I'd like to see the experiment where they're entangled, one is dropped through a black hole's event horizon, and you observe the result on the other. Time compression should have an interesting effect on the half-life of the retained entangled one until it crosses the EH.
Wow, I bet you could make an incredible bomb in a science fiction book like that.
This may be a dumb question from the question being asked, but looking over the companies being listed as "good" (IBM/Lenovo/Dell/HP) which are people finding to be bad (including of course Fujitsu)?
I think the second page of the article is definitely the more interesting of the two: http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=1&cId=3 155102. Here they give the reasons why this launch's similarities aren't all positives. The PS2 may have been on ebay for $600, but the PS3 is coming from retail stores at MSRP of $600. That's a big difference.
Lamest idea ever. I like tech things, I don't mind MS, but this is the lamest idea ever. Anything you want on that screen could be written on a little piece of paper. Plus who carries their laptop around out of a case, uncovered. If you cover the laptop you can't see the screen anyway, and the times when this would be covered are probably the exact times that you would potentially use this thing.
As organisms get older the chance that they will have a mutation that leads to some form of cancer grows (in a if every day you have the chance of something happening, after enough days go by you're likely to have had it happening sense).
Does the same thing apply to a cell?
In other words, as a cell ages is it more likely to have a cancerous mutation? And how does this likeliness compare to the chance of having a cancerous mutation through a cell's reproduction process? (these are for the biologists out there)
If you have a greater chance to have the mutation a cell reproduces then you'd want cells to live along time so they have to reproduce less. If you have a greater chance as the cell sticks around (ages) then you'd want more reproduction and a shorter life span (even though this would be less energy and resource efficient, but maybe more efficient than fixing/killing cancerous cells).
There's no reason you can't do this with any card. Just because "true" drivers exist doesn't mean you couldn't write your own. But its a PITA to do this, so you'd at least want information on the cards control codes and what not (an API type manual), unless you want to reverse engineer these.
Even with a supportive vendor, getting drivers built by "the community" is slow; someone sitting in their room fiddling with a card on the weekends is going to take a lot longer (and probably do a worse job) then a guy whose job it is to develop to do this (and a guy that has the people who built the card 2 doors down).
I assume the loans you are taking out are subsidized loans, otherwise I don't think this question would be asked (because the obvious answer then is to pay off as much of the loans as you can). If this is the case, then there seems to be something fishy going on here.
It is against the FAFSA's rules to take out loans for non-schooling related reasons, in other words, you cannot take out a loan and then put that loan market on the stock market. That is not what financial aid is for. This is not free money, the banks aren't just saying here, borrow this money, pay it back when you can. This is subsidized meaning that the government is paying the interest for you.
Let me rephrase that: I am paying the government to pay the interest for you. If you don't need that money and have all this extra to spare, then you should return part of the loan.
I had this idea too, a year or two ago I had some money saved up and thought about taking out the max loans I could and putting it in bonds or something. Then I looked through the FAFSA docs and they explicitly state that you are not allowed to do this (I can't find a link at the moment, but if you look around you can find this).
I think this is a personal question. Compare your life outside of work at the lower income with the life outside of work you have now. If that change is acceptable then take the other job.
Just make sure you leave your current job on good terms (just in case) and make sure that this startup isn't going to invade the rest of your life (for instance with long hours trying to get the new product out the door, hours you could spend with your girlfriend or doing whatever else).
Just another suggestion to go with "buy a cd get...". How about buy a cd, get to watch a show live over the internet. Only allow one login per cd and as soon as the login has been used for a show invalidate it. Allow the same login to be used multiple times during the show so if someone gets kicked off they can get back in, but only stream to one IP and when it's done, it's done.
You could then sell remote logins to the show also once you have this setup. Not sure how big a money maker it'd be, but it'd give people another extra for buying the cd.
The reason people don't mind betas is that generally by the time they're released out to the public their main feature set is working. Also, the google and similar betas we've been seeing are not just betas of the next versions of apps, they're betas of new and interesting software.
If the new and interesting software fills a niche, it's primary functionality will be used by people. The primary functionality is generally in the publicized betas, therefore people use the beta.
I wonder if it would in some way be possible to switch off the regeneration then? I don't know much about gene therapy or the like, but maybe we could leave on the scarring genes for normal use (to get quicker general healing) and then monthly/yearly/... go for a checkup where they switch you to regen mode.
