series of cars that BMW offers. M==Motorsport. Take racing technology developed from real track experience and translate it into a publicly consumable vehicle.
It is completely impossible to say anything intelligent or enlightening in a space this size, excep
"Because it means they want to make us obsolete to increase the margins of rich idiots."
Let's see...Rich guy, gettin richer my automating his computer network...Sounds like a fucking genius!
Vincit que se vincit.
...if it would be a good idea to declare a 5 year moratorium on ALL laws pertaining to security and the internet/networks. In other words, declare the internet a "new frontier" and let the strong survive.
Not only would this spur on an intense period of security systems development, and force those individuals who languish outside the circle of the latest security enhancements to keep up with the current advancements, but it just might encourage people to recognise the true nature of network systems and digital data (...among other things, networks are insescure for MANY reasons and that the data is never permanent or secure).
Keep in mind that vigilantism would be fair play...someone cracks your network and you can retaliate. Furthermore, the thought of impending attack might encourage the right people to have a level of alertness that should ALREADY be in place with regard to their networks.
This would also give "us" some time to take a close look at how things REALLY work on the internet before "they" start legislating.
Also, the desire to have a secure OS would drastically change the current marketplace. The average consumer would now HAVE to learn a little bit more about what they were actually spending their money on, and the execs of companies would pay better attention to which systems were designed with security in mind. Those systems with blatant, glaring, abundant, security holes (Hmmm, wonder who that could be?!) would find themselves out on their proverbial asses, maybe even overnight!
While this does run contrary to my feeling about law, property, and justice it is an idea that keeps popping up in my head...maybe my manifesto will be out next spring....hehe. Please comment.
Vincit que se vincit.
Could you imagine...you and your wardriving buddies are out, ya know, wardriving...
You notice Fred, your closest bud and hackmeister supreme, is actin' a little weird and won't let you see his laptop screen. So you, being the larger of the two pasties and, as a result of the steriods in a clandestinely doped meal replacement bar you had that morning, pry it out of his hands...Only to find a STREAM of outgoing "Enlarge you penis NOW by working from home!" emails! ACK!!! Fred's a SPAMMER!!!
What would you DO?!?!?
"Sophocles...Euripides...Meet my cousin---Testacles."
1. the idiots will try and hack and abuse.
2. the companies will slowly gain awareness, try to figure out how to secure themsleves, secure funding, initiate sucurity protocols, fix holes, etc.
WOOOOHOOOO!!!!!
The sooner that this happens the better.
Now all my laid off IT buddies can get back to work securing the wireless networks for all the companies that fired them last year. Course, maybe some of them could pose as "the idiots," (see above) thereby hastening and ensuring their return to gainful employment!
Maybe then they'll lay off buggin' me for the $20 I borrowed in highschool that I never paid back.
"Sophocles...Euripides...Meet my cousin---Testacles."
There are two sides to this that I see.
1) Yes, you do take a risk by trying to make school "Fun," particularly if this is done at the expense of true education. There is no substitute for mathematical exercises, spelling list memorizations, reading etc. Thes things are irrepalcable, no matter how many multimedia presentations you try to substitute them with.
2) However, I can see the value in trying to excite students about a subject that mignt not, according to the students' perception, be exciting. The aim of course, is to expose students to a subject in a way that may stimulate their enthusiasm, and therefore have them motivated from their own desire and curiosity, rather than the simple reason of "I have to take this course." To restate, an engaged and motivated student will perform better, and will, hopefully, WANT to learn more. This is the kind of thinking that can overcome the doldrums of all the rote, sometimes boring, mechanical processes that are required to learn higher math and science.
The real victory for the student, and to a lesser degree the teacher, is when a student begins to enjoy the hard stuff. For myself, the turning point was in Algebra 2 in high school. Until that point, the exercises and problems were, naturally, a chore. Then, when we studied matricies with 3 and more variables, something changed. I actually stared to enjoy the "work" of math. The fun was in the process, in getting the right answer. I was able to carry this into college with me and it was by far the most important thing I learned in High School.
Vincit que se vincit.
I think you have misinterpreted what they are doing here. They are measuring the speed of propogation of gravity. Sure, things in a gravity well will accelerate toward the center of the well. What is being measured here is how fast the effects of gravity are felt at a distance.
In other words, if a black hole with 10 million times the gravitational force of the sun instantly appeared in place of the sun would it:
a) take the 8 minutes (that's how long light takes to get to earth) for us to all get sucked off the face of the earth, or will it
b) instantly suck us off the face of the planet?
I kinda like the instant sucking off myself!
Vincit qui se vincit.
So if we can patent business practices, then what is to stop me from patenting, say, the idea of exchanging (Dr. Evil finger quotes) "money" for (Dr. Evil finger quotes) "goods and services." Then I could demand that for each such (yet again!) "exchange" that takes place I get a royalty fee. Every time someone makes a pay phone call or buys a yacht I would get a cut... Hmmmmm.
