I was always under the assumption that a uniformed officer knocks on your door and hands you a slip of paper to escort you "downtown."
Not anymore. Blitzkrieg raids have become SOP for anything more severe than unpaid parking tickets, and will probably remain that way until more citizens start greeting these home invasions with kinetic resistance.
Has anyone tried to sue (this is the US after all) for excessive use of force?
Anyone with some knowledge about economic theory will know that income you get in 20 to 50,
not to mention 50 to 95, years from
now should have almost no impact on your decision about whether or not to invest time ( = money )
on creating a copyrightable work today.
Unless you calculate a extremely big income or a absurdly low interest the
present value of that income
is negligible.
Why? Gosling isn't the one holding the patents, he has no standing in this.
No, but he may have lots of good information about what was common knowledge
(among experts in this field) at the time of the development of Java.
Also what pre-existing knowledge and systems the inventors of Java had for inspiration
when developing it.
Military grade explosives will not go off from being hit by a bullet.
They require a blasting-cap (I hope that is the correct word in English)
or similar to detonate.
Yes, but only the actual original works, reprints are about worthless
on a one by one basis. Of course as mass-production it is alot of money there.
Anyway, after 10 years most artist/writers makes little money from their
works because they almost always have to sell the copyright to a
publisher/record company to get them to produce and promote it
Norwegian car tax used to be calculated by weight, engine volume and engine effect. I'm not sure about the details about the new system but now its at least partially based on CO2 g/km emissions of the car measured by some EU-test.
Not knowing the details on cotton the answer is maybe not.
For example your hair does not contain any DNA if it is cut off without the hair sack. Hair does not consist off cells but of a substance prodused by hair sack cells. Of course the hair can easyly be "contaminated" with dna from somewhere else on your body.
Skin on the other hand contains DNA as your topmost layer of skin is actually dead skin-cells.
So it is possible the fibers of cotton used for cotton produkts does not consist off plant cells but off a substance prodused by the cells
Actualy there is a process when making the sex-cells that mix the genes from the two chromosomes in the chromosome pair. So none of the chromosones in the semen is actually a direct copy
of the ones in the rest of your body.
So you're telling me that almost every single user would reach several points in your puzzles where, for a whole 30 seconds they have no bloody clue what to do, and essentially have to surrender and use that button? And you think they should enjoy the frustration instead?
IMHO, if the game has a timer and you lose when it runs out then 30 seconds is long time to be stuck. But if it is a game with specific puzzles where when you have solved it once you know the solution and no timer, then spending 30 seconds thinking should be minimum for solving a level.
would this not be vulnerable to infra-red cameras?
First we need to rembeer that light, infra-red, ultra violet and radar (among others) are just different wavelengths of electromagnetic waves.
So the prisiple is the same but one "cloack" technology may be effective for some wavelengts
but not others.
I'm just going to call it all emw for now.
To be invisible one need to take care of four
things.
1. Not reflecting any emw from any emw-source
to the sensor/observer.
2. Not to emit any emw to the sensor/observer
3. Not create a shadow in the emw emitded by the backgroud against the sensor/observer
4. Not create a shadow in the emw emitded towards a surface in a way changing the emw the surface
reflects/emits towards the sensor/observer
So to ansver your question to be efective against infra-red cameras the technology must be effective
guiding emw around in the infrared spectrum and one must somehow hide ones own infrared signature
One argument against supposing an intelligent desinger is that the desing is not all that intelligent
For eksample the human eye has the optic nerves on the inside of the eye redusing space for light sensitive cells and making a blind spot where the nerves come togheter and leaves the eye. Some species of octopus has this the right way, but as humans according to the bible are created after the sea-creatures it is strange the designer did not keep this better solution.
The human spine seems like it has been designed for moving on four limbs and given some minor tweaks to fit bipedal movement. Maybe the designer
was too short on time to redesign this properly?
We have multiple nerves that are wired in a way that allow a strike to the wrong (or right dependig if you are the striker or the strikee) place to disable a person completly. Maybe fighting was not in the original design goals.
These weaknesses must mean the desinger was not omniscient, or maybe lazy. Or maybe there was some other reason, makin life more challening? I dont know.
These weaknesses can be explained by evolution.
