You're just not a scientist. SETI@Home has produced a lot. Just because all it has produced is known negatives doesn't mean that the information isn't useful.
"How can people in the 21th century measure forces or torques with units like "a pound at the lenght of the feet of a old king"
We don't. The legal definition of the foot in most countries that still use it is "30.48 centimeters." In fact, in the US, the foot has been defined in metric terms since the nineteenth century.
"And i still cant realize the beauty of a system of lenght units that convert like"
Well, for one thing, you're never going to confuse ounce with pounds or yards with miles. I recall seeing an article from the UK about a doctor that accidentally gave a fatal overdose to a newborn because he confused miligrams with micrograms.
"how many yards are 0.34 miles?"
Decimals are not the end-all be-all of numbers. They have the nasty habit of repeating when describing perfectly rational numbers. SI is nice and all, but I still don't see it as being the alpha and omega of arbitrary measurement systems.
" Why is the article so confusing about the units?"
I'd wager because that's how the parts were measured by the manufacturer when they bought them. Sure, they could have converted to 5.5 meters high, diameter in centimeters, and thrown in some kilograms and Newtons for good measure, but why go through the trouble of converting when both they and most of their audience know what inches and pounds are?
"Why can't they stick to real scientific notations, all with SI units ??"
Why should they? Most of us North Americans are fairly fluent in both systems, and that's pretty much who their intended audience is.
Or do you feel that all websites should only use the English language to also prevent confusing you?
"We need less 'irony'ism and apathy, and more hard core fanaticism in this society."
Um... hello? "Ironic" and "apathetic" people don't vote. It's the "hard core fanatics" who are die-hard party loyalists that keep these people in office to begin with.
What we need is less of either of these kinds of people and more truly informed and concerned voters.
He was probably trying to think of a new name for a variable, looking at how the English, Greek, and a good chunk of the Cyrillic alphabets are already used. Hell, they've already started trying to turn letters upside-down to come up with new symbols...
A friend of mine devised a new symbol he called "pac," which looked a lot like a certain yellow dot-eating disc...
"To wit, how can they calculate damages based on the price of a pay-per-view movie that's running every 2 hours, on five channels, start time offset by 20 minutes on each channel?"
That has little (if anything) to do with their numbers. DirecTV service with all the stop pulled out (all the movie and sports networks, etc. etc.) runs up to $85.99/month, or $1,031.88/year. They can get their $1,000/(year*thief) number without even having to consider pay-per-view.
Not all businesses operate like the RIAA members.
"I won't even go into the fact they haven't actually lost anything..."
Then you shouldn't mind spammers. After all, you would be paying for that electricity and ISP service anyway...
"They were on a fast track to make an expendable heavy lift vehicle that would match what the old Saturn boosters could do (you know the ones we used to go to the Moon, the ones we can't build any more)."
...
"The most insurmountable risk is the desire of the U.S. government and NASA to subsidize competing launch systems."
So, was he going to build super-heavy launch systems or wasn't he? He seems to complain a lot about government-subsidized competition, but (as you alluded to) there is no government-subsidized super-heavy launch vehicles, foreign or domestic.
"while you're pointing fingers at NASA, point the rest of your body at the White House"
Replace "White House" with "Capitol." They're the ones that decide funding.
"Let's have a space policy that ends NASA's constricting monopoly and allows American enterprise to go where it will in space"
What is it exactly do you want the government to do here? It's not like the feds have ever told anybody "No, you can't launch anything into space, only we can do that." NASA may have a de facto monopoly on manned spaceflight, but they sure as heck haven't done anything in the past 50 years to enforce that. What exactly is it that you want? The federal government to throw tax dollars at some private corporation instead? And that's better how?
And why should Congress throw money at some private organization when all that private enterprise has ever done for manned spaceflight in the last 50 years is produce snazzy concept art? Pan Am talked about flights into space once, should Congress have sunk a few billion into keeping them afloat just because of that?
I'm not saying what you think I'm saying, but I'm not saying its opposite, either. In fact, I'm not saying anything at all. But I get to keep the tits.
Think about it: It was probably extended to 30,000 years to make the offer more appealing to get his guilty plea. $500/mo for 360,000 months is a lot more paletable than, say, $5,000,000/mo for 36.
"Is that right? Satellite TV costs well over $1000 a year? No wonder people don't want to pay for it."...
"The $4Billion they calculate is based on what it would cost those 3 million people to subscribe to every single channel available,"
If they're able to get it for free, why would they only stop at the basic package?
""if we don't know what they watched, we must assume they watched everything-- at the same time""
But it's a reasonable assumption, especially when you look at the past track records of people who steal cable and such. The illegal equipment that sells best are the ones that get the puchaser the most expensive services for free.
"The only argument against methane is its mind alterating effects (halluzinations etc),"
Methane is a hydrocarbon, just like the octane you put into your car. So, like with all hydrocarbons, burning it produces all those nasty carbon-based greeenhouse gases everybody complains about
Slashdot Mirror
You're just not a scientist. SETI@Home has produced a lot. Just because all it has produced is known negatives doesn't mean that the information isn't useful.
Um... Netscape has had the pop-up blockers un-hidden since 7.02. Edit/Preferences/Privacy & Security/Popup Window Controls.
I can delete icons quite easily, and they annoy me far less than IE's inability to block pop-ups.
"Was there a tense moment at NORAD, I wonder?"
Hey, Einstein! Canada is NORAD!
