What he said was that it seems like, while there IS touch-sensitive technology, it is used ONLY to determine whether a given click is a left-side or right-side one. I'm not sure whether this is true, but the Apple site does not make it clear.
Re:It's not about safer, it's about cheaper
on
NASA's Shuttle Plans
·
· Score: 1
I think NASA has spent enough subsidizing technological development. For decades that was seen as part of their purpose, so they pushed for cutting-edge advancements like reusable spacecraft. Now we have lots of technology and it's time to get down to the business of exploring space. Enough of new rockets.
First of all, the Constitution uses the word "citizen" a few times, but the word "people" in all declarations of rights. Not to mention that the "Bill of Rights" is part of the Constitution.
We should note, though, that even the Bill of Rights does not grant freedoms to anyone; rather, it restricts the power of the Government to infringe upon certain specific freedoms.
In any event, the Supreme Court has held that the Constitutional requirements of due process MUST be applied to the inhabitants of Guantanamo Bay, so that is settled law. The aspect of law still under dispute is whether military tribunals can be considered due process.
The fundamental insight here is that the Constitution, as the document establishing and chartering the US Government, applies to ALL actions of said Government. It is improper to refer to the Constitution as "applying" or "not applying" with reference to individuals.
I'm not going to try to define "normal", but I'm pretty sure that the majority of people don't wonder much of anything when they get up in the morning. Consider myself, for instance -- when I get up in the morning I'm likely to be thinking about how amazing it is that my alarm clock just "knows" when to go off... if I'm thinking of anything at all.
IBM is to a great extent a research company; they do huge amounts of work in diverse fields. I remember when they were working on blue-laser optical disks back in 1998, for instance. Thus they come up with large numbers of what most Slashdotters see as legitimate inventions.
Microsoft is a software development company. It's debatable whether the idea to perform a specific operation on a machine that has been shown to be capable of any operation constitutes a legitimate invention.
I know this one girl who is 18 years old. Kind-hearted soul, polite as anybody. Once I saw her playing GTA: Vice City.
Disturbing as all heck. She kept doing the same thing over and over, for no reason. She knew a code that causes a multitude of women to show up and mindlessly follow you around. She'd enter the code and once the women showed up, she'd carefully shoot them in the head one by one. I have no idea why she was playing like that, but I think it was far worse than this non-nudity "porn" that everyone is going on about.
Parents like yourself should make no mistake as to what a 17+ game means. These games are more interactive than ever before, and they will allow your children to do and see incredibly inappropriate things. And where an R movie might include 90 minutes of violence, a video game allows this violence to be experienced over and over again, on demand.
I'm 24 and single, and I buy and play GTA games when I feel like it, and enjoy myself immensely. But as a parent considering the issue of video games, I think you should be more worried about the kinds of conduct they allow your children to engage in. I believe that your reaction to this mod suggests you haven't taken that issue seriously enough. If "hot coffee" bothers you so much, then the REST of the game should bother you even more.
Ten cents a message is a ludicrous price, at least a 99% markup. Hence it is covered by my parenthetical note, "as long as you choose a provider that doesn't practice price gouging."
Children have never had anything to say to each other. Their conversation has always been inane chatter, mere practice for real conversation as adults. As such, children have generally never written letters to each other. E-mail is nothing different.
I swear, the greatest myth is that the new generation is different from the last one. People have been complaining that children are only interested in "instant gratification" for hundreds of years.
If you press buttons multiple times per letter, you either don't know how to use your cell phone or have an old one.
Besides that, using cell phones to text message is relatively quick, unobtrusive, and inexpensive (unless you choose a provider that practices price gouging). I can do it while I'm doing something else. Sure, if the conversation gets intensive, it's easier to talk, but usually a cell-text discussion is less engaged -- I might go half an hour, or even five hours, between responses. Which is great for questions that require a lot of thought, like "Do you think ice cream and barley would go together?"
What you think is wrong, unfortunately. It is spectacularly difficult to get into orbit or to the moon.
Please read http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/misc/ss1.html for a reasonable run-down of the basic issues. The schematics of the SSME (which does nothing other than propulsion) will give you some idea of the costs and complexity involved.
To be honest, actually, the only move Microsoft ever made that could be classified as brilliant was the betrayal of IBM. They were quite lucky there, too, as IBM was too involved in internal and antitrust issues to properly fight about it. It's certainly amusing also that what IBM eventually got in compensation was the Windows 3.1 source code -- an essentially cursed artifact that damaged OS/2 more than it helped.
If I put $1500 on 5 at a roulette wheel, and win, will you assume that I know how to play roulette?
