You do realise this process works for ANYTHING based on carbon, right? Including soybean plants, and soybeans, and soybean oil. You don't need to process the beans to get the oil -- just throw them in a TDP "machine" and get light crude out the other end. That's the beauty of it: there's no need for expensive and complicated separation of waste material. Just throw it all in, let the TDP process do its work, then recover raw materials at the end.
I...voted for Bush twice...I think his...stand on intellectual freedom issues is wrong.
You know, when you think someone is so completely and totally wrong, you're not supposed to vote for that person.
Vote for the candidate who has an agreeable stance on the issues, even if that's a third-party candidate. If more than, say, 10 per cent of the American populace would do this instead of being total sheep, the two-party career politicians would have to sit up and take notice.
I'm no fan of the rumour sites, but I find there to be enormous potential for a very troubling precedent here.
The court has to consider two things.
1) What is a "journalist"? 2) Do journalists have the right to protect their sources?
If the publisher of Think Secret is defined as "not a journalist", a whole lot of other Web-based media are going to find themselves in a whole lot of hot water for similar stuff. The Druge Report, Salon, etc. -- there's no print media there, so on the surface I don't see a whole lot of difference between these sites and Think Secret.
If journalists don't have the right to protect their sources, controversial and very important stories in the media will completely dry up, because the sources won't wish to be put in a position where they could be revealed.
IMO -- and IANAL -- if the anonymous e-mail to Think Secret is truly anonymous, and Nick was smart enough not to keep server logs around, Apple stands to gain absolutely nothing from this suit, because if he did things properly, Nick has absolutely no idea who his source is. It doesn't matter how many lawyers Apple has, it doesn't matter what Apple threatens to do to him. If he doesn't know, he can't tell them!
I sincerely hope this is the case, though I seriously doubt it. In all likelihood, Nick knows exactly who his source is, and he wants to protect that source to preserve his future revenue stream. IMO, that's despicable and cheap.
But it's the same thing every other form of media does, and media consumers absolutely lap it up. Newspapers make money by selling ads in their paper. TV shows make money by selling commercial airtime. These more traditional media outlets have published or broadcast "scoops" that I guarantee upset people who wanted the release to be staged a certain way. This happens in the auto industry all the time. But the auto industry isn't run by megalomaniacs of the same calibre as Uncle Steve. The point is, just because a media outlet exists as part of a for-profit enterprise doesn't make any tips it receives about unreleased products "corporate espionage". AFAIK, "corporate espionage" requires malicious intent. I rather doubt any of Apple's competitors gained anything by having one week's advance notice that the Mac mini and iPod Shuffle were coming out. Hell, most of Apple's competitors have spent the last month and a half talking about how utterly useless and passé these two products are, rather than cracking the whip on their engineering departments to get copycat products to market ASAP.
So I hope Apple loses the suit, not because I like Think Secret (I firmly believe that the rumour sites hurt Apple), but because I believe in the sanctity of the media's right not to reveal their sources.
The last Apple laptop mousing device that *might* have been practical to sell as a user-replaceable aftermarket "upgrade" part was...uhm...maybe the TiBook's trackpad, which was less than impossible to get to.
That's it. There's no friggin' WAY anyone but an expert could successfully replace the trackpad button on virtually any other Mac laptop.
I wouldn't be too surprised if a company like MCE has already investigated the possibility of doing this and decided it just wasn't economically viable. There are already mail-in SuperDrive upgrades for most recent Apple laptops, and before that, mail-in DVD and Combo drive upgrades were popular for the Lombard and Pismo series. Those upgrades are simple by comparison, though.
You don't have any idea who John Gruber is, do you?
That's a rhetorical question, but if you insist on answering, the correct answer is "Someone who knows far more about Macs than you could ever hope to know if you lived until you were 1000 years old."
You, sir, are an idiot if you think repairing permissions before an OS update is doing you any good at all. You probably rebuilt your desktop and zapped the PRAM on OS 9 every week, too, didn't you?
AFAIK, this still isn't fixed, probably because Apple didn't know about it in time. Can anyone who has the update confirm that Safari is still vulnerable?
Me, I'm waiting on the new AlBook to get here. No point in updating the Ti when it's getting retired in a week.
You seem like you know what you're talking about, but I take issue with this:
Sure, coal plants pump out a lot more garbage into the environment than nuclear plants, but coal plants have two big advantages: relatively small events don't wind up writing-off the whole plant; and you can take the damn things apart and fix them relatively cheaply because they aren't radioactive.
You know that a majority of the non-background radioactivity in the atmosphere comes from burning coal, right? And that when coal-burning plants are run for a long time, a lot of radioactive crap accumulates in the belly of the plant? There are a couple old coal-fired plants around here and the radiation makes shit *glow* at night. It's fantastically unsafe, and unlike nuclear, there isn't a rigorous waste containment policy.
Nuclear might not seem economical, but how much are we going to pay to un-fuck the world if we keep burning coal for the next 100 years?
