Yeah, and if the polls are to believed, the varnish is coming off the 10Q filings. Ordinary people can understand Martha Stewart vs. Bernie Madoff, and they're not at all happy.
What are you talking about - "anti-invasion strategy"?
To the best of my recollection, a nuclear power has never been invaded by another nation. How is that not a sovereignty strategy? Given the 'Axis of Evil' rhetoric, the invasion of Iraq (1 of 3), and AQ Kahn's network, the means for nuclear weapons has proliferated to some of the most dangerous actors on the world stage.
DPNK is more complex as conventional artillery is within reach of Seoul, which isn't as bad but it's sufficiently complex. Time to end that War, IMHO.
Good point. Maybe you should have linked to regulatory capture so the mods would have a clue what you were talking about.
heh, yeah, the Rockefeller mods are out in force today. I suppose it is too much to expect a basic knowledge about the history of Standard Oil.
We know the telecoms and government are in each others pockets, but Yahoo?
Once a corporation goes public and is involved in significant M&A they're at the government's mercy. The TARP scandal has brought out just how strongly the screws get put on.
If we allow corporations as legal persons they should be subject to dissolution for certain abuses. That should satisfy both pro-civil rights liberals and pro-death penalty conservatives.
Sure, any corporate charter can be suspended or revoked. It just never happens, except very minimally at the local levels.
From the wiki [wikipedia.org]: "It is believed that the SA-3 crews and spotters were able to locate and track F-117A 82-806 visually, probably with infra-red and night vision systems."
Shortly after the war it was reported that the 117's did reflect cellular communications to a certain degree and that an engineer had worked up a way to combine these data points from the cellular network in realtime to build a tracking system.
It's not in the article, I wonder if it's been debunked or just sounds like bad PR.
OR will fly the center seats. OTH, those who enjoy even moderate amusement park rides, will have no issues with flying the outer edges. Given the fuel economy of this design (30-50%) of which fuel now accounts for more than 50% of the costs
In that case, expect Southwest to be interested, pass along the savings, and price-ration the center seats.
In my opinion this mad rush to develop nuclear technology makes no sense from an energy perspective, when their top priority should be economic reform.
You're expecting their government to be self-reflective and implement a turn-around? That seems way more unlikely than their dropping nuclear research.
If they do succeed and oil does peak, they'll have a nice nest egg, at least. That would just be a bonus on their anti-invasion (aka sovereignty) strategy.
I'm not saying its not a lot of work, just that it is possible if the desire is there..
It's not a work problem - ZFS is elegantly simple, 6000 LoC or so in its basic form.
The problem is it's heavily patented and you have no rights to those patents if you don't derive your code from the CDDL'ed code, which you can't do with the GPL (but FreeBSD, MacOSX, and the FUSE module did).
but version 1.0 means *someone* thought it significant
Call me old fashioned, but I think the practice of numbering releases with ordinal numbers is far less confusing. Alpha and beta monikers mean 'still adding features' and 'working out bugs' respectively. One dot (1.1) releases are feature changes, two dot (1.1.1) are bug fixes, and no-dot (2.0) reflect significant re-works (architectural, interface, etc.).
0.87 tells me nothing based on the number. 4.1b7 encodes lots of information.
I hate corporations. I hate them with every fiber of my being. Although I still like them better than government
Corporations are legal fictions created by governments, so no need to feel conflicted. It's what makes regulatory capture so poisonous, and kills the negative feedback required for a balance of power.
But, hey, what's destroying a system of government or two when there's a Rockefeller empire to be made in oil?
No, that applies to other, more northern parts of Western NH. In my area, we need large antennas here to pull in anything from either Burlington VT or Manchester NH, none are available without large gear. Given the choice, most locals point their antennas at Manchester.
There was a PBS station repeating off of a closer mountain, but I'm not sure its current status (and there's no FCC market based off that mountain, which would actually make some economic sense).
Of course in reality, DTV's reach is actually much shorter with larged unserved areas between the DMAs, but nobody seems willing to admit that.
Right, it's now even further divorced from reality. Again, free choice would make this easy.
Yes, the signal maps re-enforce the conclusions, but people around here usually have to put up large antennas to get OTA and they point them to get the NH stations which don't appear as being possible on those maps, by in large. Burlington happens to have a large mountain (Mansfield) to its east of it which is convenient for antennas to reach its market, and the terrain allows some of Western NH to see that antenna, but due to the Green Mountains themselves, the economic markets are not well-connected. So the politico-economic overlap is small, and, for example, a Burlington TV station isn't going to cover what's happening at the State House in Concord NH, even though they're supposedly tasked with serving that market (especially under the pre-80's rules). And no updates to the markets are being made to accommodate the change in DTV signal propagation.