Because any change to happen in evolution there must be a path in "gene-space" from one form to the new where every step in the way is a improvement on the previus step. Creationists tries to use this property of evolution teory to disprove it by trying to find exsamples of features where there can be no such path.
So a specie can be "trapped" in an local optimum in the "gene-space" until a change inn its enviorment causes it to no longer be an local optimum, a big (beneficial) mutation causes it to make a big leap in "gene-space" out of the local optimum or it goes extinct.
The big mutation event is the least likley one, but considerig the timerframe and the number of species and individuals it probably has happened
may times.
Of cource the customer desides the license for the code they pay you to write!
But the discussione might go like this:
I can do this in 200 hours using this and this
libary but the result must be under the GPL
(if you ever need to redistribute it) or
I can spend 300 aditonal hours reimplementing this
GPL-libary or you can buy this similiar libary from company X for Y$(probaly cheaper than reimplementing, but the we will have to rely on company X for bugfixes)
Because the purpose of the GPL is to make
all code free for everyone. So the license is
designed to only be usefull to those helping this goal.
If this does not fit you look for public domain code, BSD (or bsd-like) licensed code or buy a closed source libary with a license that fit your
purpose.
In a game the program/code might be GPL but the
grapichs, sound, story and possibly action scripts for NP-Characters might be considered data and be under a different license.
So it would be possible to have an opensource
game engine and have companies charge for
modules with content for the engine.
Why do we restrict your freedom to drive at 140 mph down a crowded inner city street?
To protect others freedom to walk around without getting killed.
I the same manner the GPL has some restrictions to protect other freedoms. One can argue where the balance is to be and several open source licenses are awailable as the result of people disagreing on this balance.
On the other hand we can not put aside the fact
that the GPL also has a political agenda, to
increase the amount of FOSS software by making a
large amount of code, libaries and software under a licence that makes it imposible to close source
it thus making it quicker and easier to develop
new software if one can open source it and use
FOSS libaries and code.
Most programmers/coders in the world, and most of the money in IT are not made by selling software but by (like myself) bulding custom systems and custom software for a spesific customers.
I have an iPod, i bought my girlfriend an iPod.
I really like the design of the lastest iMac's and
apples laptop computers.
But I dont like the way apple tries to force
the customers bying their hardware into using
it only the way they like it.
Like apple tries to make it hard to use anyting
but iTunes to load music onto the iPod.
Not only by not disclosing the file-formats
needed to load the music, by when it was reverse
enginered they starded making cryptogaphicaly
signatures on some of the files to make it
imposible to write third party software for this purpose. (Anyone know if this has been cracked yet?)
I think this as well as the way they treat the
iPhone owners disclose an unhealty attitude
towards their customers.
There is not much room for interpretation in the versers in the
genesis that states that the punshiment for worship of other gods
is death, preferably by stoning and for some reason at the city gates.
One might argue that this is only about jewish people
(this is the old testament so christianity did not exists yet)
converting to other religions, but Islam is (as they should be)
often critisised when killing converters to other religions.
Luckily most modern cristians ignore most of the bible:-)
The fact that there are violent parts of the bible might
be irrelevant when discussing wheter Islam is violent,
but not when stating that Islam is more violent than
other religions.
The cristian churches has commitet uspeakable
amounts of violence up the ages, Islam will have to
work hard to catch up. Not to mention that if you attribute
violence from people that happen to be muslims to Islam
when the violence itself is more related to politics,
then the amount of violence that needs to be attributet
to christiany is enormous.
But now I sound like I defend or endorse Islam, wich I dont.
I just get annoyed when other religons pretend to be all
on the moral highground.
As far as I am conserned all religion is bad, for one reason:
They ask you to but aside critical thought and blindly follow
a dogma and the religus leaders.
Slashdot Mirror
I know he is joking, but I suppose they mean a production reactor as opposed to a research reactor.
I was always under the assumption that a uniformed officer knocks on your door and hands you a slip of paper to escort you "downtown."
Not anymore. Blitzkrieg raids have become SOP for anything more severe than unpaid parking tickets, and will probably remain that way until more citizens start greeting these home invasions with kinetic resistance.
Has anyone tried to sue (this is the US after all) for excessive use of force?