What a diabolical idea. This would spell the end of useful commerce as we know it. The entire economic structure of the world would collapse! Chaos would reign supreme in the marketplace and all would suffer the most horrible fate of total insolvency!!! With an idea like this I could bring the world's economy to it's knees!!!! Total domination!!!!!! MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!
(Frantically dials the patent office)
Oops! I have just been informed that the government already holds that patent:
--TAXES--
Vincit que se vincit.
The first round of winners evolved to win by cheating -- they found a bug in my software that allowed them to make three moves all at once and win on the first move!
Just like the article's writers, you are attributing anthropomorphised characteristics to code when what you have is an experiment that was poorly designed or had faulty initial conditions. Because the experiment yeilded unexpected results, you say that it "cheated," when in reality the conditions of the experiment (which you as the designer SET) determined the results. I don't know if you guys took the same programming classes that I did, but we learned that computers and software do EXACTLY what we program them to do. If the results are unexpected, WE have not done our due dilligence.
The same holds true for the scientists in the article. If they had put in a check in their flow chart to determine the source of the oscilations, they would have had more iterations of evolution until some other result was achieved. Furthermore, if they had shielded the experiment from outside EMF they could have had better results as well. There are probably a hundred things they could have done to get the results that they wanted, but they didn't do it.
My daddy used to say that when people say things about you behind your back it says more about them than it does about you. Likewise, IMHO what we are seeing is more indicative of the people who set up the experiemnts than of the code/experiments themselves.
In essence what we have here is a poorly designed experiment with ironic/humorous results and therefore it is not anything of interest. Go back to the ol' drawing board guys...and this time get it RIGHT.
Vincit qui se vincit.
I'm hoping and hoping that startling achievements in fighting "natural causes" will reach some sort of threshold where we might be expected to live for a ridiculously long time. :)
Herbert said "If, until this point in time, death had not yet been invented, there would be a need to do so." (paraphrased)
The desire to procreate and the lifespan of humanity have been in imbalance since recorded history. Imagine if we lived unrealistically long lives what population pressure would be like then? Scarcity of resources would cause massive unrest, and eventually, if war was avoided, famine would ensue.
Furthermore, the technology for long life, if not universally available, would encourage frightful animosity between the haves and the have-nots. With limited immortality as the prize, what lengths do you think people would go to?
In this situation, the "cure" could be worse than the "illness".
I think I like things as they are. To misquote Gordon Gecko: "Death is good. Death works."
Vincit qui se vincit.
Are you sure that he didn't plan to just eat a few of the Somalians each day?
He could just program himself to have them all taste like ice cream!
Vincit que se vincit.
As he aimed his remote at it and initiated the cryptographic handshake -- i.e., unlocked the doors --
When I read this I actually laughed. It seemed to me to be a kind of punch at the way that techno-speak is infiltrating the language. Sort of a glipse of the future of euphamism and linguistic vapidity.
I mean can you see the commerical? "The new Toyota Hybrid! Now with new and improved cryptographic handshake doomaflagie whiz-bang action!"
Vincit que se vincit.
only a small minority of the judeo/christian community finds it necessary to use the bible as a source for infallible scientific and historical truth. And the only reason they do so is to advance a moral agenda the particulars of which are rejected by the majority of devout christians.
I personally use the Bible in exactly the manner in which you describe, ie. it is infallible with respect to science and history, as well as in its main purpose, revealing the character of God. I do not, however propose to advance any moral agenda on anyone.
I do believe, however, that the evidence we observe in nature, and the account in the Bible are reconcilable. This is why I find it so interesting that the Bible and observed scientific facts coincide. I should not have asked if it was interesting to you or anyone else, as that is a matter of personal preference and therefore subjective at best.
I have found that both camps (evolutionist and creationist) have done a piss poor job of providing accurate information in an intelligent and dispassionate manner. From falsifications of evolutionary evidence and empirical results, to indoctrination of antiquated theories, to glossing over of theoretical holes and vaguely supported points, evolution science has made a poor showing of academic excellence. To be fair, most Christians can't theologize themselves out of a wet paper bag, and have no business discussing matters of creation when they haven't even properly studied the pertinent materials themselves.
Therefore, I will bide my time, study dilligently on BOTH sides of the street, and carefully observe the facts as they are revealed.
Vincit qui se vincit.
There are so many errors of science in the bible that finding one statement that is by happenstance scientifically correct (there are certainly more) means little.
Please elaborate on these errors. I have been a student of the Bible for quite a long time and by no means is my knowledge complete. I would really like to have evidence of this. It is quite possible that I have been lead away from these points where the Bible has provided inaccurate scientific information. Please provide as many as you can.
Not all of the facts of creation and it's account exist in Genesis. Furthermore there are other passages that have to to with the angelic conflict that preceded the creation of man that make reference to the Earth and even to the garden of eden existing BEFORE man was on the Earth. There is even reference to the garden of eden being a place where Satan would entertain angels that he was trying to convince to oppose God.
If you are a student of the Bible, PLEASE find a teacher who has at least 10+ years of study of the Bible in the ORIGINAL languages and who is familiar with the more accurate and earlier scripture evidence of the Bible. If you are studying from the King James or any modern english translation you are most probably missing the boat.