These were the bigger species and they tend to reproduce slower. Hunters would want the most gain for the least work so they would hunt the bigger species. Lets do an example. There is a tribe of hunters with a population of one hundred people. This tribe hunts in a region that overlaps the grazing grounds of a herd of mammoths that consists of forty adults. The hunters will go after the young and weak because they will be easier kills and are more likely to get seperated from the group either by not being able to keep up or by being confused in a crisis situation. Lets be generous and say that there are twenty-five females in the group and that they can produce a calf every five years. Before the advent of man they would have been in equilibrium and the total deaths over any reasonable timeframe would equal the number of births. Man would have started killing off their predators as soon as he ran into them because any predator that could take a mammoth is a serious threat to him. He would throw off the equilibrium and more of the mammoths would now be free to grow and multiply except he is hunting them for food. We'll ignore the effect of man on the predators and just make a guess. Say disease and predators kill off two of the mammoths each year. All man has to do is kill three of them each year to wipe out the herd in one generation. There would be other herds that would still be relatively free of mankinds interference for a while but he'll move on and kill another herd in the next generation and then another and so on. Using brushfires to herd them and cliffs to kill them he would actually finish the job on any given herd in far less time than that. Mankind tends to take the easy way and when your survival depends on it you will take the easiest way to put calories in your belly. I have no doubt that mankind was the major contributor to these extinctions. The timing is right and human nature is right. Other factors probably helped but mankind was probably the dominant one. I have seen people here saying that there is no way that mankind could have done it with the primitive weapons of the time but he was expert with these weapons and none of these animals would have been outside of his capabilies. While these animals were still around the population would have expanded very rapidly. They were easy sources of food and the people would have been relatively well fed. Probably better fed than their contemporaries in the old world. They would have kept applying more and more pressure on fewer and fewer walking grocery stores. They would have always been on the move to where the next easy source of food was. If you don't think man was capable of it you are seriously underestimating the human race. About the only people who would not believe they were capable of it are people who have never seen the resourcefulness of humans in adverse conditions. I could make a strong case that if anything the people of that time were smarter than the people of today and had were immensely stronger willed. The weak and stupid died young.
A.45 is not going to pass through an engine block. If you are real lucky you might crack the block but that is on a good day. A.45 would have a fairly hard time going through the sheet metal on a 56 Chevy. A.50 caliber machine gun bullett might go through a small 4 cylinder block but I have my doubts. Guns are not all powerful and the way we use them in hunting today is a whole lot less wasteful than some of the ways that primitive man hunted. Herding animals over cliffs and setting fires to drive animals were incredibly inefficient ways to hunt. They ended up killing far more then they could eat.
Were you born this anal or did you have to work at it? You must be a lonely person if you go through life being that literal about everything. Most people understand that a statement can be general in nature. I would be willing to bet that almost all of the readers of/. (that are old enough to have to worry about such things) have searched for real estate online. It is exceptable in most cases to say all when you really mean the vast majority. As for your comment about the guy running to Canada, well you have to be some kind of cold fish to not feel for him and to worry about the state of justice in this country that allowed that kind of crap to happen to anyone. Also if I remember correctly some of those were felony charges.
Take development system . It has to have access to the machines so that they can update the software and such. Put it on the internet so the developer can access updates for the software on his machine. What do you have? A potential hole. If you have access to the dev box you don't need access to the actual command and control stuff because you can make the changes in the software so that if somebody who has command and control access makes changes they aren't quite what he thinks they'll be. Somebody here said that there are control rooms with switches and actual people who do the control but I'll bet all those switches do is feed input to software somewhere. I know of a place that uses PLCs a lot in production. It would be very hard to impossible to get in and take over control, pretty hard but probably not impossible to gain access to the proper dev machines. All of the functions of the switches on those machines can be changed within certain parameters.
I happen to know for a fact that there are still Chinese hackers carrying on attacks against US computer systems. I can't give the details but I know of some systems that are still under attack.
In that case Tivo screwed up. Why should they pay to maintain a server to set the time for non-subscribers boxes. If I were them I wouldn't allow non-subscribers to connect to any of my servers for any reason. They have no obligation to non-subscribers to provide them with any services whatsoever.
Actually things get a little fuzzy here. If you aren't a subscriber then Tivo didn't sell you anything. Phillips or another electronics company sold you a box that uses Tivo software. I wouldn't be surprised if there are clauses in the EULA and owners manual saying Tivo isn't responsible to the purchaser of the box for anything.
Taht is funny. Every market share survey I've seen in the last year or so show Linux and Mac neck and neck with the momentum on the Linux side. I am not talking about total Linux installs just the desktop.
Not only is shared sourc only shown to selected companies but they are only showing about 90% of the code. 90% of the windows code can hide a lot of APIs.