Some how our local cable companies are allowed to carry NH and Boston stations but the satellite companies are forbidden. Cable TV penetration in the area is about 60%, and costs are high, so actual usage is probably less than 50%, though most can handle a $20/mo satellite bill.
What this leaves is a populous largely disconnected from knowing about its governments (I use the Internet but many are not so inclined). The excuse for this is an economic subsidy to the 'assigned' station's advertising departments. That it's not just mandating availability but exclusivity backed by threat of force to the provider and customer seems like a very political decision.
Yeah, and don't even think about the '$200B broadband scandal' - we paid *and* got nothing.
Communal ownership of infrastructure really does make the most sense. It's just a shame that history demonstrates there's no way to do that without greed, corruption, and ineptitude marring the projects.
Cable must-carry laws have traditionally respected radio frequency propagation of the over-the-air television station (the "Grade B service contour" for analog, the "noise limited service contour" of for DTV)
Right, so those under-served due to the unfortunate arrangement of terrain and laws of physics remain under-served when there is no natural reason for it (merely political).
"Must carry" doesn't consider the humans involved, and "must not carry" just drives the nail in further.
Funny how CATV used to mean Community Antenna TV to deal with this problem specifically.
Nope. FCC rules require all local stations and "out of market but significantly-viewed" stations be provided free-of-charge in the basic cable package.
A big problem is how they define markets. It's based mostly on political favors and loosely on NTSC propogation characteristics. I'm in Western NH and can't get any stations that cover NH news, because some bureaucrat in Washington put my ZIP code in the Burlington VT "market".
You know what would be totally crazy? Let people buy what they want. I know, there I go being heretical again, I'm better off for the Government dictating which signals coming down from geosynchronous orbit I'm allowed to decode, I'm just too dumb to realize it.
This will allow for competition for those people who are stuck with Comcast being the sole provider.
Why don't you get your government to stop granting monopolies instead? They caused your problem, don't ask them to try to fix it too, they'll do just as good as job.
Translates to: Screw the authors & screw the customers.
Many don't know that copyright in England was originally put in place to protect the authors from the publishers, not the readers with their pirate ink plates.
And yet, it will last 30+ years, making exceptionally cheap compared to most other toys.
indeed, yet the poor rarely buy on value. I get my kids nice quality used toys at the second-hand store, yet somehow it seems the box opening experience would have been important for the GP.
It's just the death of journalism as we know it. Print, TV, and radio news outlets are going to have to decide if they are in the print/tv/radio news or if they are in the business of news.
It's important to realize that journalism and distribution have been tightly coupled, but the Internet makes that model obsolete.
Rather than having a Cincinnati 'science writer', we're going to have writers who are very good at certain fields of expertise within science, and their work can be widely distributed.
A blog post I made on this in May in the context of GPS technology:
Whenever I've been interviewed for a newspaper, words and facts have been twisted and/or just gotten wrong. Whenever I read a popular press article in an area where I have in-depth knowledge, it's wrong, at least in the details.
So, I just assume that's true all the time and go to specialists for real news reporting. I haven't checked, but I'd assume a place like Jane's would have a good article on this GPS thing.
How about this business model: be a journalist who's a bona-fide expert on GPS. Write completely accurate, insightful, and helpful news articles on GPS happenings. Charge alot for them.
The last part is the trick of course. But how many GPS journalists does the world need? No more than a handful. With the Internet it should be possible to greatly reduce the number of generalist journalists and start making 'newspapers' much better with experts. There's probably too much inertia at established papers but a disruptive model seems possible.
It's not 'mere blog aggregation' because most bloggers aren't writing in the form or quality required, but some scheme with writers, aggregators, and integrators could get it done. I don't see the value in local newspapers doing anything but inserting their local stories into layout and selling ads these days - find an integrator that matches your editorial values and outsource it.
Why doesn't the poor parent just buy the Legos then? Oh, right, because they charge $25/lb for moderate-grade injection-molded plastic. Who hates the poor kids again?
There's some weird triangulation between marketing, entitlement and corporatism going on in that story.
Lego is not evil. The generic blocks are evil.... I can understand why Lego sued, if I made a successful children's toy and I saw competitors bringing crappy copies to the market I'd sue too.
