There are millions of eggs in freezers already that will never be used. Instead of throwing them in the trash, maybe they could be used for one of the most important advances in human history. Just a thought.
In the article, you'll see that one of the reasons why the technique was so successful is because they avoided using the frozen eggs. Freshly harvested eggs are better.
Even if you use only open source software, you don't own any of it.
Talk about missing the point... Everything you said is completely true, and yes, the grandparent made a slight error in statement of ownership. However, I think you're really missing the point. If you have all of the software that you use installed on your local machine, you have complete control over what applications you are using, when and if they will be upgraded, and when the applications should be removed because you no longer need them. You also have more or less complete control over what money you spend on upgrades. Contrast this with thin client and a subscription-based service. You have no control over upgrades. The subscription fees will most likely be like maintenance fees on a Timeshare (forever going up), and the provider can choose to sunset an application that is very important to you.
The only difference with thin client computing is that the terms of the license is different.
Yes, but those terms can have a monstrous impact on subscribers.
I do want to point out, however, that for some people, the subscription model may be beneficial. Depending on their needs, they may actually be able to save money by paying subscription fees, as the provider can buy enough seats from the software vendor to obtain a significant discount, and pass part of that savings on to the subscribers. Couple that with not having to lay out $500 all at once for Office Pro, and it may be preferable for some people.
Trying to run the company to please the shareholders is like driving a car down the highway looking back in the rear view mirror.
Close, but to really understand it, you would have to drive down the road staring at the part just in front of the car instead of ranging in and out to 100 meters or so up the road like you are supposed to. It's a really really good way to get in an accident, so I don't actually recommend that you try it. Nevertheless, I think it's a very accurate comparison to running a company that is shareholder-driven.
Exactly. The only logical alternative to infinite recursion is to accept the existence of an universe without a creator.
Which brings up the question that I never got answererd when in school, and I'm hoping someone here with an advanced degree can answer... Where did all the matter and energy in the Universe come from?
I think the wisest approach would be to host exactly the same content on both and check if they get different rankings all things being equal.
I don't think this will work too well. Other sites that link to your site impact your page rankings, and it's unlikely the "redundant" site will achieve the same referral links.
IMO the true test would be to take his site which is hosted on Apache, move it to being hosted on IIS and watch and see if his ranking goes up or down after the next time it is indexed.
And then you would also need to move it _back_ to Apache to see if the ranking declines again.
How about categorization and documentation? When you access a SourceForge site with nothing but the source code on it, it's difficult to take seriously. In this case, though, we all know who the author is. For lesser known authors, lack of any additional materials can kill community interest in the project.
The whole reason so many are moving to VoIP is to avoid these kinds of bogus fees
At least with Vonage, these fees are miniscule -- only a couple bucks a month, and I wouldn't consider them to be bogus. I would expect that the money taken in by these fees to ultimately pay for the necessary infrastructure for E911 service. But at any rate, these fees are definitely not why I switched to Vonage. Some of the other fees (like the per-minute federal taxes) had something to do with it, but the most prominent reason for me was the fact that Verizon is trying to get every last cent out of its customers. Forgetting the regulatory fees for a moment, consider that until Vonage (and other VoIP services) began to provide some serious competition, Verizon didn't even offer a flat-rate package that included unlimited long distance. Consider also that the unlimited long distance package for Verizon is something in the neighborhood of $55 (before the regulatory fees), and that Vonage charges only about $25 for essentially the same thing. This is all about a monopoly, and VoIP services are the first real competition that the well-entrenched Baby Bells have had.
The break-up of AT&T did a lot to reduce the costs of long distance, but it seems that absolutely _NO_ progress has been made on the cost of local access. That's primarily because there is no competition. Even though you see advertisements for other local phone carriers, they are still enslaved to the Bells because the Bells own the last mile connection to your house. Years of trying has not eliminated this problem, and it has taken VoIP to finally put on the cost pressure. As much as I don't want to see archaic regulatory fees imposed on VoIP providers, the related costs pale in comparison to the extra overhead that the local carriers are charging.
