Pluto has an atmosphere. Part of the justification for the Pluto-Kuiper Express is that Pluto's atmosphere is frozen solid through most of its orbit. Right now, it's still gaseous, though.
If MacDonald's is the only hamburger on the market due to a contract with the US Dept of Commerce to be a state-sanctioned monopoly on hamburgers, yes, you should get to vote for seats on the Board of Directors.
I've never had the ATA problem. I was actually thinking about AGP. How advanced is FreeBSD AGP support? The Linux drivers tend to flip on a lot of bits.
That said, I'm aware of the VIA ATA corruption issue that got fixed awhile back. It was a manufacturing error and subsequent mislabeling, IIRC. In these situations, it would be cool if Linus had direct access to the "ATA_Chipset_rev_blah_Errata.pdf."
It certainly isn't "a step in the right direction." ICANN isn't giving in to public demands, its giving up on public participation. It seems to me that ICANN is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Indeed, several of us on the At-Large forum list have said that we would sign an amicus curiae or whathaveyou on a report to the Department of Commerce that ICANN has failed to implement anything at all resembling public participation as promised.
Methinks they'd be pretty sad if the DoC said "get with the program or dissolve."
If an individual is a domain owner, how does this apply?
You should read the At-Large study forum archive for discussion on this. Here are some starter responses fleshed out in much more detail on the list:
ICANN does not only represent domain owners. This is not a push-content only 'Net. This is why protocols and addresses have separate representation.
What is an individual domain owner? A 2LD owner? Why stop there? There are lots of non-US citizens who purchase 2LDs and even 3LDs, particularly in states with ccTLDs. Will they be excluded? What's the arbitrary limit on subdomains to get a vote? VeriSign is already worried that an arbitrary limit will cause unnecssary flattening of the domain hierarchy. My URL listed above is a valid domain name. I don't pay a dime for it, should I not get a vote? I'm already subject to Roadrunner and Dynodns restrictions, can't I have some say as to how they should run their businesses from a higher level: i.e., should they not have some accountability (moreso RR, less so Dynodns) to myself and others?
I'm really puzzled at the fear/corporate bashing element exemplified here. If my corporation owns X domains, why/shouldn't/ I have representation? Why should some idealist ELF college student / non-domain holder have an equal say - or worse, as this poster proposes? My domain, my money, my vote. Don't like that? Go argue with your poly sci prof and stay out of the real world.
Individual domain owners currently have no representation. The DNSO is only for corporations. This was because IDNOs were supposed to have representation through ALSO.
As far as representation, if we don't have a "one person, one vote" analogue, you'll have the same problem to solve as did the Continental Congress did, their solution being the creation of a Senate and a House.
Since you seem pro-free market, let me point out that ICANN is a Department of Commerce sanctioned organization. That means it is supposed to have public accountability built-in as a state-sanctioned monopoly. ICANN has been openly stifling free market competition by sucking VeriSign's dick repeatedly with government backing and no recourse from public input.
The point of the 'Net is to allow lots of stuff, not dictate "there can be only one.com registrar" or "there can be only one root server system." But with ICANN headed down the US-centric, monopolistic path it's headed down, I certainly foresee instability in the 'Net as a result.
So basically the vaccuum has certain properties that exist forever and are timeless
Ah! That's exactly what I was talking about in my other post!---not necessarily a vaccuum, of course, because I was non-specific---just that there is a self-existent reason, versus, "no reason at all" which seems just false to me. The infinite chain theory would fall under this category, too, I guess...
I wrote a little manifesto I'm just gonna call "The Manual for Preservers" for now. Anyway, the manifesto was about mankind and other species getting together and hording black holes together and maintaining a galaxy for us to live in together regardless of the expansion of the universe. I'm no physicist, but the only potential hole I've found in the idea is this:
Does the minimal distance between fundamental particles expand?
If it does, then nothing can stop expansion short of sucking in matter from another universe. Heh, real likely.
If it does not, then the plan could still work. Other than the difficulty in carrying it out, I haven't seen any other reasons why the theory itself is invalid.
They're still either true or false; it'd just take an infinite amount of time with a computer to calculate the truth value, so we can't do the calculation.
sigh. And you're confusing Godel with decidability. They're too different issues. You can have a complete logic without every sentence being decidable. This is how first order logic works. What Godel proves is that there are truths about mathematics, stateable in the language, that cannot be proven. What's weird is there's a decidable algorithm for generating Godel sentences. So, you can make your computer spit out true sentences of mathematics, in the language of math, that there are no proofs for. Weird eh?