What kind of crack are you smoking? IBM has a very good record of producing technology on the schedule they say they will. Unlike some (Intel, Microsoft, Apple for examples), IBM is pretty carefull about delivering their products on time. There new denser storage mediums are on the market and they did it far faster than anybody else would have been able to do. When IBM makes a theoretical breakthrough they will say that it might be useable in ten years but when they say something like it should be in production in a couple of years they have the tech worked out. It might take them time to get it worked into a production system. That tends to involve restructuring the current system and often changes in building layout and expenditures for the equipment. Big changes in manufacturing of any kind are neither cheap or easy to do. IBM has vastly impressed me with their willingness to deploy new tech as fast as possible and to make their tech available to other companies at prices low enought to allow rapid adoption. IBM could sit back and not license their new chip making technologies to anyone and they would have a significant advantage over the competition.
You didn't actually read the article did you? White LEDs are made out of blue ones by coating the lense with flourescent chemicles that emit red and green when excited by the blue led. They also let enough blue pass through to make for a white light.
Copyright law is supposed to protect the creator. It doesn't really work that way but it is supposed to. The idea is to compensate the creators in a way that encourages the best to produce more. That will increase the quantity of created works as well as quality. It was not intended to last forever. The work need to pass into the public domain within a reasonable amount of time. This allows even wider dissemination of the work and helps ensure that it will always be available. Many of the early tv shows and movies are gone forever as a result of the only copies being lost or damaged by time. Mickey Mouse is almost 80 and it is incomprehensible that such a popular icon has not been allowed to enter the public domain. That is a direct violation of the intentions of the framers of the constitution. Disney has built an empire out of that little bit of IP and cannot under any circumstances claim that losing him to the public domain will cripple their ability to produce more quality works. Instead of milking an 80 year old cow it would encourage them to produce more charactors that can withstand the test of time. I can argue that by being able to maintain their monopoly on their older charactors they have severely lacked in the creation of newer and equally appealling charactors. Does anybody really think Aladin will still be popular 80 years from now? Copyright terms need to be pulled back to the original shorter terms. Congress needs to understand that by protecting these companies they are hurting the original idea of rewarding the creators but eventually allowing the widespread dissemination and adoption of the ideas.
Then you would be awfully surprised when you get a ticket in the mail because I hacked your vehicle id into my system during that hundred mile an hour run up the interstate.
In someplace like an airport a blind person would be in a whole lot better shape than you when the power goes out. Actually you could modulate the emergency lighting system to provide them with the information they need pretty easily. Emergency lighting is almost always dc and is easy to make flicker.
Small business employs more people and pays more taxes in the US than big business. However they get the short end of the stick on everything from OSHA regs to tax laws. The average small business cannot afford to put aside enough money to pay for adequate loobying to protect themselves.
Yeah, but at least somebody would have to guess where to find it. Putting it on a Microsoft server is like putting it on a billboard. Everyone who wants it will be able to get it.
Re:alternative to nvidia linux only drivers?
on
XFree 4.1.0 Out
·
· Score: 1
You are right. I probably will be modded down. So what. I have no problem with the GPL but just because Stallman came up with it doesn't mean that everything he says is the one and only truth. Open Source (especially the GPL) is in a fight for its life now. Mundie and Allchin have just begun to try and discredit Open Source and RMS is way too much of a zealot to be the one responding to their allegations. The goal of their little campaign is to get use of GPL'd software forbidden by the government. If they get that then they have discredited Open Source sufficiently that BSD style licenses will be guilty by association in the eyes of the people who make the decisions. RMS is too extreme to be taken seriously by the suits and lawmakers and image is where the battle will be won. He may tone down the rhetoric but his image won't let him be taken seriously. We need more visibility from people like Bruce Perens and Linus. They can present themselves in ways that make the hippy free software tag look ridiculous. As far as my coding skills are concerned you might be surprised. Especially since this is/. and I was probably coding before you were born.
Re:alternative to nvidia linux only drivers?
on
XFree 4.1.0 Out
·
· Score: 1
Who died and made Stallman God? I'll be d***** if I'm going to put my time into code that I intend to be free in both meanings of the word and have some company come along and incorporate it into their proprietary crap. If I wanted it sold I'd sell it myself.
Re:America: the country without a past...
on
American Gods
·
· Score: 1
That is funny. My family has been here just short of 400 years. I don't have a single immigrant in my tree for over 200 years and I know when and where almost every ancestor has lived in each branch of the tree since they came over. I don't know too many Europeans with a better idea of where they come from and how they came to be.
I ain't a gonna go until I've done everything I ever wanted to do. At currents rates I have at least another 5000 years or so and by then there will be new things to do. Somewhere in this universe is a planet with my name on it. I will be the first human to set foot on that planet. I figure that is going to keep me going for a long time all by itself.