The point is to keep domains from being abused, not to limit their use to people who have already bought one.
Yes, but look at what is happening here. Let's say my name is "Arthur Walling" and that I'm an lawyer. I purchase the domain name, "authurwalling.law.pro" and use that to do business. Then, my arch rival, "Jonathan Seymour," who already owns "jonathanseymour.law.pro" finds out he can pull a fast one and purchases "arthurwalling.pro" so that he can usurp business from me. This is what ICANN is trying to prevent. Although there are some other laws that kick in here, it's a whole lot cheaper to both me and the public if they aren't allowed to pull this stunt in the first place. I rarely agree with ICANN, but I must hesitantly do so this time. BTW, did I choose good lawyer names?;)
Yeah, and if you RTFA you will notice that Tridge didn't use BitKeeper:
I read the entire article and several associated links, thanks. He didn't say that he didn't use BitKeeper. He said he didn't use it for his reverse engineering. I think we're going to find out that although he didn't use the BitKeeper tool "at home" during his reverse engineering, he had to use the BitKeeper tool at work, and thus was bound (whether he knew it or not) by the license, which I'm sure includes a "no reverse engineering" clause. There's all kinds of arguments going back and forth about how "reverse engineering" is or isn't illegal, or is or isn't immoral. The truth is that it's not illegal and you can probably argue both sides of immoral. But it is definitely a violation of the license agreement, and therefore subject to civil law. The only way he could avoid this is if he truly never used _any_ of the BitKeeper tools while at work, and if he obtained a BitKeeper database (upon which to experiment) from some source completely unconnected with his employment. I seriously doubt this is the case, and because of this I believe he implicates either himself or OSDL. Maybe I'm wrong. For his sake, I truly hope so.
Finally we come to the heart of the matter...the reason that should have been number one, with the two reasons listed above in support of it. Humankind must colonize space, and do it soon.
Umm... Are you familiar with counting backwards? Saving the best for last?? "To Survive" is the number one reason listed. It's just listed last because the poster was attempting to build suspense.
It doesn't apply to this article, because Grandma can't go grab a Gentoo CD, pop it in the drive, and come back an hour later with a working system.
I agree with your point, but I have to ask: Can Grandma do this with Windows XP? I'm just curious because I haven't installed Windows XP from scratch. I realize, of course, that as long as most PCs ship with Windows, Linux actually needs to be EASIER to install than Windows in order to earn market share.
In these tight economic times, why would a city consider it a wise move to spend tax payer monies on project like this just escapes me.
High-speed internet for poorer people who can barely even afford a PC. It's a pretty cheap way to offer self-improvement benefits and otherwise "look good" among some of the poorer voters.
Bringing "customers" into the WiFi hot zone to patronize the local business just because they have connectivity there.
Is it really THAT expensive to install and operate a city-wide wireless network? The $5000 per year that Dayton is paying is pure PEANUTS compared to some of the other things that money gets wasted on. They've probably wasted more than that on "entertainment" expenses run up by a single employee in the last two months.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense... I'm trying to listen to a conference call while writing....
Crackpottery would be saying something is true and then saying everything must conform to that. Science doesn't work like that. You have a bunch of data, and you make a theory that best fits the evidence. Or you make a theory that makes some prediction. That theory remains valid until some piece of data is uncovered that does not fit in with the theory, at which point the theory is modified.
Science doesn't work like that, but people do. Many people today understand that science is making a hypothesis, devising tests that will support or prove wrong the hypothesis, and then building enough evidence to move the hypothesis into a workable theory upon which additional hypotheses may be based. However, they fail to realize that even seemingly insurmountable evidence for a theory doesn't make it infallible. At best, we can only hope that a theory will only have to be "adjusted" in the face of future observations that conflict with it. And sometimes we must accept that a theory, while attractive for many years, is just plain wrong except under limited circumstances. This is what many people have a hard time accepting. I'm, of course, not suggesting that we be quick to throw out every well-established theory in the face of adversity, but I like to see research on alternate theories encouraged (with adequate skepticism) because I feel that failing to do so will cause us to miss out on a lot of truly fascinating science in the future.