Every generation of millions of people is going to have those who are spectacularly lucky. Microsoft's history is filled with lots of luck and precious few strokes of insight from Bill Gates.
That magic number, first of all, depends on the software and the conditions surrounding it. Also, it is not necessarily between 0 and 1. In some cases it is negative.
For instance, in your example, perhaps someone who wants to do some graphics work pirates Photoshop versus learning the GIMP. One could argue that it's better for Adobe's sake if they pirate Photoshop -- it serves as advertising and they are likely to buy a copy later on if they do professional work.
This is why it was dumb in the first place for the industry to create the BSA. The BSA treats all software the same, when what companies need to be doing is looking at all the software they sell, figuring out where it fits into the marketplace, and taking a different approach to copyright enforcement depending on the circumstances. (I should note that, unlike trademarks, copyrights do not need to be defended universally.)
That was probably a bit of a media misunderstanding. I've heard this before -- it's like people extrapolate the original design goal of 100 operational flights into a 1% loss rate. But if the catastrophic failure rate is 1%, the chance of surviving 100 flights is only 37%.
Of course, the failure rate did turn out to be higher than anyone would have liked. Though still not bad compared to other systems, everyone was hoping that the Shuttle would be more of a leap forward in reliability.
Yeah, maybe, but that's caused by Nature. You'll notice that the rows on a regular periodic table also change length. That's due to the physics that determine valence electron orbitals and can't be changed.
But there is also an older proverb that ends "And perhaps the horse will learn to sing." So is a Bayesian filter more like a pig, or more like a horse?
I think you are right. And yet I sigh, as I see no reason for the government to pay for it. If the agrobusiness megacorps are going to make a killing, why don't they pay for it?
Government, if anything, ought to put its money into blue-sky stuff like nuclear fusion that is too long-term for corporations to invest in. With ethanol, the technology now exists, and making it profitable should be up to the profiteers.
Slashdot Mirror
What you quoted does not contradict what he said.
What he said was that it seems like, while there IS touch-sensitive technology, it is used ONLY to determine whether a given click is a left-side or right-side one. I'm not sure whether this is true, but the Apple site does not make it clear.
I think NASA has spent enough subsidizing technological development. For decades that was seen as part of their purpose, so they pushed for cutting-edge advancements like reusable spacecraft. Now we have lots of technology and it's time to get down to the business of exploring space. Enough of new rockets.
First of all, the Constitution uses the word "citizen" a few times, but the word "people" in all declarations of rights. Not to mention that the "Bill of Rights" is part of the Constitution.
We should note, though, that even the Bill of Rights does not grant freedoms to anyone; rather, it restricts the power of the Government to infringe upon certain specific freedoms.
In any event, the Supreme Court has held that the Constitutional requirements of due process MUST be applied to the inhabitants of Guantanamo Bay, so that is settled law. The aspect of law still under dispute is whether military tribunals can be considered due process.
The fundamental insight here is that the Constitution, as the document establishing and chartering the US Government, applies to ALL actions of said Government. It is improper to refer to the Constitution as "applying" or "not applying" with reference to individuals.
Hi! The word "citizen" does appear in the Constitution, mostly regarding eligibility for elected office, but not in the Bill of Rights.
The Constitutional restrictions apply to all actions of the Constitutional government, no matter where it is operating.
I'm not going to try to define "normal", but I'm pretty sure that the majority of people don't wonder much of anything when they get up in the morning. Consider myself, for instance -- when I get up in the morning I'm likely to be thinking about how amazing it is that my alarm clock just "knows" when to go off... if I'm thinking of anything at all.
IBM is to a great extent a research company; they do huge amounts of work in diverse fields. I remember when they were working on blue-laser optical disks back in 1998, for instance. Thus they come up with large numbers of what most Slashdotters see as legitimate inventions.
Microsoft is a software development company. It's debatable whether the idea to perform a specific operation on a machine that has been shown to be capable of any operation constitutes a legitimate invention.
It doesn't matter whether or not you have an HDTV. If the game comes on an HD-DVD disk, you'll need an HD-DVD drive to read it.
You know, I've got to speak to this.
I know this one girl who is 18 years old. Kind-hearted soul, polite as anybody. Once I saw her playing GTA: Vice City.
Disturbing as all heck. She kept doing the same thing over and over, for no reason. She knew a code that causes a multitude of women to show up and mindlessly follow you around. She'd enter the code and once the women showed up, she'd carefully shoot them in the head one by one. I have no idea why she was playing like that, but I think it was far worse than this non-nudity "porn" that everyone is going on about.