Slashdot Mirror
These were the bigger species and they tend to reproduce slower. Hunters would want the most gain for the least work so they would hunt the bigger species. Lets do an example. There is a tribe of hunters with a population of one hundred people. This tribe hunts in a region that overlaps the grazing grounds of a herd of mammoths that consists of forty adults. The hunters will go after the young and weak because they will be easier kills and are more likely to get seperated from the group either by not being able to keep up or by being confused in a crisis situation. Lets be generous and say that there are twenty-five females in the group and that they can produce a calf every five years. Before the advent of man they would have been in equilibrium and the total deaths over any reasonable timeframe would equal the number of births. Man would have started killing off their predators as soon as he ran into them because any predator that could take a mammoth is a serious threat to him. He would throw off the equilibrium and more of the mammoths would now be free to grow and multiply except he is hunting them for food. We'll ignore the effect of man on the predators and just make a guess. Say disease and predators kill off two of the mammoths each year. All man has to do is kill three of them each year to wipe out the herd in one generation. There would be other herds that would still be relatively free of mankinds interference for a while but he'll move on and kill another herd in the next generation and then another and so on. Using brushfires to herd them and cliffs to kill them he would actually finish the job on any given herd in far less time than that. Mankind tends to take the easy way and when your survival depends on it you will take the easiest way to put calories in your belly. I have no doubt that mankind was the major contributor to these extinctions. The timing is right and human nature is right. Other factors probably helped but mankind was probably the dominant one. I have seen people here saying that there is no way that mankind could have done it with the primitive weapons of the time but he was expert with these weapons and none of these animals would have been outside of his capabilies. While these animals were still around the population would have expanded very rapidly. They were easy sources of food and the people would have been relatively well fed. Probably better fed than their contemporaries in the old world. They would have kept applying more and more pressure on fewer and fewer walking grocery stores. They would have always been on the move to where the next easy source of food was. If you don't think man was capable of it you are seriously underestimating the human race. About the only people who would not believe they were capable of it are people who have never seen the resourcefulness of humans in adverse conditions. I could make a strong case that if anything the people of that time were smarter than the people of today and had were immensely stronger willed. The weak and stupid died young.
A .45 is not going to pass through an engine block. If you are real lucky you might crack the block but that is on a good day. A .45 would have a fairly hard time going through the sheet metal on a 56 Chevy. A .50 caliber machine gun bullett might go through a small 4 cylinder block but I have my doubts. Guns are not all powerful and the way we use them in hunting today is a whole lot less wasteful than some of the ways that primitive man hunted. Herding animals over cliffs and setting fires to drive animals were incredibly inefficient ways to hunt. They ended up killing far more then they could eat.
Were you born this anal or did you have to work at it? You must be a lonely person if you go through life being that literal about everything. Most people understand that a statement can be general in nature. I would be willing to bet that almost all of the readers of /. (that are old enough to have to worry about such things) have searched for real estate online. It is exceptable in most cases to say all when you really mean the vast majority. As for your comment about the guy running to Canada, well you have to be some kind of cold fish to not feel for him and to worry about the state of justice in this country that allowed that kind of crap to happen to anyone. Also if I remember correctly some of those were felony charges.
Ah but if you think software should be patentable you are posting to the wrong website. Software patents are real unpopular here.
Take development system . It has to have access to the machines so that they can update the software and such. Put it on the internet so the developer can access updates for the software on his machine. What do you have? A potential hole. If you have access to the dev box you don't need access to the actual command and control stuff because you can make the changes in the software so that if somebody who has command and control access makes changes they aren't quite what he thinks they'll be. Somebody here said that there are control rooms with switches and actual people who do the control but I'll bet all those switches do is feed input to software somewhere. I know of a place that uses PLCs a lot in production. It would be very hard to impossible to get in and take over control, pretty hard but probably not impossible to gain access to the proper dev machines. All of the functions of the switches on those machines can be changed within certain parameters.
I happen to know for a fact that there are still Chinese hackers carrying on attacks against US computer systems. I can't give the details but I know of some systems that are still under attack.
Wrong again. Tivo pays far more in subsidies to the manufacturers than any license fee would be.
In that case Tivo screwed up. Why should they pay to maintain a server to set the time for non-subscribers boxes. If I were them I wouldn't allow non-subscribers to connect to any of my servers for any reason. They have no obligation to non-subscribers to provide them with any services whatsoever.
Actually things get a little fuzzy here. If you aren't a subscriber then Tivo didn't sell you anything. Phillips or another electronics company sold you a box that uses Tivo software. I wouldn't be surprised if there are clauses in the EULA and owners manual saying Tivo isn't responsible to the purchaser of the box for anything.
Taht is funny. Every market share survey I've seen in the last year or so show Linux and Mac neck and neck with the momentum on the Linux side. I am not talking about total Linux installs just the desktop.
Not only is shared sourc only shown to selected companies but they are only showing about 90% of the code. 90% of the windows code can hide a lot of APIs.