Thats not crackpottery, thats the way its supposed to work. There is no such thing as a 'final' theory. Its a process.
Agreed, and if only teachers could get this across to their students, we might see more people actually able to think for themselves rather than nodding their heads at everything that makes it out of the journals and into mainstream periodicals. Maybe somebody needs to get this reality across to some of the teachers....
In light of April 1st I have to say I'm not sure if this is legit or not.
This is probably redundant by now, but the new features are definitely not a joke. I sent email with Rich Text from GMAIL to another email account, and it worked. However, there still appear to be some bugs in the interface. At any rate, tomorrow will tell whether they yank the features away.
If this is not an april fools joke i shall eat my mac
You know, I spent a good three minutes just staring at my screen with my mouth open before I remembered that it was April 1. I was caught between the audacity of such a stunt, the possibility that maybe it wasn't a real child, and the indifference of the Slashdot editor. What a ride! Thanks for the joke.
Make it last as long as possible. Any media set to self destruct after a set date is no use to anyone. Make the best you can and keep inproving it.
I think the whole reason for the survey is that it's not cost-feasible to make long-lasting media, and that the efforts to drive prices ever-lower will also product media of lower quality. If you want long lasting media, you're going to have to pay for it. Personally, I'd be OK if they made two (or more) different grades. I don't need most of my computer files to last longer than 7 years, but I'd want my photos and videos to at least survive me. Hopefully, technology will one day allow me to achieve that goal without intentionally stepping off the curb in front of a moving vehicle.
...Vonage lobbied hard to not be considered a telephone service, so that they would be excluded from all of the regulations including providing 911 service.
Think about it. Vonage lobbied hard to be excluded from much regulation, but there is absolutely no valid business reason why they wouldn't want to provide 911 service unless there was some difficulty in doing so. There are many many people on the edge of going to VoIP that have not done so simply because of the lack of traditional 911. It would be in the best interest of Vonage to provide this service. Also, they *DO* charge fees related to the 911 service, so why not go the whole way?
If Vonage were legally a phone service, then the Bells would be required to provide them the appropriate interface.
Pray tell, why is it that the Bells should be the ones giving permission for Vonage to participate in public safety infrastructure? Don't you think this is a little warped?
Thanks for the opportunity to have some meaningful dialog about what can be a "hot" topic...;)
I think you may have a misunderstanding of some terms. There are countless contradictory hypotheses...
No misunderstanding, but an unintentional misrepresentation. You are correct. Those ideas that are most contradictory are generally only hypotheses. Theories are frequently proven wrong, but not usually in whole. Instead, it is usually the case that some extension is needed to satisfy new observations that have been found. But make no mistake. Theories are not necessarily fact. They are merely strongly supported conclusions that have been generally accepted. It does happen that a previously accepted theory is completely contradicted when it is found that it utterly fails to explain some new observations. This doesn't happen very frequently, though.
You make it sound as if disagreement is a bad thing - strong disagreement is the only way that science advances.
Not at all. In fact, that whole paragraph I wrote was just using the grandparent's words about religion in reference to science instead. Like in science, in religion disagreements don't have to be a "bad" thing, although there are some core beliefs that when transgressed yield rather unhealthy friction.
A "bad" scientist is not a scientist at all, by purest definition.
Try convincing the "bad" scientiest of that.;)
Sure, someone might call themselves one but then again not everyone who claims to be Christian follows the beliefs they profess.
Agreed.
Is Clinton a Christian even though he got busy in the Oval Office?
I don't think anyone can say for sure. All I can say is that his behavior was not reflective of Christian beliefs. But, Christians are human too.
Is Bush a Christian, even though his right-to-life stance doesn't extend to Death Row?
I'm not sure you can compare these two, as the only crime usually committed by a fetus is one of inconvenience to its parents.
Aren't we supposed to forgive everyone?
One could argue that there is a difference between forgiveness and consequences. If you steal something from me, my forgiveness of that act can be separate from the time you spend in jail. Although, they can be intertwined. What makes Death Row different is that there is no opportunity for retribution afterwards. I think the scariest thing about capital punishment is the possibility of executing someone who is innocent.
