The Mississippi Delta country this time of year runs overnight lows in the 85F range or higher and dew points nearly as high, so evaporation is not going to get leaves down to 70F or anywhere near it.
And yet, the plants flourish. Notably, kudzu flourishes and grows so fast that you can almost see it happen -- which means it's not waiting for cooler weather.
I thought the plan was to export democracy, free speech, human rights and other such goodies... oh boy, was I wrong!
Not that wrong. As soon as you redefine "democracy, free speech, human rights" etc. to be what's defined in the Manual, it all works. Of course it's important to make sure that those same definitions apply at home.
These things mentioned are unpalatable but then again - so is war. Moral of the story - avoid it. But sometimes you will have to fight, and when you do, fight hard and fight to win.
There are a few details in the way of your plan. Mostly treaties (such as the Geneva Convention) to which the USA is signatory, but there are still a few laws passed by Congress that also apply, depending on how creative you want to be with your redefinition of terms.
The USA has spent a good bit of the last century telling the world that "the ends justifies the means" is not carte blanche to those with power. If there's going to be a change of policy, perhaps abrogating those treaties would be a good start.
The downside possibilities for this one are huge -- AP could end up with a very strong decision denying them any control at all over linking and expanding the bounds of "fair use" quotation.
Lots of feel-good nonsense gets proposed in the Legislature to stroke the True Believers at home, either to swing the marginal or to get the hard-core to turn out. Whatever -- it's all Legislative Theater. Congressman Baksheesh proposes a bill, the sucker dies in committee, and the good Congressman gets brownie points for at least having tried.
Take it up a notch and you have the perennial bills that do pass with the full knowledge that the first Federal Court that sees it will overturn it, since it's just a paraphrase of one that has been shot down six times already by the Supreme Court. School prayer bills fall in this category.
Not sayin' which one this fits, but it's as good a bet as you'll get where the Supreme Court is concerned that this one falls into one or the other.
In a modern, educated nation one might expect, given the ubiquity of computers, that everyone (not just science majors) have some basic understanding of programming, even if it's just -- err --- BASIC.
However, I believe that we're discussing the United States.
Preface: I started out on a physics degree almost forty years ago but ended up with a CS. Meanwhile I have two children majoring in physics, and when I retire I plan to go back for the MS physics just for the Hell of it.
Bottom line: IMHO no special effort to add programming to a physics curriculum should be necessary. However, there are obviously classes where programming is essential to the physics content and for those you would horribly disserve your students by candy-coating the computational aspects.
Require programming as a pre-requisite where the class requires it, and if that means that none of the reasonable degree tracks are possible without it then you have your answer.
Aside from the fact that they're protesting other NBs' votes (or so the Secretariat will rule) there's the little matter of there not being any IS-29500 text to object to. No standard, no objections.
Think of it as creative interpretation of the Directives.
You would be astounded to who has access to your electronic medical records during the course of treatment.
Or not. The whole idea is to make the records available to anyone who needs them, such as emergency personnel in the distant town you're visiting when you're unconscious. (I'm not making that one up; it's one of the favorite selling points for these access-anywhere databases.)
It's a great idea, but of course it only works if every EMT on the planet has access to your records. You can calculate the privacy implications.
Microsoft has already supported a ODF extension for Office 2007. Full import and export, and also a command-line batch converter. It's a SourceForge project with a very liberal license (search for odf-converter). Microsoft didn't develop it directly but sponsored (paid for) the development, and assisted with the OOXML side of things.
We've heard of it, and apparently unlike you know that it's a very partial conversion with stunningly bad performance.
SCO will pay their due punishment, either in cash or in company assets.
If any lawyers get sanctioned, it is only because they were sloppy.
Well, they haven't any cash and they haven't any company assets; they're in bankruptcy right now and are burning their remaining assets fast enough to make sure that there's nothing left before the creditors (including Novell and IBM) get a dime.
As for the lawyers, they have been incredibly sloppy. A number of attorneys have opined that in their whole careers they've never seen such flagrant violations of the FRCP, Rule 11 not least of all. The same lawyers are also very doubtful about any sanctions being assessed against the lawyers involved.
So, by all means, let's see what happens when the counterclaims and any possible motions for sanctions are wrapped up.
That's called a bug. Word processing files should look exactly the same across platforms and versions, with exceptions given for missing fonts or other referenced data.
You're confusing word processing with page layout. If you want total control over presentation, use FrameMaker -- that's what it's for.
At the other end of the spectrum, you can use LaTex and various front ends and again have total control over appearance across platforms, but without the user having to worry about the details. Word processing is in between and compromises on both layout and content orientation.
UKUUG is currently waiting on the UK judicial system to decide whether to do a judicial review of the British Standards Institute's recent decision to ratify OOXML.
Since the appeal deadline will have passed before the judicial review can even begin, it's all rather moot.
More to the point, how badly will they cripple the ODF support?