Anyone with some knowledge about economic theory will know that income you get in 20 to 50, not to mention 50 to 95, years from now should have almost no impact on your decision about whether or not to invest time ( = money ) on creating a copyrightable work today.
Unless you calculate a extremely big income or a absurdly low interest the present value of that income is negligible.
Why? Gosling isn't the one holding the patents, he has no standing in this.
No, but he may have lots of good information about what was common knowledge (among experts in this field) at the time of the development of Java. Also what pre-existing knowledge and systems the inventors of Java had for inspiration when developing it.
There is a difference between buying extra content for a game, and buying Items to give you a head start you could achieve by playing.
As games are for your own entertainment I am not implying one is better or worse than the other but it is different.
U.S.A is a socialist country and have always been a socialist country.
You pay taxes and those taxes and those taxes are spent on "the common good": roads, schools, military, police, firebrigades...
Healthcare is just one more ting on the list of what your taxes pay for
Military grade explosives will not go off from being hit by a bullet.
They require a blasting-cap (I hope that is the correct word in English)
or similar to detonate.
I think requiring a full production model on sale is to steep a requirement.
But a working prototype should definitively be required.
Mythbusters often use pigs when testing that kind of damage.
Yes, but only the actual original works, reprints are about worthless on a one by one basis. Of course as mass-production it is alot of money there.
Anyway, after 10 years most artist/writers makes little money from their works because they almost always have to sell the copyright to a publisher/record company to get them to produce and promote it
Norwegian car tax used to be calculated by weight, engine volume and engine effect.
I'm not sure about the details about the new system but now its at least partially based on CO2 g/km emissions of the car measured by some EU-test.
Not knowing the details on cotton the answer is maybe not.
For example your hair does not contain any DNA if it is cut off without the hair sack. Hair does not consist off cells but of a substance prodused by hair sack cells. Of course the hair can easyly be "contaminated" with dna from somewhere else on your body.
Skin on the other hand contains DNA as your topmost layer of skin is actually dead skin-cells.
So it is possible the fibers of cotton used for cotton produkts does not consist off plant cells but off a substance prodused by the cells
I want to lie, shipwrecked and comatose, drinking fresh mango juice ,Fun ...........
Goldfish schools nibbling at my toes
Fun, Fun
Actualy there is a process when making the sex-cells that mix the genes from the two chromosomes in the chromosome pair. So none of the chromosones in the semen is actually a direct copy of the ones in the rest of your body.
So you're telling me that almost every single user would reach several points in your puzzles where, for a whole 30 seconds they have no bloody clue what to do, and essentially have to surrender and use that button? And you think they should enjoy the frustration instead?
IMHO, if the game has a timer and you lose when it runs out then 30 seconds is long time to be stuck. But if it is a game with specific puzzles where when you have solved it once you know the solution and no timer, then spending 30 seconds thinking should be minimum for solving a level.
The persons who got the brilliant idea to but remote readable technology into passports should be hit with a cluestick the size of the Eiffel-tower.
Like it would be such a big problem to put such a card into a reader with connection points
Surface area is the size of a football field, but because it is very thin it can be rolled up in to something very small.
Think about a roll of toilet paper. When rolled up it is about 10cm x 10cm x 10cm. If you roll it out it might be 50m long.
First we need to rembeer that light, infra-red, ultra violet and radar (among others) are just different wavelengths of electromagnetic waves. So the prisiple is the same but one "cloack" technology may be effective for some wavelengts but not others.
I'm just going to call it all emw for now.
To be invisible one need to take care of four things.
1. Not reflecting any emw from any emw-source to the sensor/observer.
2. Not to emit any emw to the sensor/observer
3. Not create a shadow in the emw emitded by the backgroud against the sensor/observer
4. Not create a shadow in the emw emitded towards a surface in a way changing the emw the surface reflects/emits towards the sensor/observer
So to ansver your question to be efective against infra-red cameras the technology must be effective guiding emw around in the infrared spectrum and one must somehow hide ones own infrared signature
One argument against supposing an intelligent desinger is that the desing is not all that intelligent
For eksample the human eye has the optic nerves on the inside of the eye redusing space for light sensitive cells and making a blind spot where the nerves come togheter and leaves the eye. Some species of octopus has this the right way, but as humans according to the bible are created after the sea-creatures it is strange the designer did not keep this better solution.