Since the media will never distort what a religious leader says...?
Oh, this happens all the time. I never meant to imply that it doesn't. In fact, there are probably any number of potential religious leaders in whom I can place no trust because I don't know if the media is lying or not.
This one was actually a point of curiosity - would you name some of these religious leader role-models?
The best public example I could provide is Billy Graham. But there are plenty of leaders with whom I interact that the general public wouldn't be aware of, including my own pastor. There are also some Christian artists that I've had the pleasure of meeting, and who've had an impact on my life. By the way, this is not to say that these people aren't human. Just like anybody else, they can make mistakes, so one shouldn't set them on a pedestal.
Slashdot Mirror
Come on man, it would go between the other two, and it would be a great benefit for ski-boxing....
In the article, you'll see that one of the reasons why the technique was so successful is because they avoided using the frozen eggs. Freshly harvested eggs are better.
Talk about missing the point... Everything you said is completely true, and yes, the grandparent made a slight error in statement of ownership. However, I think you're really missing the point. If you have all of the software that you use installed on your local machine, you have complete control over what applications you are using, when and if they will be upgraded, and when the applications should be removed because you no longer need them. You also have more or less complete control over what money you spend on upgrades. Contrast this with thin client and a subscription-based service. You have no control over upgrades. The subscription fees will most likely be like maintenance fees on a Timeshare (forever going up), and the provider can choose to sunset an application that is very important to you.
The only difference with thin client computing is that the terms of the license is different.
Yes, but those terms can have a monstrous impact on subscribers.
I do want to point out, however, that for some people, the subscription model may be beneficial. Depending on their needs, they may actually be able to save money by paying subscription fees, as the provider can buy enough seats from the software vendor to obtain a significant discount, and pass part of that savings on to the subscribers. Couple that with not having to lay out $500 all at once for Office Pro, and it may be preferable for some people.
Close, but to really understand it, you would have to drive down the road staring at the part just in front of the car instead of ranging in and out to 100 meters or so up the road like you are supposed to. It's a really really good way to get in an accident, so I don't actually recommend that you try it. Nevertheless, I think it's a very accurate comparison to running a company that is shareholder-driven.
Which brings up the question that I never got answererd when in school, and I'm hoping someone here with an advanced degree can answer... Where did all the matter and energy in the Universe come from?
You forgot to add: "Muhahahaha!!!".
I don't think this will work too well. Other sites that link to your site impact your page rankings, and it's unlikely the "redundant" site will achieve the same referral links.
And then you would also need to move it _back_ to Apache to see if the ranking declines again.
How about categorization and documentation? When you access a SourceForge site with nothing but the source code on it, it's difficult to take seriously. In this case, though, we all know who the author is. For lesser known authors, lack of any additional materials can kill community interest in the project.
At least with Vonage, these fees are miniscule -- only a couple bucks a month, and I wouldn't consider them to be bogus. I would expect that the money taken in by these fees to ultimately pay for the necessary infrastructure for E911 service. But at any rate, these fees are definitely not why I switched to Vonage. Some of the other fees (like the per-minute federal taxes) had something to do with it, but the most prominent reason for me was the fact that Verizon is trying to get every last cent out of its customers. Forgetting the regulatory fees for a moment, consider that until Vonage (and other VoIP services) began to provide some serious competition, Verizon didn't even offer a flat-rate package that included unlimited long distance. Consider also that the unlimited long distance package for Verizon is something in the neighborhood of $55 (before the regulatory fees), and that Vonage charges only about $25 for essentially the same thing. This is all about a monopoly, and VoIP services are the first real competition that the well-entrenched Baby Bells have had.
The break-up of AT&T did a lot to reduce the costs of long distance, but it seems that absolutely _NO_ progress has been made on the cost of local access. That's primarily because there is no competition. Even though you see advertisements for other local phone carriers, they are still enslaved to the Bells because the Bells own the last mile connection to your house. Years of trying has not eliminated this problem, and it has taken VoIP to finally put on the cost pressure. As much as I don't want to see archaic regulatory fees imposed on VoIP providers, the related costs pale in comparison to the extra overhead that the local carriers are charging.