You got modded funny -- and it is -- but I'll bet the reason for this is Coffeyville is very very close to the geographic centre of the United States.
If Google had been smarter, they would have made it centre on the population density centre of the United States, so that on average, people would have to do less dragging to centre any individual residence.
It's being used as a tool to determine a location where the criminal act might have occurred. Now they can look for surveillance tapes, talk with hotel personnel, etc. to determine who was there with the victim.
This is no more "evidence" than a person calling Silent Observer and saying "I saw Mr. X with a little girl at the Acme Hotel" would be. It's a lead. Nothing more. Don't make it out to be something it's not.
Re:um, car's aren't rockets...
on
Hondas in Space
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
A Honda does not push the envelope. A Ferrari does. That is why a Ferrari will break down more often, on a per-mile basis, than a Honda.
Bullshit.
The Honda S2000's engine is making more horsepower per litre of displacement than any other mass-produced normally aspirated engine on the market, including every single Ferrari engine. The Acura RSX engine also makes more HP per litre than every Ferrari engine.
It has absolutely nothing to do with "pushing the envelope," and everything to do with volume production. It's a lot easier -- and a lot more IMPORTANT -- to iron out the bugs when you make 50,000 than if you make 1,000.
People don't buy Ferraris for their reliability. They buy them because they have a big prancing horse emblem on the hood and exude sex appeal like only a piece of fine Italian machinery can.
The original analogy was flawed at best. Science doesn't give a crap what brand name is on the rocket -- they just want the reliability at a low cost.
White paint? What, are you going to blind it so it can't see to hit us?:-p
You don't really think white paint is reflective enough to make a difference in an asteroid's orbit over any reasonable amount of time, do you? Or that we could effectively coat one in it?
Slashdot Mirror
The microbes replied:
"Throw us a fricken bone here. We've been frozen for thirty thousand years!"
p
Has it fixed the IDN vulnerability yet? 10.3.8 didn't...
p
RFC 1149, man.
p
Not if they block an IP rather than a login name, which is the smart thing to do (and the way it's been implemented where I've seen it).
p
You do realise this process works for ANYTHING based on carbon, right? Including soybean plants, and soybeans, and soybean oil. You don't need to process the beans to get the oil -- just throw them in a TDP "machine" and get light crude out the other end. That's the beauty of it: there's no need for expensive and complicated separation of waste material. Just throw it all in, let the TDP process do its work, then recover raw materials at the end.
cl
If the Soviet cosmonauts thought pencil lead actually contained "metal lead particles," it's no wonder they lost the Cold War...
p
I...voted for Bush twice...I think his...stand on intellectual freedom issues is wrong.
You know, when you think someone is so completely and totally wrong, you're not supposed to vote for that person.
Vote for the candidate who has an agreeable stance on the issues, even if that's a third-party candidate. If more than, say, 10 per cent of the American populace would do this instead of being total sheep, the two-party career politicians would have to sit up and take notice.
p
You ever look at the back of a $20 bill.... ...ON MARS???
p
I'm no fan of the rumour sites, but I find there to be enormous potential for a very troubling precedent here.
The court has to consider two things.
1) What is a "journalist"?
2) Do journalists have the right to protect their sources?
If the publisher of Think Secret is defined as "not a journalist", a whole lot of other Web-based media are going to find themselves in a whole lot of hot water for similar stuff. The Druge Report, Salon, etc. -- there's no print media there, so on the surface I don't see a whole lot of difference between these sites and Think Secret.
If journalists don't have the right to protect their sources, controversial and very important stories in the media will completely dry up, because the sources won't wish to be put in a position where they could be revealed.
IMO -- and IANAL -- if the anonymous e-mail to Think Secret is truly anonymous, and Nick was smart enough not to keep server logs around, Apple stands to gain absolutely nothing from this suit, because if he did things properly, Nick has absolutely no idea who his source is. It doesn't matter how many lawyers Apple has, it doesn't matter what Apple threatens to do to him. If he doesn't know, he can't tell them!
I sincerely hope this is the case, though I seriously doubt it. In all likelihood, Nick knows exactly who his source is, and he wants to protect that source to preserve his future revenue stream. IMO, that's despicable and cheap.
But it's the same thing every other form of media does, and media consumers absolutely lap it up. Newspapers make money by selling ads in their paper. TV shows make money by selling commercial airtime. These more traditional media outlets have published or broadcast "scoops" that I guarantee upset people who wanted the release to be staged a certain way. This happens in the auto industry all the time. But the auto industry isn't run by megalomaniacs of the same calibre as Uncle Steve. The point is, just because a media outlet exists as part of a for-profit enterprise doesn't make any tips it receives about unreleased products "corporate espionage". AFAIK, "corporate espionage" requires malicious intent. I rather doubt any of Apple's competitors gained anything by having one week's advance notice that the Mac mini and iPod Shuffle were coming out. Hell, most of Apple's competitors have spent the last month and a half talking about how utterly useless and passé these two products are, rather than cracking the whip on their engineering departments to get copycat products to market ASAP.