The human spine seems like it has been designed for moving on four limbs and given some minor tweaks to fit bipedal movement. Maybe the designer was too short on time to redesign this properly?
We have multiple nerves that are wired in a way that allow a strike to the wrong (or right dependig if you are the striker or the strikee) place to disable a person completly. Maybe fighting was not in the original design goals.
These weaknesses must mean the desinger was not omniscient, or maybe lazy. Or maybe there was some other reason, makin life more challening? I dont know.
These weaknesses can be explained by evolution.
Because any change to happen in evolution there must be a path in "gene-space" from one form to the new where every step in the way is a improvement on the previus step. Creationists tries to use this property of evolution teory to disprove it by trying to find exsamples of features where there can be no such path.
So a specie can be "trapped" in an local optimum in the "gene-space" until a change inn its enviorment causes it to no longer be an local optimum, a big (beneficial) mutation causes it to make a big leap in "gene-space" out of the local optimum or it goes extinct.
The big mutation event is the least likley one, but considerig the timerframe and the number of species and individuals it probably has happened may times.
Of cource the customer desides the license for the code they pay you to write!
But the discussione might go like this:
I can do this in 200 hours using this and this libary but the result must be under the GPL (if you ever need to redistribute it)
or I can spend 300 aditonal hours reimplementing this GPL-libary
or you can buy this similiar libary from company X for Y$(probaly cheaper than reimplementing, but the we will have to rely on company X for bugfixes)
Because the purpose of the GPL is to make all code free for everyone. So the license is designed to only be usefull to those helping this goal.
If this does not fit you look for public domain code, BSD (or bsd-like) licensed code or buy a closed source libary with a license that fit your purpose.
In a game the program/code might be GPL but the grapichs, sound, story and possibly action scripts for NP-Characters might be considered data and be under a different license.
So it would be possible to have an opensource game engine and have companies charge for modules with content for the engine.
Why do we restrict your freedom to drive at 140 mph down a crowded inner city street?
To protect others freedom to walk around without getting killed.
I the same manner the GPL has some restrictions to protect other freedoms. One can argue where the balance is to be and several open source licenses are awailable as the result of people disagreing on this balance.
On the other hand we can not put aside the fact that the GPL also has a political agenda, to increase the amount of FOSS software by making a large amount of code, libaries and software under a licence that makes it imposible to close source it thus making it quicker and easier to develop new software if one can open source it and use FOSS libaries and code.
Most programmers/coders in the world, and most of the money in IT are not made by selling software but by (like myself) bulding custom systems and custom software for a spesific customers.
For this use open source works fantastic.
I have an iPod, i bought my girlfriend an iPod. I really like the design of the lastest iMac's and apples laptop computers.
But I dont like the way apple tries to force the customers bying their hardware into using it only the way they like it.
Like apple tries to make it hard to use anyting but iTunes to load music onto the iPod. Not only by not disclosing the file-formats needed to load the music, by when it was reverse enginered they starded making cryptogaphicaly signatures on some of the files to make it imposible to write third party software for this purpose. (Anyone know if this has been cracked yet?)
I think this as well as the way they treat the iPhone owners disclose an unhealty attitude towards their customers.
I will not buy any apple produkts in the future.
I guess facts are good bait for trolling :-)
There is not much room for interpretation in the versers in the genesis that states that the punshiment for worship of other gods is death, preferably by stoning and for some reason at the city gates.
One might argue that this is only about jewish people (this is the old testament so christianity did not exists yet) converting to other religions, but Islam is (as they should be) often critisised when killing converters to other religions.
Luckily most modern cristians ignore most of the bible :-)
The fact that there are violent parts of the bible might be irrelevant when discussing wheter Islam is violent, but not when stating that Islam is more violent than other religions.
The cristian churches has commitet uspeakable amounts of violence up the ages, Islam will have to work hard to catch up. Not to mention that if you attribute violence from people that happen to be muslims to Islam when the violence itself is more related to politics, then the amount of violence that needs to be attributet to christiany is enormous.
But now I sound like I defend or endorse Islam, wich I dont. I just get annoyed when other religons pretend to be all on the moral highground.
As far as I am conserned all religion is bad, for one reason: They ask you to but aside critical thought and blindly follow a dogma and the religus leaders.