Yet. The EU, the UK and Australia will be following soon enough.
Yes, but look at what is happening here. Let's say my name is "Arthur Walling" and that I'm an lawyer. I purchase the domain name, "authurwalling.law.pro" and use that to do business. Then, my arch rival, "Jonathan Seymour," who already owns "jonathanseymour.law.pro" finds out he can pull a fast one and purchases "arthurwalling.pro" so that he can usurp business from me. This is what ICANN is trying to prevent. Although there are some other laws that kick in here, it's a whole lot cheaper to both me and the public if they aren't allowed to pull this stunt in the first place. I rarely agree with ICANN, but I must hesitantly do so this time. BTW, did I choose good lawyer names? ;)
I read the entire article and several associated links, thanks. He didn't say that he didn't use BitKeeper. He said he didn't use it for his reverse engineering. I think we're going to find out that although he didn't use the BitKeeper tool "at home" during his reverse engineering, he had to use the BitKeeper tool at work, and thus was bound (whether he knew it or not) by the license, which I'm sure includes a "no reverse engineering" clause. There's all kinds of arguments going back and forth about how "reverse engineering" is or isn't illegal, or is or isn't immoral. The truth is that it's not illegal and you can probably argue both sides of immoral. But it is definitely a violation of the license agreement, and therefore subject to civil law. The only way he could avoid this is if he truly never used _any_ of the BitKeeper tools while at work, and if he obtained a BitKeeper database (upon which to experiment) from some source completely unconnected with his employment. I seriously doubt this is the case, and because of this I believe he implicates either himself or OSDL. Maybe I'm wrong. For his sake, I truly hope so.
No, but if you _host_ a site on Microsoft IIS, you must agree to the license...
Umm... Are you familiar with counting backwards? Saving the best for last?? "To Survive" is the number one reason listed. It's just listed last because the poster was attempting to build suspense.
I agree with your point, but I have to ask: Can Grandma do this with Windows XP? I'm just curious because I haven't installed Windows XP from scratch. I realize, of course, that as long as most PCs ship with Windows, Linux actually needs to be EASIER to install than Windows in order to earn market share.
Is it really THAT expensive to install and operate a city-wide wireless network? The $5000 per year that Dayton is paying is pure PEANUTS compared to some of the other things that money gets wasted on. They've probably wasted more than that on "entertainment" expenses run up by a single employee in the last two months.
Crackpottery would be saying something is true and then saying everything must conform to that. Science doesn't work like that. You have a bunch of data, and you make a theory that best fits the evidence. Or you make a theory that makes some prediction. That theory remains valid until some piece of data is uncovered that does not fit in with the theory, at which point the theory is modified.
Science doesn't work like that, but people do. Many people today understand that science is making a hypothesis, devising tests that will support or prove wrong the hypothesis, and then building enough evidence to move the hypothesis into a workable theory upon which additional hypotheses may be based. However, they fail to realize that even seemingly insurmountable evidence for a theory doesn't make it infallible. At best, we can only hope that a theory will only have to be "adjusted" in the face of future observations that conflict with it. And sometimes we must accept that a theory, while attractive for many years, is just plain wrong except under limited circumstances. This is what many people have a hard time accepting. I'm, of course, not suggesting that we be quick to throw out every well-established theory in the face of adversity, but I like to see research on alternate theories encouraged (with adequate skepticism) because I feel that failing to do so will cause us to miss out on a lot of truly fascinating science in the future.
Thats not crackpottery, thats the way its supposed to work. There is no such thing as a 'final' theory. Its a process.
Agreed, and if only teachers could get this across to their students, we might see more people actually able to think for themselves rather than nodding their heads at everything that makes it out of the journals and into mainstream periodicals. Maybe somebody needs to get this reality across to some of the teachers....
See? Even you had trouble with it. ;)
This is probably redundant by now, but the new features are definitely not a joke. I sent email with Rich Text from GMAIL to another email account, and it worked. However, there still appear to be some bugs in the interface. At any rate, tomorrow will tell whether they yank the features away.