Actually, Godel is just the beginning of problems with attempting to model math in logic. Another weird one is: between any two integers there are an infinite number of integers between them. Really? between 1 and 2 there are an infinite number of integers? So, you see that models of things are often inaccurate or defy intuition. so, we work on our models.
What bugs me about the dragons_flight's post is this: simply because a proof is not stateable in a language does not imply that there is no reason for that truth being there.
As far as the universe is concerned, I think you'll find that something at the bottom is self-existent. We haven't found it yet, nor will we know much about it until then, but it seems very counterintuitive to think otherwise. And so, the reason for itself is itself. That's very different from saying "there's no reason at all."
All those modal logic guys can finally implement the decidable portions of their theory without base-level translation. woot. or wait, I forgot about all those other truth value schemes... like the boolean complete truth value system. drat.
I tell them to get a browser that supports modern standards.
me too. I always recommend the latest mozilla build and am careful to note that while IE5 for Mac is very compliant, IE5 for Windows is significantly less compliant than the Mac codebase. Then I note that since Mozilla uses the same codebase on all platforms, it does not have this cross-platform compatibility problem that IE5 has. I have not used/tested/read anything about IE6 so I will keep my comment limited to IE5.
When Netscape 6 finally stabilizes on a decent version of Mozilla, I might recommend that. But until then, no way. With the Mozilla runtime always being open like IE's is, it's much speedier.
yeah, for all its flaws, I really liked SimEarth. It was different enough from Populous, Civ, etc. that it was very enjoyable. Still have the floppies around somewhere... mebbe it's time to get Dosemu working again...
But seriously, I wonder if there is a legal defense here, or at least a convincing argument against treating intermediate formats as copies instead of simply a means to an end.
IANAL, IANA physicist... that said...
What the hell am I talking about?
Basically, you are creating an intermediate "copy" of the television program or movie via the Freznel lens. It's a copy because of the properties defining how light travels through the lens.*
If you could demonstrate this to the Courts, your Congresscritters, etc., then perhaps you could convince them that an intermediate format of a copyrighted work stored in RAM does not count as a copy of a work and therefore is not subject to copyright restrictions or regulation. Not that you couldn't be sued for using the intermediate format to make thousands of copies of the work and selling them for $5 a pop... it would just a priori prevent Congress from regulating it directly.
* I am not a physicist, but IIRC from high school physics, copies of the original photons are generated from the lens.
Cheers,
-l
Exult absolutely rules. One of these days, I'm going to take a week's vacation and send my son to his mom's house and play U7 straight through because it's such an awesome game and because I know the machine's not gonna lock up on me after four or five hours of gameplay.
I'm not a gamer, but I love U7. Go figure.
-l
You're forgetting Hawking radiation... black holes do give off energy, albeit slowly compared to, uh, fusion in Sol, but they still lose energy over time. Unless the consumed energy is greater than that energy radiated, it will die off like the rest of us.
As Levar Burton would say "But don't take my word for it". Look up Hawking radiation. I'd do an awful job describing it.
I found the difference to me was that I was not getting enough water when I drank soda. So now, I just have a large cup of coffee in the morning and drink water or juice all day. I feel good physically except I don't get enough sleep. But that's a scheduling problem, not an insomnia problem anymore.
-l
At university, LaTeX is the serious publishing app in my department. Different strokes for different folks. CMYK support in GIMP is a huge deal. I don't envy any of the poor souls who are navigating all the patents on that.
But since we're speaking of publishing, a much larger problem than "lousy print support (you *can* do CMYK under Linux, but it's all done through ghostscript or gimp-print using printer-specific drivers, thus 'lousy' and not 'no')" is "no decent drawing program". We've got the photoshop, but not the Illustrator or Painter clone. I know about killustrator (or whatever it's called now), sketch, etc. but they are *much* further behind than GIMP. let's not even start on PageMaker and the rest.
X has supported server side extensions for a very long time. XRender is getting more and more usage daily. Why don't you get a better window manager and a newer copy of X?
Anti-aliasing is cheap in hardware these days, unlike when X was designed. But you have to look at the original philosophy of the design: network transparency. But I also question the philosophy that the display server knows better what to anti-alias than the client. How much overhead will client-specific messages about "do not AA this. do AA that" take up? Compared to VNC, X protocol is a speed daemon. I like it that way.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, just pointing out some things.
Slashdot Mirror
Pluto has an atmosphere. Part of the justification for the Pluto-Kuiper Express is that Pluto's atmosphere is frozen solid through most of its orbit. Right now, it's still gaseous, though.
http://encyclozine.com/Space/Planets/Pluto/
-l
NS6 or Mozilla? They're similar, but different animals.