These inserted chips are never going to happen in the USA. Why never? As the comment titled 'Just a "health chip"?' mentions, for the christian church this is a sign of the end of the world (see Mark of the beast for more info).
I'm not an amazingly religous person, but with the large christian populace in the USA I can't see someone ever getting enough support to put something like this through. As soon as this became somewhat common place, a large chunk of the us citizens is going to hear sermons (or second-hand hear) about the oncoming end of the world and how whoever's backing this is either working for or is the anti-christ.
Like I said, I'm not an amazingly religous person, but even my seeing this raises an eyebrow (maybe I should go to church this week...).
I agree with this but would add that this isn't really the argument that generally gets made for GPL. A lot of the time you see arguments that by using a GPL style license you're helping to promote code sharing and you're doing good for the sake of doing good, which I entirely disagree is occurring with that style license.
Yes you're providing something potentially useful for someone out there, but you're also imposing your viewpoint on everyone else by requiring they do the same thing you are. Which doesn't sound like doing it for the greater good which open source software is many times made out to be.
With a more BSD style license I think that initial argument holds more ground, yes you may need to include an extra license file or some credits, but you don't impose yourself on others code/products.
I work for a government lab that develops both free software and private software (specifically when under contract with private companies) and we have to deal with this issue constantly. We try our best to not reinvent the wheel and to use pre-existing libraries that are out there, but sometimes you find a perfectly fitting library only to find its GPL'd, which kills any possibility of using it since not all of the work a company like ours can do is able to have a GPL style license.
It is not logical to expect (IMO) that a company contracting another company is always going to want (or be willing to accept) a GPL style license, so GPL'ing something limits its use in corporate sectors (again IMO).
Now many times if you go and ask the library authors' they'll grant special permission especially in a case like this, but it's a hastle to work with. And you can argue that you should fight for free software all over, but it doesn't make business sense in every case, especially when your company is not in the business of providing support.
Also the LGPL solves this sort of issue to some extent, but I'd say the LGPL is more BSD then GPL, but that's a bit of an overstatement...
The one thing I never see anyone talk about when seeing these patents is that there isn't always a company wide reason for certain patents.
Back in the day my dad worked as a manager for a meat packing plant. It was generally expected that if you were in the research part of the place that you would intermittently either publish some papers and/or get some patents. So while some of these patents are the companies making big plans (and this may or not be the case with this one), some patents are going to be people trying to get bonuses or meet their qouta.
Now someone probably oversees the patent submissions, but that doesn't mean the entire company would agree with a particular one, possibly that just one overseer does.
Show how nice a company they are by letting him keep his job. And next year quietly outsource his job.
Bonus points for replacing his co-workers too....
Microsoft may be primarily a software company, but they still are a big business. As with all businesses it is customary (and encourage) to diversify your offerings and tap into other markets. This helps avoid cash flow problems when your main market starts slows down.
If your main product is widgets but you sell wickets too, when people stop buying widgets you still have wicket money coming in.
I was reading this link http://boingboing.net/2004_01_01_archive.html#1073 57767583280159 over at boingboing.net and think it's pretty relevant. basically it's a comment towards why bother going to mars when we avoid the mars like climates on earth.
I don't totally agree with the article, especially since it doesn't consider our need to eventually figure out how to live off this planet, but it is interesting.
The article's not on getting reports for specific locations, it's about getting more accurate readings for those specific locations. Subtle but important difference.
Is this really something that apple will be able to totally control? Maybe the artist's whose music is being sold at apple's site wouldn't want their music continually being exchanged. I don't know much about copyright laws, but does the artist have any sway (besides somehow not letting apple sell their music) in the final distribution of their IP?
Something like this would be wonderful for the average person. For the 10% of the population (read us) that this would hinder the benefits would greatly overweight anything else. This does bring up a totally different idea I had while thinking of how things like this and similar average user features(for instance forcing people to use dialers, browsers, etc..) slow down the power users. It would be nice if major ISP's would start offering levels of service for users. This technically wouldn't require more charges for either group (although surely the ISP's would jack up the prices for specialization). The costs of blocking and filtering would balance with the cost of having to set up special settings for a different group. Both would cost more, but together they wouldn't have to have different prices. Of course this will never happen, but it's one of those ideas that somebody should think about. And all of this would probably be most useful for broadband connections.
BTW, are their major ISP's that do this type of thing?