You know, I spent a good three minutes just staring at my screen with my mouth open before I remembered that it was April 1. I was caught between the audacity of such a stunt, the possibility that maybe it wasn't a real child, and the indifference of the Slashdot editor. What a ride! Thanks for the joke.
"At a distance" in this case is less than two inches, although I'm sure somebody will use a Pringles can to make a reader that works at up to 1 km.
I think the whole reason for the survey is that it's not cost-feasible to make long-lasting media, and that the efforts to drive prices ever-lower will also product media of lower quality. If you want long lasting media, you're going to have to pay for it. Personally, I'd be OK if they made two (or more) different grades. I don't need most of my computer files to last longer than 7 years, but I'd want my photos and videos to at least survive me. Hopefully, technology will one day allow me to achieve that goal without intentionally stepping off the curb in front of a moving vehicle.
Why should the Bells have gotten such funding?
Think about it. Vonage lobbied hard to be excluded from much regulation, but there is absolutely no valid business reason why they wouldn't want to provide 911 service unless there was some difficulty in doing so. There are many many people on the edge of going to VoIP that have not done so simply because of the lack of traditional 911. It would be in the best interest of Vonage to provide this service. Also, they *DO* charge fees related to the 911 service, so why not go the whole way?
If Vonage were legally a phone service, then the Bells would be required to provide them the appropriate interface.
Pray tell, why is it that the Bells should be the ones giving permission for Vonage to participate in public safety infrastructure? Don't you think this is a little warped?
I think you may have a misunderstanding of some terms. There are countless contradictory hypotheses...
No misunderstanding, but an unintentional misrepresentation. You are correct. Those ideas that are most contradictory are generally only hypotheses. Theories are frequently proven wrong, but not usually in whole. Instead, it is usually the case that some extension is needed to satisfy new observations that have been found. But make no mistake. Theories are not necessarily fact. They are merely strongly supported conclusions that have been generally accepted. It does happen that a previously accepted theory is completely contradicted when it is found that it utterly fails to explain some new observations. This doesn't happen very frequently, though.
You make it sound as if disagreement is a bad thing - strong disagreement is the only way that science advances.
Not at all. In fact, that whole paragraph I wrote was just using the grandparent's words about religion in reference to science instead. Like in science, in religion disagreements don't have to be a "bad" thing, although there are some core beliefs that when transgressed yield rather unhealthy friction.
A "bad" scientist is not a scientist at all, by purest definition.
Try convincing the "bad" scientiest of that. ;)
Sure, someone might call themselves one but then again not everyone who claims to be Christian follows the beliefs they profess.
Agreed.
Is Clinton a Christian even though he got busy in the Oval Office?
I don't think anyone can say for sure. All I can say is that his behavior was not reflective of Christian beliefs. But, Christians are human too.
Is Bush a Christian, even though his right-to-life stance doesn't extend to Death Row?
I'm not sure you can compare these two, as the only crime usually committed by a fetus is one of inconvenience to its parents.
Aren't we supposed to forgive everyone?
One could argue that there is a difference between forgiveness and consequences. If you steal something from me, my forgiveness of that act can be separate from the time you spend in jail. Although, they can be intertwined. What makes Death Row different is that there is no opportunity for retribution afterwards. I think the scariest thing about capital punishment is the possibility of executing someone who is innocent.
Since the media will never distort what a religious leader says...?
Oh, this happens all the time. I never meant to imply that it doesn't. In fact, there are probably any number of potential religious leaders in whom I can place no trust because I don't know if the media is lying or not.
This one was actually a point of curiosity - would you name some of these religious leader role-models?
The best public example I could provide is Billy Graham. But there are plenty of leaders with whom I interact that the general public wouldn't be aware of, including my own pastor. There are also some Christian artists that I've had the pleasure of meeting, and who've had an impact on my life. By the way, this is not to say that these people aren't human. Just like anybody else, they can make mistakes, so one shouldn't set them on a pedestal.