I won't defend the low-quality blocks (that's why I used the negated form in my wish) but Corporations aren't granted patents for all time, they get to profit for a while, then they have to give back.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and if the polls are to believed, the varnish is coming off the 10Q filings. Ordinary people can understand Martha Stewart vs. Bernie Madoff, and they're not at all happy.
What are you talking about - "anti-invasion strategy"?
To the best of my recollection, a nuclear power has never been invaded by another nation. How is that not a sovereignty strategy? Given the 'Axis of Evil' rhetoric, the invasion of Iraq (1 of 3), and AQ Kahn's network, the means for nuclear weapons has proliferated to some of the most dangerous actors on the world stage.
DPNK is more complex as conventional artillery is within reach of Seoul, which isn't as bad but it's sufficiently complex. Time to end that War, IMHO.
Good point. Maybe you should have linked to regulatory capture so the mods would have a clue what you were talking about.
heh, yeah, the Rockefeller mods are out in force today. I suppose it is too much to expect a basic knowledge about the history of Standard Oil.
We know the telecoms and government are in each others pockets, but Yahoo?
Once a corporation goes public and is involved in significant M&A they're at the government's mercy. The TARP scandal has brought out just how strongly the screws get put on.
If we allow corporations as legal persons they should be subject to dissolution for certain abuses. That should satisfy both pro-civil rights liberals and pro-death penalty conservatives.
Sure, any corporate charter can be suspended or revoked. It just never happens, except very minimally at the local levels.
From the wiki [wikipedia.org]: "It is believed that the SA-3 crews and spotters were able to locate and track F-117A 82-806 visually, probably with infra-red and night vision systems."
Shortly after the war it was reported that the 117's did reflect cellular communications to a certain degree and that an engineer had worked up a way to combine these data points from the cellular network in realtime to build a tracking system.
It's not in the article, I wonder if it's been debunked or just sounds like bad PR.
OR will fly the center seats. OTH, those who enjoy even moderate amusement park rides, will have no issues with flying the outer edges. Given the fuel economy of this design (30-50%) of which fuel now accounts for more than 50% of the costs
In that case, expect Southwest to be interested, pass along the savings, and price-ration the center seats.
If they can be parked at terminals anyway.
In my opinion this mad rush to develop nuclear technology makes no sense from an energy perspective, when their top priority should be economic reform.
You're expecting their government to be self-reflective and implement a turn-around? That seems way more unlikely than their dropping nuclear research.
If they do succeed and oil does peak, they'll have a nice nest egg, at least. That would just be a bonus on their anti-invasion (aka sovereignty) strategy.
I'm not saying its not a lot of work, just that it is possible if the desire is there..
It's not a work problem - ZFS is elegantly simple, 6000 LoC or so in its basic form.
The problem is it's heavily patented and you have no rights to those patents if you don't derive your code from the CDDL'ed code, which you can't do with the GPL (but FreeBSD, MacOSX, and the FUSE module did).
but version 1.0 means *someone* thought it significant
Call me old fashioned, but I think the practice of numbering releases with ordinal numbers is far less confusing. Alpha and beta monikers mean 'still adding features' and 'working out bugs' respectively. One dot (1.1) releases are feature changes, two dot (1.1.1) are bug fixes, and no-dot (2.0) reflect significant re-works (architectural, interface, etc.).
0.87 tells me nothing based on the number. 4.1b7 encodes lots of information.
If Newtons and foot-lbs is still an issue, imaging what's gonna happen when somebody gets high-speed and full-speed mixed up.
I'd like to see the look on founder's faces if someone proposed to them a "universal (read: obligatory) healthcare plan" for example.
I'm not sure there's really any specific facial expression associated with drawing one's sidearm.
We the people is a law enforcement agency.
We the People ought to be enforcing the Common Law, but ... hey, who's on Idol tonight?
I hate corporations. I hate them with every fiber of my being.
Although I still like them better than government
Corporations are legal fictions created by governments, so no need to feel conflicted. It's what makes regulatory capture so poisonous, and kills the negative feedback required for a balance of power.
But, hey, what's destroying a system of government or two when there's a Rockefeller empire to be made in oil?
QED you are assigned to the Burlington market.
No, that applies to other, more northern parts of Western NH. In my area, we need large antennas here to pull in anything from either Burlington VT or Manchester NH, none are available without large gear. Given the choice, most locals point their antennas at Manchester.
There was a PBS station repeating off of a closer mountain, but I'm not sure its current status (and there's no FCC market based off that mountain, which would actually make some economic sense).