All the military simulation articles I have seen talk about the soldier game-type simulations. This is not the only simulations the military uses though. For instance here is a list of military tools used for planning and modeling. This goes form supply-chains to medical planning.
I understand it's not as fun to think about groups of people filling in supply and demand info for ammo compared with troops walking through a mission on their computers; however, I'd think the first would be in the grand scheme of things more important.
I remember seeing information in the early Iraq war days that cruise missiles don't actually fly in straight paths; they are capable and programmed to somewhat dart around while flying. I know not many countries have cruise missiles they can launch at us, but I'd assume any country capable of launching nukes from a distance could setup the missiles to fly erratic flight plans.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd like to see the experiment where they're entangled, one is dropped through a black hole's event horizon, and you observe the result on the other. Time compression should have an interesting effect on the half-life of the retained entangled one until it crosses the EH.
Wow, I bet you could make an incredible bomb in a science fiction book like that.
This may be a dumb question from the question being asked, but looking over the companies being listed as "good" (IBM/Lenovo/Dell/HP) which are people finding to be bad (including of course Fujitsu)?
I think the second page of the article is definitely the more interesting of the two: http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=1&cId=3 155102. Here they give the reasons why this launch's similarities aren't all positives. The PS2 may have been on ebay for $600, but the PS3 is coming from retail stores at MSRP of $600. That's a big difference.
Lamest idea ever. I like tech things, I don't mind MS, but this is the lamest idea ever. Anything you want on that screen could be written on a little piece of paper. Plus who carries their laptop around out of a case, uncovered. If you cover the laptop you can't see the screen anyway, and the times when this would be covered are probably the exact times that you would potentially use this thing.
Lame
Does the same thing apply to a cell?
In other words, as a cell ages is it more likely to have a cancerous mutation? And how does this likeliness compare to the chance of having a cancerous mutation through a cell's reproduction process? (these are for the biologists out there)
If you have a greater chance to have the mutation a cell reproduces then you'd want cells to live along time so they have to reproduce less. If you have a greater chance as the cell sticks around (ages) then you'd want more reproduction and a shorter life span (even though this would be less energy and resource efficient, but maybe more efficient than fixing/killing cancerous cells).
There's no reason you can't do this with any card. Just because "true" drivers exist doesn't mean you couldn't write your own. But its a PITA to do this, so you'd at least want information on the cards control codes and what not (an API type manual), unless you want to reverse engineer these.
Even with a supportive vendor, getting drivers built by "the community" is slow; someone sitting in their room fiddling with a card on the weekends is going to take a lot longer (and probably do a worse job) then a guy whose job it is to develop to do this (and a guy that has the people who built the card 2 doors down).
It is against the FAFSA's rules to take out loans for non-schooling related reasons, in other words, you cannot take out a loan and then put that loan market on the stock market. That is not what financial aid is for. This is not free money, the banks aren't just saying here, borrow this money, pay it back when you can. This is subsidized meaning that the government is paying the interest for you.
Let me rephrase that: I am paying the government to pay the interest for you. If you don't need that money and have all this extra to spare, then you should return part of the loan.
I had this idea too, a year or two ago I had some money saved up and thought about taking out the max loans I could and putting it in bonds or something. Then I looked through the FAFSA docs and they explicitly state that you are not allowed to do this (I can't find a link at the moment, but if you look around you can find this).
I think this is a personal question. Compare your life outside of work at the lower income with the life outside of work you have now. If that change is acceptable then take the other job.
Just make sure you leave your current job on good terms (just in case) and make sure that this startup isn't going to invade the rest of your life (for instance with long hours trying to get the new product out the door, hours you could spend with your girlfriend or doing whatever else).
Just another suggestion to go with "buy a cd get...". How about buy a cd, get to watch a show live over the internet. Only allow one login per cd and as soon as the login has been used for a show invalidate it. Allow the same login to be used multiple times during the show so if someone gets kicked off they can get back in, but only stream to one IP and when it's done, it's done. You could then sell remote logins to the show also once you have this setup. Not sure how big a money maker it'd be, but it'd give people another extra for buying the cd.
The reason people don't mind betas is that generally by the time they're released out to the public their main feature set is working. Also, the google and similar betas we've been seeing are not just betas of the next versions of apps, they're betas of new and interesting software.
