"Wikipedia has the advantage of being written by enthusiasts."
That can be a disadvantage. Whoever wrote most of the "History" section of the article on the Federal Reserve was certainly enthusiastic, but I wouldn't exactly call it useful or informative.
"It wasn't overblown. They just got lucky and stopped the meltdown before they had a reactor breach."
Yeah, that's why, just like with the surviving reactors at Chernobyl, TMI-1 continued to be plagued by safety problems right on up until it was decomissioned. Oh, wait...
I find it interesting all the attention everybody gives the problems at TMI-2 and how catastrophic it was, but promptly ignore the stellar safety record of its twin. If the containment of the disaster at TMI-2 had more to do with luck than engineering, then no ammount of bailing wire and duct tape could have kept TMI-1 safely in operation, let along longer than any other reactor in its class in the world.
If you want to have a rational anti-nuke argument, falling back on "TMI-2 could have been worse!" won't do you much to elevate you over the "Nukular is just BAD!" noise that continues to plague your colleagues.
"One, because it costs money - and people claim to be willing to invest, but it's normally just talk."
"Who would pay to subscribe to satellite radio when you can get AM/FM for free?" Satellite radio makes its money from and is succeeding because of customers who are willing to pay more money for a better product. It should be noted that the conflict mentioned in the article doesn't happen with terrestrial broadcasters as the customers are the advertisers, not the listeners. Most cable channels don't even work that way.
"Two, there is no possible legal way for a non-authorized, subscription-based radio company to distribute RIAA/MPAA media without consent from the RIAA or MPAA."
The RIAA has no (direct) say in what their royaltee rates are. Those rates are set by Congress (the ones who define copyright to begin with).
"As soon as the company would "stick it to the man" and "fight the system" and all the rest of the cliche terms, the stations would begin pulling out of the deal"
What "stations?" We're talking satellite radio here. The service is the "stations." This isn't cable or satellite TV where you have separate medium and media companies, at least not where music is concerned.
"If the RIAA wants to make music that nobody can listen to, it's their right."
It certainly seems that way, but in actuality it's their privilege granted to them by Congress. Whether or not the RIAA has Congress in their back pocket is a different matter, but ultimately it's Congress that calls the shots on all copyright matters.
"(Satellite) radio stations are in a tough spot between the recording industry, from which they license music, and subscribers, who want maximum flexibility in exchange for their monthly fees."
I'd be more than willing to pay higher subscription fees for a company that would willingly go to bat against the RIAA instead of caving like this. I suspect I'm not the only one, either.
Oh, you're talking about a commercial! I remember those things! Y'see, satellite radio has spoiled me rotten and I'm no longer able to tolerate advertisements the way I used to. Because of that I hardly watch any television any more.
Did you know that, between my reliance on satellite radio and the ol' Adblock extension to FF, I have yet to see a single presitential campaign advertisement? I keep on seeing mention of some controversial commercials in the news, but that's the only way I know they exist.
They may be able to quiet XM for now, but the same automated recording and tagging can be done with the new "HD Radio" standards that are getting pushed out the door. A closed-loop business like satellite radio is one thing, but broadcasters and radio manufacturers tend to be two different people when it comes to FM.
Of course, I give it a week before the RIAA strong-arms broadcasters to essentially break the tagging features, but then you'll have some unhappy hardware manufacturers...
"What me meant is that Microsoft is completely reworking the way their browser operates"
Yeah, but it was only a year or two between IE being a basic app bundled with Windows to (what they call) a part of the core operating system, inseparable from the rest of the OS. And if that wasn't "comletely reworking the way their browser operates..."
Look on the bright side, Bob: Some chick named Alice* is actually sending you stuff. This may be the first time a Slashdotter has ever had contact with a real woman!
" Remember ten years ago when the porno used to load line by line?"
That was on a 14.4 with VGA graphics. But immediately before that I had a 2400 with EGA, so any pics that weren't ASCII art really just weren't worth the download.