So I hope Apple loses the suit, not because I like Think Secret (I firmly believe that the rumour sites hurt Apple), but because I believe in the sanctity of the media's right not to reveal their sources.
p
Has anyone actually seen a legitimate IDN in the wild?
With most of the phishing scams targeted at English-speaking users, I don't see this as such a horrible decision.
p
The last Apple laptop mousing device that *might* have been practical to sell as a user-replaceable aftermarket "upgrade" part was...uhm...maybe the TiBook's trackpad, which was less than impossible to get to.
That's it. There's no friggin' WAY anyone but an expert could successfully replace the trackpad button on virtually any other Mac laptop.
I wouldn't be too surprised if a company like MCE has already investigated the possibility of doing this and decided it just wasn't economically viable. There are already mail-in SuperDrive upgrades for most recent Apple laptops, and before that, mail-in DVD and Combo drive upgrades were popular for the Lombard and Pismo series. Those upgrades are simple by comparison, though.
p
You don't have any idea who John Gruber is, do you?
That's a rhetorical question, but if you insist on answering, the correct answer is "Someone who knows far more about Macs than you could ever hope to know if you lived until you were 1000 years old."
You, sir, are an idiot if you think repairing permissions before an OS update is doing you any good at all. You probably rebuilt your desktop and zapped the PRAM on OS 9 every week, too, didn't you?
p
Which is precisely what Gruber said in the article I linked. "Rebuild Desktop" hardly ever helped anything either. :)
p
Not that I'm doubting you, but *what??*
How the hell does changing a font fix ANYTHING?
That has to be the most non-intuitive (read: how in the hell did anyone even think of doing that?) solution to any problem I've ever seen.
p
AFAIK, this still isn't fixed, probably because Apple didn't know about it in time. Can anyone who has the update confirm that Safari is still vulnerable?
Me, I'm waiting on the new AlBook to get here. No point in updating the Ti when it's getting retired in a week.
p
As always, that advice is a load of horse hockey.
p
You didn't happen to have a NeXT Cube inside that case, did you? :-p
p
You seem like you know what you're talking about, but I take issue with this:
Sure, coal plants pump out a lot more garbage into the environment than nuclear plants, but coal plants have two big advantages: relatively small events don't wind up writing-off the whole plant; and you can take the damn things apart and fix them relatively cheaply because they aren't radioactive.
You know that a majority of the non-background radioactivity in the atmosphere comes from burning coal, right? And that when coal-burning plants are run for a long time, a lot of radioactive crap accumulates in the belly of the plant? There are a couple old coal-fired plants around here and the radiation makes shit *glow* at night. It's fantastically unsafe, and unlike nuclear, there isn't a rigorous waste containment policy.
Nuclear might not seem economical, but how much are we going to pay to un-fuck the world if we keep burning coal for the next 100 years?
p
You got modded funny -- and it is -- but I'll bet the reason for this is Coffeyville is very very close to the geographic centre of the United States.
If Google had been smarter, they would have made it centre on the population density centre of the United States, so that on average, people would have to do less dragging to centre any individual residence.
p
It isn't being used as evidence.
It's being used as a tool to determine a location where the criminal act might have occurred. Now they can look for surveillance tapes, talk with hotel personnel, etc. to determine who was there with the victim.
This is no more "evidence" than a person calling Silent Observer and saying "I saw Mr. X with a little girl at the Acme Hotel" would be. It's a lead. Nothing more. Don't make it out to be something it's not.
p
It's here for the great colour scheme.
p
A Honda does not push the envelope. A Ferrari does. That is why a Ferrari will break down more often, on a per-mile basis, than a Honda.
Bullshit.
The Honda S2000's engine is making more horsepower per litre of displacement than any other mass-produced normally aspirated engine on the market, including every single Ferrari engine. The Acura RSX engine also makes more HP per litre than every Ferrari engine.
It has absolutely nothing to do with "pushing the envelope," and everything to do with volume production. It's a lot easier -- and a lot more IMPORTANT -- to iron out the bugs when you make 50,000 than if you make 1,000.
People don't buy Ferraris for their reliability. They buy them because they have a big prancing horse emblem on the hood and exude sex appeal like only a piece of fine Italian machinery can.
The original analogy was flawed at best. Science doesn't give a crap what brand name is on the rocket -- they just want the reliability at a low cost.
p
Don't forget aircraft and jet engines.
p
When you see somebody get on board a relatively cheap, fast, murder-cycle, do you tell them about the risks?
If you did, you'd be putting your front teeth back in your jaw.
Just sayin'.
There's almost nothing that pisses off motorcyclists more than someone who doesn't ride one telling us how suicidal we are.
p
White paint? What, are you going to blind it so it can't see to hit us? :-p
You don't really think white paint is reflective enough to make a difference in an asteroid's orbit over any reasonable amount of time, do you? Or that we could effectively coat one in it?
p