What kind of crack are you smoking? IBM has a very good record of producing technology on the schedule they say they will. Unlike some (Intel, Microsoft, Apple for examples), IBM is pretty carefull about delivering their products on time. There new denser storage mediums are on the market and they did it far faster than anybody else would have been able to do. When IBM makes a theoretical breakthrough they will say that it might be useable in ten years but when they say something like it should be in production in a couple of years they have the tech worked out. It might take them time to get it worked into a production system. That tends to involve restructuring the current system and often changes in building layout and expenditures for the equipment. Big changes in manufacturing of any kind are neither cheap or easy to do. IBM has vastly impressed me with their willingness to deploy new tech as fast as possible and to make their tech available to other companies at prices low enought to allow rapid adoption. IBM could sit back and not license their new chip making technologies to anyone and they would have a significant advantage over the competition.
You didn't actually read the article did you? White LEDs are made out of blue ones by coating the lense with flourescent chemicles that emit red and green when excited by the blue led. They also let enough blue pass through to make for a white light.
Copyright law is supposed to protect the creator. It doesn't really work that way but it is supposed to. The idea is to compensate the creators in a way that encourages the best to produce more. That will increase the quantity of created works as well as quality. It was not intended to last forever. The work need to pass into the public domain within a reasonable amount of time. This allows even wider dissemination of the work and helps ensure that it will always be available. Many of the early tv shows and movies are gone forever as a result of the only copies being lost or damaged by time. Mickey Mouse is almost 80 and it is incomprehensible that such a popular icon has not been allowed to enter the public domain. That is a direct violation of the intentions of the framers of the constitution. Disney has built an empire out of that little bit of IP and cannot under any circumstances claim that losing him to the public domain will cripple their ability to produce more quality works. Instead of milking an 80 year old cow it would encourage them to produce more charactors that can withstand the test of time. I can argue that by being able to maintain their monopoly on their older charactors they have severely lacked in the creation of newer and equally appealling charactors. Does anybody really think Aladin will still be popular 80 years from now? Copyright terms need to be pulled back to the original shorter terms. Congress needs to understand that by protecting these companies they are hurting the original idea of rewarding the creators but eventually allowing the widespread dissemination and adoption of the ideas.
Then you would be awfully surprised when you get a ticket in the mail because I hacked your vehicle id into my system during that hundred mile an hour run up the interstate.
In someplace like an airport a blind person would be in a whole lot better shape than you when the power goes out. Actually you could modulate the emergency lighting system to provide them with the information they need pretty easily. Emergency lighting is almost always dc and is easy to make flicker.
Small business employs more people and pays more taxes in the US than big business. However they get the short end of the stick on everything from OSHA regs to tax laws. The average small business cannot afford to put aside enough money to pay for adequate loobying to protect themselves.
W2k has had more defacements as a percentage of installed base than any OS in history.
Yeah, but at least somebody would have to guess where to find it. Putting it on a Microsoft server is like putting it on a billboard. Everyone who wants it will be able to get it.
You are right. I probably will be modded down. So what. I have no problem with the GPL but just because Stallman came up with it doesn't mean that everything he says is the one and only truth. Open Source (especially the GPL) is in a fight for its life now. Mundie and Allchin have just begun to try and discredit Open Source and RMS is way too much of a zealot to be the one responding to their allegations. The goal of their little campaign is to get use of GPL'd software forbidden by the government. If they get that then they have discredited Open Source sufficiently that BSD style licenses will be guilty by association in the eyes of the people who make the decisions. RMS is too extreme to be taken seriously by the suits and lawmakers and image is where the battle will be won. He may tone down the rhetoric but his image won't let him be taken seriously. We need more visibility from people like Bruce Perens and Linus. They can present themselves in ways that make the hippy free software tag look ridiculous. As far as my coding skills are concerned you might be surprised. Especially since this is /. and I was probably coding before you were born.
Who died and made Stallman God? I'll be d***** if I'm going to put my time into code that I intend to be free in both meanings of the word and have some company come along and incorporate it into their proprietary crap. If I wanted it sold I'd sell it myself.
That is funny. My family has been here just short of 400 years. I don't have a single immigrant in my tree for over 200 years and I know when and where almost every ancestor has lived in each branch of the tree since they came over. I don't know too many Europeans with a better idea of where they come from and how they came to be.
I ain't a gonna go until I've done everything I ever wanted to do. At currents rates I have at least another 5000 years or so and by then there will be new things to do. Somewhere in this universe is a planet with my name on it. I will be the first human to set foot on that planet. I figure that is going to keep me going for a long time all by itself.
Thats funny. All of the reports I have seen show Mandrake selling more boxed sets than anybody else.
I an. I can do anything with it I can do with any other distro and have good tools for when I don't want to do things the hard way.