IMO, that's more the FTC enforcing responsibility for what you say rather than restricting what you can say. If you tell people "My product can do XYZ," you should be held accountable if it doesn't, just as you should be held accountable for the ol' "Shouting 'Fire!' in a crowded theater" analogy.
"People can still say the Pledge all they want, but Government-run schools can't encourage you to, because then you'd have the government getting involved in religion."
Ah, but if you take out those two offending words it's still OK for the government to mandate loyalty oaths from minors. You gotta love that...
"What's the point of civil disobedience if you don't get arrested for it?"
"Civil disobedience" is voluntarily being arrested for violating a law you disagree with. For example, if you want to take the civil disobedience approach to protesting the War on Drugs, you get yourself some of your favorite illicit narcotic, go up to the nearest cop and say "Hi, I'm in posession of $narcotic, please arrest me."
"The whole idea is to get arrested to get publicity for your message"
No, the technical terms for getting arrested simply to spread "a message" are "grandstanding" or "showboating." "Making an ass of oneself" may also apply.
The only reason someone truly practicing the ideals of civil disobedience would get arrested for spraying chalk on sidewalks is if they were protesting laws against spraying chalk on sidewalks. And if you were blocking traffic for a few hours for any reason other than your belief in the right to block traffic whenever you wanted, what you were doing isn't civil disobedience.
"Public property" means "paid for by people who may not agree with you." The people of the city paid for those streets, and so they have the right, through their representatives in city hall, to dictate the terms of its use. You have no more right to deface public streets than you do to drive on them without a license.
There is nothing in the First Amendment that gives you the right to force others to listen to you. No free soapboxes, no right to block public rights-of-way. Your right to free speech cannot interfere with my rights to peace and quiet and to use public streets for their intended purpose, so sayeth the Ninth Amendment.
"People said that about 14.4, 28.8, 56k, and DSL."
And I'm still saying that about DSL. It's nice to know that if I lived in the heart of New York City or Los Angeles that I might be able to get 10 Gb/s, but right now my router says it's dialling in at 24 kb/s.
"Give the rich part of the world ten years, and we're all spending our time wearing atomic _and_ digital watches."
The hard part isn't necessarily keeping an eye on the atom, it's all the math needed to approximate what atomic time should be.
Over the years since the adoption of the atomic second, all sorts of adjustments and clarifications were made to the definition, that include (among others) accounting for blackbody radiation (it's "supposed" to be at 0 K), special relativity (they're "supposed" to be stationary to the observer), and general relativity (gotta remember gravity and centripetal acceleration from earth's spin at your latitude). All this must be done in a relatively controlled environment so that you know what numbers to put into the equations.
Throw that all in with the effects that swinging your arm will have while you walk, and putting one on your wrist sounds extraneous since you'll still have to correct it from time to time to get that accuracy you're supposed to have with an atomic timepiece. The correcting will probably have to be done by GPS time transfer, which is a lot more complicated than simply asking your GPS receiver what time it is. The light lag involved is very signifigant when you're counting 9,192,631,770 "ticks" per second.
My radio-controlled quartz watch, when allowed to update itself every 3 days, is at worst accurate to the nearest second, and I've never seen it get anywhere near that far off. If I concentrate a little I can watch deciseconds tick by, but centiseconds are too much of a blur for a mere mortal like me. Why bother with nanoseconds?
Put one in a computer? Sure. Network validation schemes like Kerberos would benifit greatly by knowing that all the workstations in the domain are all synchronized to a disgustingly high degree. But quartz crystals continue to be good enough for even high-end GPS receivers, so why would I need better on my wrist?
Slashdot Mirror
"Wikipedia has the advantage of being written by enthusiasts."
That can be a disadvantage. Whoever wrote most of the "History" section of the article on the Federal Reserve was certainly enthusiastic, but I wouldn't exactly call it useful or informative.
So what you're saying is that your visits to Slashdot went from taking up 5% to 100% of your company's web traffic?
"It wasn't overblown. They just got lucky and stopped the meltdown before they had a reactor breach."
Yeah, that's why, just like with the surviving reactors at Chernobyl, TMI-1 continued to be plagued by safety problems right on up until it was decomissioned. Oh, wait...