Of course in reality, DTV's reach is actually much shorter with larged unserved areas between the DMAs, but nobody seems willing to admit that.
Right, it's now even further divorced from reality. Again, free choice would make this easy.
Yes, the signal maps re-enforce the conclusions, but people around here usually have to put up large antennas to get OTA and they point them to get the NH stations which don't appear as being possible on those maps, by in large. Burlington happens to have a large mountain (Mansfield) to its east of it which is convenient for antennas to reach its market, and the terrain allows some of Western NH to see that antenna, but due to the Green Mountains themselves, the economic markets are not well-connected. So the politico-economic overlap is small, and, for example, a Burlington TV station isn't going to cover what's happening at the State House in Concord NH, even though they're supposedly tasked with serving that market (especially under the pre-80's rules). And no updates to the markets are being made to accommodate the change in DTV signal propagation.
Some how our local cable companies are allowed to carry NH and Boston stations but the satellite companies are forbidden. Cable TV penetration in the area is about 60%, and costs are high, so actual usage is probably less than 50%, though most can handle a $20/mo satellite bill.
What this leaves is a populous largely disconnected from knowing about its governments (I use the Internet but many are not so inclined). The excuse for this is an economic subsidy to the 'assigned' station's advertising departments. That it's not just mandating availability but exclusivity backed by threat of force to the provider and customer seems like a very political decision.
Yeah, and don't even think about the '$200B broadband scandal' - we paid *and* got nothing.
Communal ownership of infrastructure really does make the most sense. It's just a shame that history demonstrates there's no way to do that without greed, corruption, and ineptitude marring the projects.
Cable must-carry laws have traditionally respected radio frequency propagation of the over-the-air television station (the "Grade B service contour" for analog, the "noise limited service contour" of for DTV)
Right, so those under-served due to the unfortunate arrangement of terrain and laws of physics remain under-served when there is no natural reason for it (merely political).
"Must carry" doesn't consider the humans involved, and "must not carry" just drives the nail in further.
Funny how CATV used to mean Community Antenna TV to deal with this problem specifically.
hey, that's not the *official* line. :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#History
Most publishers worth worrying about can only exist as creations of government as well, so it's quite the tangled web.
for another overinflated paycheck with which to buy another hedonistic toy
Leno's motto has always been "tell joke, get paycheck." He's never been duplicitous in this regard.
Nope. FCC rules require all local stations and "out of market but significantly-viewed" stations be provided free-of-charge in the basic cable package.
A big problem is how they define markets. It's based mostly on political favors and loosely on NTSC propogation characteristics. I'm in Western NH and can't get any stations that cover NH news, because some bureaucrat in Washington put my ZIP code in the Burlington VT "market".
You know what would be totally crazy? Let people buy what they want. I know, there I go being heretical again, I'm better off for the Government dictating which signals coming down from geosynchronous orbit I'm allowed to decode, I'm just too dumb to realize it.
This will allow for competition for those people who are stuck with Comcast being the sole provider.
Why don't you get your government to stop granting monopolies instead? They caused your problem, don't ask them to try to fix it too, they'll do just as good as job.
Translates to: Screw the authors & screw the customers.
Many don't know that copyright in England was originally put in place to protect the authors from the publishers, not the readers with their pirate ink plates.
And yet, it will last 30+ years, making exceptionally cheap compared to most other toys.
indeed, yet the poor rarely buy on value. I get my kids nice quality used toys at the second-hand store, yet somehow it seems the box opening experience would have been important for the GP.
It's just the death of journalism as we know it.
Print, TV, and radio news outlets are going to have to decide if they are in the print/tv/radio news or if they are in the business of news.
It's important to realize that journalism and distribution have been tightly coupled, but the Internet makes that model obsolete.
Rather than having a Cincinnati 'science writer', we're going to have writers who are very good at certain fields of expertise within science, and their work can be widely distributed.
A blog post I made on this in May in the context of GPS technology:
Why doesn't the poor parent just buy the Legos then? Oh, right, because they charge $25/lb for moderate-grade injection-molded plastic. Who hates the poor kids again?
There's some weird triangulation between marketing, entitlement and corporatism going on in that story.
Lego is not evil. The generic blocks are evil. ... I can understand why Lego sued, if I made a successful children's toy and I saw competitors bringing crappy copies to the market I'd sue too.
I won't defend the low-quality blocks (that's why I used the negated form in my wish) but Corporations aren't granted patents for all time, they get to profit for a while, then they have to give back.