If the new and interesting software fills a niche, it's primary functionality will be used by people. The primary functionality is generally in the publicized betas, therefore people use the beta.
Stargate sarcophaguses anyone?
Again, I don't know if this even makes sense since I know very little bio. And maybe regeneration isn't slower. But interesting.
I'm not an amazingly religous person, but with the large christian populace in the USA I can't see someone ever getting enough support to put something like this through. As soon as this became somewhat common place, a large chunk of the us citizens is going to hear sermons (or second-hand hear) about the oncoming end of the world and how whoever's backing this is either working for or is the anti-christ.
Like I said, I'm not an amazingly religous person, but even my seeing this raises an eyebrow (maybe I should go to church this week...).
Here's a link to a movie of the mini-game from a site that's not dead (as of now). http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/pc/gta-sex-authentic- and-unlocked-107620.php
Yes you're providing something potentially useful for someone out there, but you're also imposing your viewpoint on everyone else by requiring they do the same thing you are. Which doesn't sound like doing it for the greater good which open source software is many times made out to be.
With a more BSD style license I think that initial argument holds more ground, yes you may need to include an extra license file or some credits, but you don't impose yourself on others code/products.
It is not logical to expect (IMO) that a company contracting another company is always going to want (or be willing to accept) a GPL style license, so GPL'ing something limits its use in corporate sectors (again IMO).
Now many times if you go and ask the library authors' they'll grant special permission especially in a case like this, but it's a hastle to work with. And you can argue that you should fight for free software all over, but it doesn't make business sense in every case, especially when your company is not in the business of providing support.
Also the LGPL solves this sort of issue to some extent, but I'd say the LGPL is more BSD then GPL, but that's a bit of an overstatement...
Back in the day my dad worked as a manager for a meat packing plant. It was generally expected that if you were in the research part of the place that you would intermittently either publish some papers and/or get some patents. So while some of these patents are the companies making big plans (and this may or not be the case with this one), some patents are going to be people trying to get bonuses or meet their qouta.
Now someone probably oversees the patent submissions, but that doesn't mean the entire company would agree with a particular one, possibly that just one overseer does.
Show how nice a company they are by letting him keep his job. And next year quietly outsource his job.
Bonus points for replacing his co-workers too....
And going up with the Russians doesn't count.
If your main product is widgets but you sell wickets too, when people stop buying widgets you still have wicket money coming in.
I was reading this link http://boingboing.net/2004_01_01_archive.html#1073 57767583280159 over at boingboing.net and think it's pretty relevant. basically it's a comment towards why bother going to mars when we avoid the mars like climates on earth.
I don't totally agree with the article, especially since it doesn't consider our need to eventually figure out how to live off this planet, but it is interesting.
The article's not on getting reports for specific locations, it's about getting more accurate readings for those specific locations. Subtle but important difference.
Is this really something that apple will be able to totally control? Maybe the artist's whose music is being sold at apple's site wouldn't want their music continually being exchanged. I don't know much about copyright laws, but does the artist have any sway (besides somehow not letting apple sell their music) in the final distribution of their IP?
Something like this would be wonderful for the average person. For the 10% of the population (read us) that this would hinder the benefits would greatly overweight anything else.
This does bring up a totally different idea I had while thinking of how things like this and similar average user features(for instance forcing people to use dialers, browsers, etc..) slow down the power users. It would be nice if major ISP's would start offering levels of service for users. This technically wouldn't require more charges for either group (although surely the ISP's would jack up the prices for specialization). The costs of blocking and filtering would balance with the cost of having to set up special settings for a different group. Both would cost more, but together they wouldn't have to have different prices.
Of course this will never happen, but it's one of those ideas that somebody should think about. And all of this would probably be most useful for broadband connections.
BTW, are their major ISP's that do this type of thing?
All the military simulation articles I have seen talk about the soldier game-type simulations. This is not the only simulations the military uses though. For instance here is a list of military tools used for planning and modeling. This goes form supply-chains to medical planning. I understand it's not as fun to think about groups of people filling in supply and demand info for ammo compared with troops walking through a mission on their computers; however, I'd think the first would be in the grand scheme of things more important.
I remember seeing information in the early Iraq war days that cruise missiles don't actually fly in straight paths; they are capable and programmed to somewhat dart around while flying.
I know not many countries have cruise missiles they can launch at us, but I'd assume any country capable of launching nukes from a distance could setup the missiles to fly erratic flight plans.