I find it interesting all the attention everybody gives the problems at TMI-2 and how catastrophic it was, but promptly ignore the stellar safety record of its twin. If the containment of the disaster at TMI-2 had more to do with luck than engineering, then no ammount of bailing wire and duct tape could have kept TMI-1 safely in operation, let along longer than any other reactor in its class in the world.
If you want to have a rational anti-nuke argument, falling back on "TMI-2 could have been worse!" won't do you much to elevate you over the "Nukular is just BAD!" noise that continues to plague your colleagues.
But I *like* Nintendo of America!
"It appears we have some of the stuff wrapped in aluminium foil and aren't entirely sure where it is."
Found it! It's in the back of my refrigerator.
"One, because it costs money - and people claim to be willing to invest, but it's normally just talk."
"Who would pay to subscribe to satellite radio when you can get AM/FM for free?" Satellite radio makes its money from and is succeeding because of customers who are willing to pay more money for a better product. It should be noted that the conflict mentioned in the article doesn't happen with terrestrial broadcasters as the customers are the advertisers, not the listeners. Most cable channels don't even work that way.
"Two, there is no possible legal way for a non-authorized, subscription-based radio company to distribute RIAA/MPAA media without consent from the RIAA or MPAA."
The RIAA has no (direct) say in what their royaltee rates are. Those rates are set by Congress (the ones who define copyright to begin with).
"As soon as the company would "stick it to the man" and "fight the system" and all the rest of the cliche terms, the stations would begin pulling out of the deal"
What "stations?" We're talking satellite radio here. The service is the "stations." This isn't cable or satellite TV where you have separate medium and media companies, at least not where music is concerned.
"If the RIAA wants to make music that nobody can listen to, it's their right."
It certainly seems that way, but in actuality it's their privilege granted to them by Congress. Whether or not the RIAA has Congress in their back pocket is a different matter, but ultimately it's Congress that calls the shots on all copyright matters.
"(Satellite) radio stations are in a tough spot between the recording industry, from which they license music, and subscribers, who want maximum flexibility in exchange for their monthly fees."
I'd be more than willing to pay higher subscription fees for a company that would willingly go to bat against the RIAA instead of caving like this. I suspect I'm not the only one, either.
Er... Sony's a member of the RIAA. MPAA too.
Huh...?
Oh, you're talking about a commercial! I remember those things! Y'see, satellite radio has spoiled me rotten and I'm no longer able to tolerate advertisements the way I used to. Because of that I hardly watch any television any more.
Did you know that, between my reliance on satellite radio and the ol' Adblock extension to FF, I have yet to see a single presitential campaign advertisement? I keep on seeing mention of some controversial commercials in the news, but that's the only way I know they exist.
They may be able to quiet XM for now, but the same automated recording and tagging can be done with the new "HD Radio" standards that are getting pushed out the door. A closed-loop business like satellite radio is one thing, but broadcasters and radio manufacturers tend to be two different people when it comes to FM.
Of course, I give it a week before the RIAA strong-arms broadcasters to essentially break the tagging features, but then you'll have some unhappy hardware manufacturers...
No no, that's high school. College calls for a little more subtlety. Get a large knife and be sharpening it whenever somebody comes in.
"What me meant is that Microsoft is completely reworking the way their browser operates"
Yeah, but it was only a year or two between IE being a basic app bundled with Windows to (what they call) a part of the core operating system, inseparable from the rest of the OS. And if that wasn't "comletely reworking the way their browser operates..."
"Why is it that politicians seem to do everything in their power to undermine public
confidence in the election process?"
Because what else are the people going to do, not vote?
The more voters are disgusted with the system, the fewer voters politicians need to worry about to win an election
Look on the bright side, Bob: Some chick named Alice* is actually sending you stuff. This may be the first time a Slashdotter has ever had contact with a real woman!
*Unless it's Alice Cooper...
" Remember ten years ago when the porno used to load line by line?"
:)
That was on a 14.4 with VGA graphics. But immediately before that I had a 2400 with EGA, so any pics that weren't ASCII art really just weren't worth the download.
