You will have to vote for someone who will win or someone who will lose regardless, and your vote will not alter the result.
No matter who you vote for your vote has the same effect: it causes the candidate of your choice to receive one more vote than she would have otherwise. Except for small local elections where there is a significant chance of a one vote margin, the outcome will be exactly the same no matter what you do.
> Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle today signed legislation that "will > require the software of touch-screen voting machines used in > elections to be open-source."
The law does not require that the software be Open Source. It merely requires that voters be able to examine and test it.
> I am guessing that there will be a crater of some sort after the > impact. Maybe some floating dust.
Dust doesn't float very well in a vacuum. In fact, it doesn't float at all. Dust particles created by the explosion will follow ballistic trajectories just like those of the larger fragments. This is important because while you are unlikely to be hit by a large chunk if you're kilometers away 1000 m/s dust could do a lot of damage.
It is worth noting that Heisenberg didn't disagree with Einstein here. He wrote in some places that he thought that the apparent irreduceable randomness of quantum physics could be due to a sort of quantum interference where the result depended on the state of everything else in the universe. In essence, it is not that things aren't deterministic, but that everything depends on everything else, the moreso as we get into smaller systems.
The Zeilinger interpretation might be equivalent to this.
Whether or not anything is be sold is irrelevant. A trademark owner can prevent others from use his mark to label their products or in ways that might confuse the public as to what is being sold, but he cannot prevent them from using it to refer to his products. Nominative use is not restricted. The list was stating simple facts about Bluetooth products. This is entirely legal, no matter how much the trademark owner may dislike it.
A trademark is not a copyright. A trademark owner has no power over nominative uses of the mark such as the subject list (or this discussion, for that matter). The list is entirely legal and need not have been removed.
> People are actually starting to worry about this. The fact that > there is a dedicated telescope set up to watch the moon for meteor > impacts suggests someone out there takes this problem seriously
"Worry" is not the only reason for watching rocks hit the moon. For example, the ages of structures such as large craters and lava flows are estimated by using crater counts. Observing the frequency of impacts could help calibrate this.
Absolute location is not necessary in order to determine the amplitude of an earthquake wave (you already know the latitude and longitude of the station, of course).
Highpass filter at perhaps.001Hz to eliminate drift, integrate twice, and you've got the amplitude of any earth motion.
> Forcibly installing such chips into our computers is, well, > illegal.
Nobody is (yet) proposing to forcibly install anything on your computer. They are proposing to make it nearly impossible to find a computer for sale without a TPM chip and impossible to get onto the Net with a computer without one. So far as I know that is not illegal.
> Then again since this would no doubt be proprietary tech it would > be impossible for me it add that required support without tainting > my kernel... and is that not technialy illegal?
I can think of no legal theory under which it would be.
> So have it ask for your permission whenever it discloses your > information to your ISP as a condition of connecting to the > Internet.
My ISP already has information about me: I have an account with them. They know my name, address, phone number, IP number, username, and password. What more is TPM going to give them?
> So rather than use government and philanthropist and charity money > to cure a LOT of cancer, this company will be making billions off > of a potentially life saving natural drug.
About the only way for them to make billions is to cure a LOT of cancer.
> FYI, the way most of these attacks work is by utter and complete > surprise. It's kind of a thuggish candid camera. By the time you > recover from the hit and recognize what's going on, you've just > got a bunch of stupid kids laughing at and taunting you.
Sounds like a way for the kids to get hurt. Some of us have old conditioned reflexes.
Slashdot Mirror
You will have to vote for someone who will win or someone who will lose regardless, and your vote will not alter the result.
No matter who you vote for your vote has the same effect: it causes the candidate of your choice to receive one more vote than she would have otherwise. Except for small local elections where there is a significant chance of a one vote margin, the outcome will be exactly the same no matter what you do.
> Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle today signed legislation that "will
> require the software of touch-screen voting machines used in
> elections to be open-source."
The law does not require that the software be Open Source. It merely requires that voters be able to examine and test it.
> I am guessing that there will be a crater of some sort after the
> impact. Maybe some floating dust.