Will ODF spreadsheets be functionally equivalent to CSV?
Will ODF text be functionally equivalent to plain-text ASCII with line breaks?
WIll ODF presentations be JPEG renderings?
Will ODF import and export take hours?
etc.
I've occasionally been accused of having an evil mind, but I'm sure that professionals given weeks or months can come up with better kneecapping plans than the above amateur hipshots.
We could keep him around for entertainment value alone, but best of all he's so freaking useful in totally discrediting the antigamers who don't froth at the mouth, chew carpets, and fling feces at the judge.
I really don't see the problem with using technologies like.NET or Java, although the latter is now approaching full GPL.
Aside from the fact that Microsoft has patent locks on it and even Scoble has reported that internally they are reserving the option of suing other implementations into oblivion, not much. Well, aside from the fact that even Novell only has four years to go until their patent truce expires.
I wouldn't mind so much if we weren't heading towards total (Linux) world domination by GNOME, and GNOME is headed towards being dependent on The MS Clone Formerly Known As Mono.
I cranked it up in a VM and had to look twice to be sure it wasn't GNOME. Most of KDE's signature customizability is gone, and (like GNOME) it's not just a matter of missing GUIs for tweaking settings; the settings themselves are gone into hard code.
Whether we like it or not, turnabout is nearly complete: GNOME, which started out as a GPL-purity alternative to KDE, has become Microsoft.NET for Linux; at the same time, KDE (although still pure GPL) has set a new direction of becoming a GNOME-alike with different internals.
Let me be the first to hail our new diminutive overlords!
Slashdot Mirror
And yet, the plants flourish. Notably, kudzu flourishes and grows so fast that you can almost see it happen -- which means it's not waiting for cooler weather.
Something isn't adding up for me here.
The USA has spent a good bit of the last century telling the world that "the ends justifies the means" is not carte blanche to those with power. If there's going to be a change of policy, perhaps abrogating those treaties would be a good start.
It's not like it hasn't been obvious that this has been US domestic policy for several years.
They must see these points as survival matters.
The results would have been the other way around if they hadn't stacked the deck by removing Star Trek crewmen from consideration.
Take it up a notch and you have the perennial bills that do pass with the full knowledge that the first Federal Court that sees it will overturn it, since it's just a paraphrase of one that has been shot down six times already by the Supreme Court. School prayer bills fall in this category.
Not sayin' which one this fits, but it's as good a bet as you'll get where the Supreme Court is concerned that this one falls into one or the other.
Bottom line: IMHO no special effort to add programming to a physics curriculum should be necessary. However, there are obviously classes where programming is essential to the physics content and for those you would horribly disserve your students by candy-coating the computational aspects.
Require programming as a pre-requisite where the class requires it, and if that means that none of the reasonable degree tracks are possible without it then you have your answer.
Think of it as creative interpretation of the Directives.
It's a great idea, but of course it only works if every EMT on the planet has access to your records. You can calculate the privacy implications.
Not useful.
As for the lawyers, they have been incredibly sloppy. A number of attorneys have opined that in their whole careers they've never seen such flagrant violations of the FRCP, Rule 11 not least of all. The same lawyers are also very doubtful about any sanctions being assessed against the lawyers involved.
So, by all means, let's see what happens when the counterclaims and any possible motions for sanctions are wrapped up.
At the other end of the spectrum, you can use LaTex and various front ends and again have total control over appearance across platforms, but without the user having to worry about the details. Word processing is in between and compromises on both layout and content orientation.
- Will ODF spreadsheets be functionally equivalent to CSV?
- Will ODF text be functionally equivalent to plain-text ASCII with line breaks?
- WIll ODF presentations be JPEG renderings?
- Will ODF import and export take hours?
- etc.
I've occasionally been accused of having an evil mind, but I'm sure that professionals given weeks or months can come up with better kneecapping plans than the above amateur hipshots.We could keep him around for entertainment value alone, but best of all he's so freaking useful in totally discrediting the antigamers who don't froth at the mouth, chew carpets, and fling feces at the judge.
Well, that's refreshing. Maybe the gang got some hints on PR from Stone Brewing Company.
The Brits are going to have to get serious if they want to compete on canine hygiene enforcement.
I wouldn't mind so much if we weren't heading towards total (Linux) world domination by GNOME, and GNOME is headed towards being dependent on The MS Clone Formerly Known As Mono.
I cranked it up in a VM and had to look twice to be sure it wasn't GNOME. Most of KDE's signature customizability is gone, and (like GNOME) it's not just a matter of missing GUIs for tweaking settings; the settings themselves are gone into hard code.
Whether we like it or not, turnabout is nearly complete: GNOME, which started out as a GPL-purity alternative to KDE, has become Microsoft .NET for Linux; at the same time, KDE (although still pure GPL) has set a new direction of becoming a GNOME-alike with different internals.
Let me be the first to hail our new diminutive overlords!