Dirty text files, on the other hand...
So the Internet is really 35 years old, or at least will be in September, which is before November...
INTERNET FOR PRESIDENT!
Why? So Taco can make extra-sure that the story he's posting is, in fact, a dupe?
(What, you honestly think they were all accidental?)
IMO, that's more the FTC enforcing responsibility for what you say rather than restricting what you can say. If you tell people "My product can do XYZ," you should be held accountable if it doesn't, just as you should be held accountable for the ol' "Shouting 'Fire!' in a crowded theater" analogy.
"People can still say the Pledge all they want, but Government-run schools can't encourage you to, because then you'd have the government getting involved in religion."
Ah, but if you take out those two offending words it's still OK for the government to mandate loyalty oaths from minors. You gotta love that...
"What's the point of civil disobedience if you don't get arrested for it?"
"Civil disobedience" is voluntarily being arrested for violating a law you disagree with. For example, if you want to take the civil disobedience approach to protesting the War on Drugs, you get yourself some of your favorite illicit narcotic, go up to the nearest cop and say "Hi, I'm in posession of $narcotic, please arrest me."
"The whole idea is to get arrested to get publicity for your message"
No, the technical terms for getting arrested simply to spread "a message" are "grandstanding" or "showboating." "Making an ass of oneself" may also apply.
The only reason someone truly practicing the ideals of civil disobedience would get arrested for spraying chalk on sidewalks is if they were protesting laws against spraying chalk on sidewalks. And if you were blocking traffic for a few hours for any reason other than your belief in the right to block traffic whenever you wanted, what you were doing isn't civil disobedience.
You're suppoed to be civil.
"Public property" means "paid for by people who may not agree with you." The people of the city paid for those streets, and so they have the right, through their representatives in city hall, to dictate the terms of its use. You have no more right to deface public streets than you do to drive on them without a license.
"What good is free speech if nobody hear you?"
Your problem, not mine.
There is nothing in the First Amendment that gives you the right to force others to listen to you. No free soapboxes, no right to block public rights-of-way. Your right to free speech cannot interfere with my rights to peace and quiet and to use public streets for their intended purpose, so sayeth the Ninth Amendment.
Yeah, for advertising it's:and then for political speech it's:
"People said that about 14.4, 28.8, 56k, and DSL."
And I'm still saying that about DSL. It's nice to know that if I lived in the heart of New York City or Los Angeles that I might be able to get 10 Gb/s, but right now my router says it's dialling in at 24 kb/s.
"Give the rich part of the world ten years, and we're all spending our time wearing atomic _and_ digital watches."
The hard part isn't necessarily keeping an eye on the atom, it's all the math needed to approximate what atomic time should be.
Over the years since the adoption of the atomic second, all sorts of adjustments and clarifications were made to the definition, that include (among others) accounting for blackbody radiation (it's "supposed" to be at 0 K), special relativity (they're "supposed" to be stationary to the observer), and general relativity (gotta remember gravity and centripetal acceleration from earth's spin at your latitude). All this must be done in a relatively controlled environment so that you know what numbers to put into the equations.
Throw that all in with the effects that swinging your arm will have while you walk, and putting one on your wrist sounds extraneous since you'll still have to correct it from time to time to get that accuracy you're supposed to have with an atomic timepiece. The correcting will probably have to be done by GPS time transfer, which is a lot more complicated than simply asking your GPS receiver what time it is. The light lag involved is very signifigant when you're counting 9,192,631,770 "ticks" per second.
My radio-controlled quartz watch, when allowed to update itself every 3 days, is at worst accurate to the nearest second, and I've never seen it get anywhere near that far off. If I concentrate a little I can watch deciseconds tick by, but centiseconds are too much of a blur for a mere mortal like me. Why bother with nanoseconds?
Put one in a computer? Sure. Network validation schemes like Kerberos would benifit greatly by knowing that all the workstations in the domain are all synchronized to a disgustingly high degree. But quartz crystals continue to be good enough for even high-end GPS receivers, so why would I need better on my wrist?