Parents like yourself should make no mistake as to what a 17+ game means. These games are more interactive than ever before, and they will allow your children to do and see incredibly inappropriate things. And where an R movie might include 90 minutes of violence, a video game allows this violence to be experienced over and over again, on demand.
I'm 24 and single, and I buy and play GTA games when I feel like it, and enjoy myself immensely. But as a parent considering the issue of video games, I think you should be more worried about the kinds of conduct they allow your children to engage in. I believe that your reaction to this mod suggests you haven't taken that issue seriously enough. If "hot coffee" bothers you so much, then the REST of the game should bother you even more.
Ten cents a message is a ludicrous price, at least a 99% markup. Hence it is covered by my parenthetical note, "as long as you choose a provider that doesn't practice price gouging."
Mine doesn't.
Children have never had anything to say to each other. Their conversation has always been inane chatter, mere practice for real conversation as adults. As such, children have generally never written letters to each other. E-mail is nothing different.
I swear, the greatest myth is that the new generation is different from the last one. People have been complaining that children are only interested in "instant gratification" for hundreds of years.
If you press buttons multiple times per letter, you either don't know how to use your cell phone or have an old one.
Besides that, using cell phones to text message is relatively quick, unobtrusive, and inexpensive (unless you choose a provider that practices price gouging). I can do it while I'm doing something else. Sure, if the conversation gets intensive, it's easier to talk, but usually a cell-text discussion is less engaged -- I might go half an hour, or even five hours, between responses. Which is great for questions that require a lot of thought, like "Do you think ice cream and barley would go together?"
...being destroyed over and over again...
What you think is wrong, unfortunately. It is spectacularly difficult to get into orbit or to the moon.
Please read http://www.daughtersoftiresias.org/misc/ss1.html for a reasonable run-down of the basic issues. The schematics of the SSME (which does nothing other than propulsion) will give you some idea of the costs and complexity involved.
To be honest, actually, the only move Microsoft ever made that could be classified as brilliant was the betrayal of IBM. They were quite lucky there, too, as IBM was too involved in internal and antitrust issues to properly fight about it. It's certainly amusing also that what IBM eventually got in compensation was the Windows 3.1 source code -- an essentially cursed artifact that damaged OS/2 more than it helped.
If I put $1500 on 5 at a roulette wheel, and win, will you assume that I know how to play roulette?
Every generation of millions of people is going to have those who are spectacularly lucky. Microsoft's history is filled with lots of luck and precious few strokes of insight from Bill Gates.
The single graphical effect that you refer to is friggin' annoying. Why does anybody care?
A wedge requires three dimensions. Without a wedge shape, how the heck are you going to cut anything?
That magic number, first of all, depends on the software and the conditions surrounding it. Also, it is not necessarily between 0 and 1. In some cases it is negative.
For instance, in your example, perhaps someone who wants to do some graphics work pirates Photoshop versus learning the GIMP. One could argue that it's better for Adobe's sake if they pirate Photoshop -- it serves as advertising and they are likely to buy a copy later on if they do professional work.
This is why it was dumb in the first place for the industry to create the BSA. The BSA treats all software the same, when what companies need to be doing is looking at all the software they sell, figuring out where it fits into the marketplace, and taking a different approach to copyright enforcement depending on the circumstances. (I should note that, unlike trademarks, copyrights do not need to be defended universally.)
Odd, I would prefer the opposite -- to filter IMs from the popular. Most of my friends have scores like 130.
Quality over quantity, man.
That was probably a bit of a media misunderstanding. I've heard this before -- it's like people extrapolate the original design goal of 100 operational flights into a 1% loss rate. But if the catastrophic failure rate is 1%, the chance of surviving 100 flights is only 37%.
Of course, the failure rate did turn out to be higher than anyone would have liked. Though still not bad compared to other systems, everyone was hoping that the Shuttle would be more of a leap forward in reliability.
Your link says at the end that this DID happen, in Indiana.
Yeah, maybe, but that's caused by Nature. You'll notice that the rows on a regular periodic table also change length. That's due to the physics that determine valence electron orbitals and can't be changed.
But there is also an older proverb that ends "And perhaps the horse will learn to sing." So is a Bayesian filter more like a pig, or more like a horse?
C ydcbt yday co bry xnrref nct.nfv Abe yd. jgy. o.jp.yapf co yrr uap er,b yd. dann urp m. yr o.. uprm d.p.v
I think you are right. And yet I sigh, as I see no reason for the government to pay for it. If the agrobusiness megacorps are going to make a killing, why don't they pay for it?
Government, if anything, ought to put its money into blue-sky stuff like nuclear fusion that is too long-term for corporations to invest in. With ethanol, the technology now exists, and making it profitable should be up to the profiteers.