"How can people in the 21th century measure forces or torques with units like "a pound at the lenght of the feet of a old king"
We don't. The legal definition of the foot in most countries that still use it is "30.48 centimeters." In fact, in the US, the foot has been defined in metric terms since the nineteenth century.
"And i still cant realize the beauty of a system of lenght units that convert like"
Well, for one thing, you're never going to confuse ounce with pounds or yards with miles. I recall seeing an article from the UK about a doctor that accidentally gave a fatal overdose to a newborn because he confused miligrams with micrograms.
"how many yards are 0.34 miles?"
Decimals are not the end-all be-all of numbers. They have the nasty habit of repeating when describing perfectly rational numbers. SI is nice and all, but I still don't see it as being the alpha and omega of arbitrary measurement systems.
" Why is the article so confusing about the units?"
I'd wager because that's how the parts were measured by the manufacturer when they bought them. Sure, they could have converted to 5.5 meters high, diameter in centimeters, and thrown in some kilograms and Newtons for good measure, but why go through the trouble of converting when both they and most of their audience know what inches and pounds are?
"Why can't they stick to real scientific notations, all with SI units ??"
Why should they? Most of us North Americans are fairly fluent in both systems, and that's pretty much who their intended audience is.
Or do you feel that all websites should only use the English language to also prevent confusing you?
"We need less 'irony'ism and apathy, and more hard core fanaticism in this society."
Um... hello? "Ironic" and "apathetic" people don't vote. It's the "hard core fanatics" who are die-hard party loyalists that keep these people in office to begin with.
What we need is less of either of these kinds of people and more truly informed and concerned voters.
He was probably trying to think of a new name for a variable, looking at how the English, Greek, and a good chunk of the Cyrillic alphabets are already used. Hell, they've already started trying to turn letters upside-down to come up with new symbols...
A friend of mine devised a new symbol he called "pac," which looked a lot like a certain yellow dot-eating disc...
Sounds like you've been working in Domino's longer than you've been working in binary. :)
Silly me. I thought the quest for patterns in and of itself helped one understand the world.
"To wit, how can they calculate damages based on the price of a pay-per-view movie that's running every 2 hours, on five channels, start time offset by 20 minutes on each channel?"
That has little (if anything) to do with their numbers. DirecTV service with all the stop pulled out (all the movie and sports networks, etc. etc.) runs up to $85.99/month, or $1,031.88/year. They can get their $1,000/(year*thief) number without even having to consider pay-per-view.
Not all businesses operate like the RIAA members.
"I won't even go into the fact they haven't actually lost anything..."
Then you shouldn't mind spammers. After all, you would be paying for that electricity and ISP service anyway...
...
"The most insurmountable risk is the desire of the U.S. government and NASA to subsidize competing launch systems."
So, was he going to build super-heavy launch systems or wasn't he? He seems to complain a lot about government-subsidized competition, but (as you alluded to) there is no government-subsidized super-heavy launch vehicles, foreign or domestic.
"while you're pointing fingers at NASA, point the rest of your body at the White House"
Replace "White House" with "Capitol." They're the ones that decide funding.
"Let's have a space policy that ends NASA's constricting monopoly and allows American enterprise to go where it will in space"
What is it exactly do you want the government to do here? It's not like the feds have ever told anybody "No, you can't launch anything into space, only we can do that." NASA may have a de facto monopoly on manned spaceflight, but they sure as heck haven't done anything in the past 50 years to enforce that. What exactly is it that you want? The federal government to throw tax dollars at some private corporation instead? And that's better how?
And why should Congress throw money at some private organization when all that private enterprise has ever done for manned spaceflight in the last 50 years is produce snazzy concept art? Pan Am talked about flights into space once, should Congress have sunk a few billion into keeping them afloat just because of that?
Oh, you mean like in Srebenica? Or are you thinking of NATOs unilateral attacks?
If I could fit in, I wouldn't be posting on Slashdot.
(Look, ma! I'm on topic!)
No, it's the way you screwed up your "your/you'res" in your post.
IMO, MTV killed "irony" long before 9/11/01 by overplaying a certain ill-informed Alanis Morisette video...
When you consider that the "time" in question is measured in integer months (since they charge by the month), I'd say it's more than possible.
If you can't view more than just one channel during the course of a month, it's time for you to get a new TV.
Someone set up us the bomb!
On the other hand, Junta wasn't a repeat offender.
Think about it: It was probably extended to 30,000 years to make the offer more appealing to get his guilty plea. $500/mo for 360,000 months is a lot more paletable than, say, $5,000,000/mo for 36.
If you can't do the time...
"Is that right? Satellite TV costs well over $1000 a year? No wonder people don't want to pay for it." ...
"The $4Billion they calculate is based on what it would cost those 3 million people to subscribe to every single channel available,"
If they're able to get it for free, why would they only stop at the basic package?
""if we don't know what they watched, we must assume they watched everything-- at the same time""
But it's a reasonable assumption, especially when you look at the past track records of people who steal cable and such. The illegal equipment that sells best are the ones that get the puchaser the most expensive services for free.
"anyone else get the image of doc brown tossing in some banana peels and beer into "mr. fusion"?? .. maybe call this "mr. hydrogen" instead?"
Why not both? If you're going for science fiction, why not extract the hydrogen from the biomass, sift out the deuterium and/or tritium, and fuse it?
"The only argument against methane is its mind alterating effects (halluzinations etc),"
Methane is a hydrocarbon, just like the octane you put into your car. So, like with all hydrocarbons, burning it produces all those nasty carbon-based greeenhouse gases everybody complains about