Dust doesn't float very well in a vacuum. In fact, it doesn't float at all. Dust particles created by the explosion will follow ballistic trajectories just like those of the larger fragments. This is important because while you are unlikely to be hit by a large chunk if you're kilometers away 1000 m/s dust could do a lot of damage.
> Am I the only one who doesn't get the (great) appeal of RSS?
No.
> With all of the talk lately about civilian space travel, I was
...would an American colony be bound by law to be in a
> wondering if anyone knew specifically how far national borders
> extend vertically.
100km.
>
> geosynchronous orbit over the U.S at all times?
What a wonky idea! In any case, it is not possible for anything to be in geosynchronous orbit over the US.
> I believe they still should be able to publish the list, they just
> should must avoid somehow to carry the "Bluetooth"-tag.
Nonsense. Publishing a list does not infringe a trademark. No one owns the word "Bluetooth". Trademarks are not copyrights.
Whether or not anything is be sold is irrelevant. A trademark owner can prevent others from use his mark to label their products or in ways that might confuse the public as to what is being sold, but he cannot prevent them from using it to refer to his products. Nominative use is not restricted. The list was stating simple facts about Bluetooth products. This is entirely legal, no matter how much the trademark owner may dislike it.
A trademark is not a copyright. A trademark owner has no power over nominative uses of the mark such as the subject list (or this discussion, for that matter). The list is entirely legal and need not have been removed.
> People are actually starting to worry about this. The fact that
> there is a dedicated telescope set up to watch the moon for meteor
> impacts suggests someone out there takes this problem seriously
"Worry" is not the only reason for watching rocks hit the moon. For example, the ages of structures such as large craters and lava flows are estimated by using crater counts. Observing the frequency of impacts could help calibrate this.
Python.
Absolute location is not necessary in order to determine the amplitude of an earthquake wave (you already know the latitude and longitude of the station, of course).
.001Hz to eliminate drift, integrate twice, and you've got the amplitude of any earth motion.
Highpass filter at perhaps
I don't see what GPS receivers can do here that accelerometers can't.
> "How many of you remember the articles in QST and Ham Radio from
> the 1970's about..."
> I'm willing to wager: not many.
At least one.
> Uplink from the ground to the shuttle always is encrypted (we don't
> want someone sending bogus commands).
Authentication does not require encryption. A cryptographic signature suffices.
"Microsoft says that the consumers should have the choice between multiple open standards for documents."
There are two standards already. ODF and PDF.
> Forcibly installing such chips into our computers is, well,
> illegal.
Nobody is (yet) proposing to forcibly install anything on your computer. They are proposing to make it nearly impossible to find a computer for sale without a TPM chip and impossible to get onto the Net with a computer without one. So far as I know that is not illegal.
I agree with the rest of your points.
> Then again since this would no doubt be proprietary tech it would
> be impossible for me it add that required support without tainting
> my kernel... and is that not technialy illegal?
I can think of no legal theory under which it would be.
> So have it ask for your permission whenever it discloses your
> information to your ISP as a condition of connecting to the
> Internet.
My ISP already has information about me: I have an account with them. They know my name, address, phone number, IP number, username, and password. What more is TPM going to give them?
Fox hunting is not exclusively a sport of the rich. Most fox hunters are middle and upper-middle class.
Perhaps the purported bugginess of Open Office is related to its closed-source heritage.
> So rather than use government and philanthropist and charity money
> to cure a LOT of cancer, this company will be making billions off
> of a potentially life saving natural drug.
About the only way for them to make billions is to cure a LOT of cancer.
> This will lengthen your day considerably, especially if everyone
> does this!
The more people do it the less it lengthens your day.
> ...compared potential damage from a cyclotron mishap to the Three
> Mile Island nuclear reactor accident
That's about right. The machine might be damaged beyond repair but there would be no injuries and no damage to the property of others.
> FYI, the way most of these attacks work is by utter and complete
> surprise. It's kind of a thuggish candid camera. By the time you
> recover from the hit and recognize what's going on, you've just
> got a bunch of stupid kids laughing at and taunting you.
Sounds like a way for the kids to get hurt. Some of us have old conditioned reflexes.