-l
If MacDonald's is the only hamburger on the market due to a contract with the US Dept of Commerce to be a state-sanctioned monopoly on hamburgers, yes, you should get to vote for seats on the Board of Directors.
smile,
-l
I've never had the ATA problem. I was actually thinking about AGP. How advanced is FreeBSD AGP support? The Linux drivers tend to flip on a lot of bits.
That said, I'm aware of the VIA ATA corruption issue that got fixed awhile back. It was a manufacturing error and subsequent mislabeling, IIRC. In these situations, it would be cool if Linus had direct access to the "ATA_Chipset_rev_blah_Errata.pdf."
That's what I had in mind...
-l
It certainly isn't "a step in the right direction." ICANN isn't giving in to public demands, its giving up on public participation. It seems to me that ICANN is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Indeed, several of us on the At-Large forum list have said that we would sign an amicus curiae or whathaveyou on a report to the Department of Commerce that ICANN has failed to implement anything at all resembling public participation as promised.
Methinks they'd be pretty sad if the DoC said "get with the program or dissolve."
-l
If an individual is a domain owner, how does this apply?
You should read the At-Large study forum archive for discussion on this. Here are some starter responses fleshed out in much more detail on the list:
I'm really puzzled at the fear/corporate bashing element exemplified here. If my corporation owns X domains, why /shouldn't/ I have representation? Why should some idealist ELF college student / non-domain holder have an equal say - or worse, as this poster proposes? My domain, my money, my vote. Don't like that? Go argue with your poly sci prof and stay out of the real world.
Since you seem pro-free market, let me point out that ICANN is a Department of Commerce sanctioned organization. That means it is supposed to have public accountability built-in as a state-sanctioned monopoly. ICANN has been openly stifling free market competition by sucking VeriSign's dick repeatedly with government backing and no recourse from public input.
The point of the 'Net is to allow lots of stuff, not dictate "there can be only one .com registrar" or "there can be only one root server system." But with ICANN headed down the US-centric, monopolistic path it's headed down, I certainly foresee instability in the 'Net as a result.
I hope I'm wrong, but we'll see.
-l
hehehe if Linus goes to work for VIA, maybe VIA support will finally be stabler than Intel chipsets.
smile,
-l
So basically the vaccuum has certain properties that exist forever and are timeless
Ah! That's exactly what I was talking about in my other post!---not necessarily a vaccuum, of course, because I was non-specific---just that there is a self-existent reason, versus, "no reason at all" which seems just false to me. The infinite chain theory would fall under this category, too, I guess...
Anyhow, cheers,
-l
I wrote a little manifesto I'm just gonna call "The Manual for Preservers" for now. Anyway, the manifesto was about mankind and other species getting together and hording black holes together and maintaining a galaxy for us to live in together regardless of the expansion of the universe. I'm no physicist, but the only potential hole I've found in the idea is this:
Does the minimal distance between fundamental particles expand?
If it does, then nothing can stop expansion short of sucking in matter from another universe. Heh, real likely.
If it does not, then the plan could still work. Other than the difficulty in carrying it out, I haven't seen any other reasons why the theory itself is invalid.
Let me know whatcha think,
-l
They're still either true or false; it'd just take an infinite amount of time with a computer to calculate the truth value, so we can't do the calculation.
sigh. And you're confusing Godel with decidability. They're too different issues. You can have a complete logic without every sentence being decidable. This is how first order logic works. What Godel proves is that there are truths about mathematics, stateable in the language, that cannot be proven. What's weird is there's a decidable algorithm for generating Godel sentences. So, you can make your computer spit out true sentences of mathematics, in the language of math, that there are no proofs for. Weird eh?
Actually, Godel is just the beginning of problems with attempting to model math in logic. Another weird one is: between any two integers there are an infinite number of integers between them. Really? between 1 and 2 there are an infinite number of integers? So, you see that models of things are often inaccurate or defy intuition. so, we work on our models.
What bugs me about the dragons_flight's post is this: simply because a proof is not stateable in a language does not imply that there is no reason for that truth being there.
As far as the universe is concerned, I think you'll find that something at the bottom is self-existent. We haven't found it yet, nor will we know much about it until then, but it seems very counterintuitive to think otherwise. And so, the reason for itself is itself. That's very different from saying "there's no reason at all."
Cheers
-l
Yeah, that was a pretty clever hoax. The sort of thing your average elitist idiot would fall for.
m l
http://www.urbanlegends.com/legal/pi_indiana.ht
-l
I believe the word you're looking for is quaternary.
<g>
-l
All those modal logic guys can finally implement the decidable portions of their theory without base-level translation. woot. or wait, I forgot about all those other truth value schemes... like the boolean complete truth value system. drat.
<g>
-l
me too. I always recommend the latest mozilla build and am careful to note that while IE5 for Mac is very compliant, IE5 for Windows is significantly less compliant than the Mac codebase. Then I note that since Mozilla uses the same codebase on all platforms, it does not have this cross-platform compatibility problem that IE5 has. I have not used/tested/read anything about IE6 so I will keep my comment limited to IE5.
When Netscape 6 finally stabilizes on a decent version of Mozilla, I might recommend that. But until then, no way. With the Mozilla runtime always being open like IE's is, it's much speedier.
cheers,
-l
lol, that reminds me of all those Chucky movies... ooo or Puppetmaster. There's always been a market for children's toys turning evil.
-l
I use vim. vim == 1994.
M = 1000
V = 5
I = 1
Thus, 1000 - (5 + 1) = 994
-l
Incidently, mvim would equal 1994... (think how MCM equals 1900).
yeah, for all its flaws, I really liked SimEarth. It was different enough from Populous, Civ, etc. that it was very enjoyable. Still have the floppies around somewhere... mebbe it's time to get Dosemu working again...
-l
Someone did that to me once... reposted a letter I'd posted regarding UCITA, IIRC, but with added in references to masturbation and whatnot.
It was pretty funny. I enjoy a tasty roast once in awhile.
-l
That was damn funny, thanks for making my day!
But seriously, I wonder if there is a legal defense here, or at least a convincing argument against treating intermediate formats as copies instead of simply a means to an end.
IANAL, IANA physicist... that said...
What the hell am I talking about?
Basically, you are creating an intermediate "copy" of the television program or movie via the Freznel lens. It's a copy because of the properties defining how light travels through the lens.*
If you could demonstrate this to the Courts, your Congresscritters, etc., then perhaps you could convince them that an intermediate format of a copyrighted work stored in RAM does not count as a copy of a work and therefore is not subject to copyright restrictions or regulation. Not that you couldn't be sued for using the intermediate format to make thousands of copies of the work and selling them for $5 a pop... it would just a priori prevent Congress from regulating it directly.
* I am not a physicist, but IIRC from high school physics, copies of the original photons are generated from the lens.
Cheers,
-l
Exult absolutely rules. One of these days, I'm going to take a week's vacation and send my son to his mom's house and play U7 straight through because it's such an awesome game and because I know the machine's not gonna lock up on me after four or five hours of gameplay. I'm not a gamer, but I love U7. Go figure. -l
You're forgetting Hawking radiation... black holes do give off energy, albeit slowly compared to, uh, fusion in Sol, but they still lose energy over time. Unless the consumed energy is greater than that energy radiated, it will die off like the rest of us.
As Levar Burton would say "But don't take my word for it". Look up Hawking radiation. I'd do an awful job describing it.
-l
Nitpick: You forgot the seasonal reference in the second line. :-)
-l
I found the difference to me was that I was not getting enough water when I drank soda. So now, I just have a large cup of coffee in the morning and drink water or juice all day. I feel good physically except I don't get enough sleep. But that's a scheduling problem, not an insomnia problem anymore. -l
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
the genesis device
-l
Define "serious publishing apps".
At university, LaTeX is the serious publishing app in my department. Different strokes for different folks. CMYK support in GIMP is a huge deal. I don't envy any of the poor souls who are navigating all the patents on that.
But since we're speaking of publishing, a much larger problem than "lousy print support (you *can* do CMYK under Linux, but it's all done through ghostscript or gimp-print using printer-specific drivers, thus 'lousy' and not 'no')" is "no decent drawing program". We've got the photoshop, but not the Illustrator or Painter clone. I know about killustrator (or whatever it's called now), sketch, etc. but they are *much* further behind than GIMP. let's not even start on PageMaker and the rest.
X has supported server side extensions for a very long time. XRender is getting more and more usage daily. Why don't you get a better window manager and a newer copy of X?
Anti-aliasing is cheap in hardware these days, unlike when X was designed. But you have to look at the original philosophy of the design: network transparency. But I also question the philosophy that the display server knows better what to anti-alias than the client. How much overhead will client-specific messages about "do not AA this. do AA that" take up? Compared to VNC, X protocol is a speed daemon. I like it that way.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, just pointing out some things.
-l