The only way low speed limits can be a danger is that the roads are crowded with road-raging hotheads who have way too high an opinion of their driving skills and who're hellbent on passing everybody.
Why is that some people seem to think that it's their god-given right to flaunt the speed limits if they personally think it's appropriate?
Because speed limits are generally far too low for what is considered safe 90% of the time. This is not always the case. 40 mph on some windy roads is ok. I think they should raise the speed limit by 10 mph most places, but then raise penalties SEVERELY if people are going too fast. They have no incentive to do so however, as right now, the local police never have a lack of people breaking the law for ticketing income.
Doing a little research I have indexed "round number" patents and gotten the following results.
Patent 10000 was issued in 1853 , 50000 was issued in 1865, 100000 was issued in 1870, 200000 was issued in 1878, 500000 was issued in 1893, 1000000 was issued in 1911, 2000000 was issued in 1935
Patent 3000000 was issued in 1955, 4000000 was issued in 1976, 5000000 was issued in 1991, 6000000 was issued in 1999, 6500000 was issued in 2002,
If 10,000 patents were all that were issued from 1790 to 1836 (40 years) and considering we are up to patent number 7,000,000 (approx) right now, it would be interesting to have a graph of patents granted over time from 1790 to the present. My guess is that it would be an exponential curve.
Here's an idea. Why not rewrite the search engines to ignore all sites that have too many words in their meta tags? Seems like it would take care of the "dictionary dumpers".
What sucks is that one reason that this got done was because of media attention. If the media does something similar, there are few enough companies to decide not to cover it.
We know that no other planet in our solar system has intelligent life (at least that we can see), and it appears that we are an anomaly among planetary systems, just as our planet is anomaly in our own solar system (70% water, atmosphere, just the right distance from the sun for life, temperature, etc.
Whatever the odds that life exist elsewhere, we should remember that we have a special planet here, and we should take care of it. We have no other feasible options in the near future.
Um... no... The moon does rotate, it just so happens to take the same amount of time to do one rotate as to go around the earth, thus the same side always faces the earth.
There were what 4 and now 3 big companies? Still not a monopoly, and didn't they already get convicted of price fixing with just the 4 of them? What we have here is an oligopoly, before and after. I realize that this will be one big player, but can you think of any abuses that could be perpetuated now that couldn't have been (and weren't) done before? I think Anti Trust issues only come in when a true monopoly occurs.
Interesting. Media for message.
on
Black Hat
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
From the review Personally, I'm still not sure that I believe in file sharing. Just because something isn't tangible (it's music or it's words or it's code) doesn't mean someone didn't work hard for it and invest in it. But Biggs' illuminating discussion certainly made me see how the industry has mismanaged their very lifeblood. I may not be file sharing anytime soon, but I won't be part of the angry mob hunting down file sharers any longer.
This suggests that the way to get this message out to people is more through media (books, maybe films?) than just whining about it amongst ourselves or trying to argue with people.
On the other hand, the reviewer is specifically reading the book, looking for this information, rather than having it forced on him, so would seem to be more receptive.
It's just too bad that the media is owned by so few people, all of whom have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are.
The Centennial Challenges program is supported by the X Prize Foundation, the Aldridge Commission and some members of Congress, but not all.
And when the "not all" link is clicked on, here is one blurb
However, in a June 17 letter to NASA, Reps. James Walsh (R-NY) and Alan Mollohan (D-WV), the chair and ranking member, respectively, of the House Appropriations Committee subcommittee that oversees NASA, denied that request as well as another request to move $24.2 million from two space science missions. It doesn't appear that the two Congressmen have anything against the Centennial Challenges program itself; instead, they are concerned NASA is moving too far ahead on the overall exploration program without Congressional approval.
This does not say that these Congressman are against the idea, it's possible that they just think NASA is jumping the gun.
It is interesting that the court appears to have said that obscenity can not be used as a justification (i.e. can't sell Playboy to minors) because obscenity deals with sexual matters, rather than violence.
While I think that this is a great win for free speech, does it seem a bit weird that the ability to blow someone's head clean off is given a higher protection than showing someone's nipple? Which one is really worse in the long run?
Note: I am not for censorship of any kind, though I think voluntary ratings and PARENTAL INVOLMENT I N CHOICES are the best solution, but it speaks volumes that violence seems to be celebrated but anything sexual must be covered up "for the children". It really goes to show the almost paradoxical prudist warrior culture that permeates America today.
Re:A musician is making sense about DRM?
on
TMBG on DRM
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Why wouldn't a musician make sense about DRM? Musicians are creative, intelligent people. (The ones that aren't "manufactured" anyway). They also generally get royally screwed by the RIAA, etc, the whole 5 cents on the dollar generated, etc. I doubt that piracy really affects their cut at all. They tend to value the music, much more than the record executives. I am actually suprised more musicians aren't making sense about DRM.
And marvel at what was, and think back of what we thought could be, and see what is, I ask simply WHY?
Flamebait? I simply meant that there was so much awe at the accomplishment, and the promise of a manned Mars mission not much later, or a permanent moon colony, but that when the entire moon project was acrapped after 1972, and we relegated ourself to "shuttles", I am extremely disappointed. Why is that flamebait?
Slashdot Mirror
If a person feels like they're being watched, they're a lot less likely to try anything 'funny'.
Yeah. If they try anything funny, we'll just put them in jail. Oh wait.
The only way low speed limits can be a danger is that the roads are crowded with road-raging hotheads who have way too high an opinion of their driving skills and who're hellbent on passing everybody.
This does seem to be the case, in my experience.
Why is that some people seem to think that it's their god-given right to flaunt the speed limits if they personally think it's appropriate?
Because speed limits are generally far too low for what is considered safe 90% of the time. This is not always the case. 40 mph on some windy roads is ok. I think they should raise the speed limit by 10 mph most places, but then raise penalties SEVERELY if people are going too fast. They have no incentive to do so however, as right now, the local police never have a lack of people breaking the law for ticketing income.
Especially if they decide that you should pay more for excessive speeding. How many people actually obey the speed limit all the time?
Full head of hair? He looks like he has less hair in the Original Series. I think he might be a client too...
Doing a little research I have indexed "round number" patents and gotten the following results.
Patent 10000 was issued in 1853 , 50000 was issued in 1865, 100000 was issued in 1870, 200000 was issued in 1878, 500000 was issued in 1893, 1000000 was issued in 1911, 2000000 was issued in 1935
Patent 3000000 was issued in 1955, 4000000 was issued in 1976, 5000000 was issued in 1991, 6000000 was issued in 1999, 6500000 was issued in 2002,
If 10,000 patents were all that were issued from 1790 to 1836 (40 years) and considering we are up to patent number 7,000,000 (approx) right now, it would be interesting to have a graph of patents granted over time from 1790 to the present. My guess is that it would be an exponential curve.
Here's an idea. Why not rewrite the search engines to ignore all sites that have too many words in their meta tags? Seems like it would take care of the "dictionary dumpers".
What sucks is that one reason that this got done was because of media attention. If the media does something similar, there are few enough companies to decide not to cover it.
We know that no other planet in our solar system has intelligent life (at least that we can see), and it appears that we are an anomaly among planetary systems, just as our planet is anomaly in our own solar system (70% water, atmosphere, just the right distance from the sun for life, temperature, etc.
Whatever the odds that life exist elsewhere, we should remember that we have a special planet here, and we should take care of it. We have no other feasible options in the near future.
gut
Um... no... The moon does rotate, it just so happens to take the same amount of time to do one rotate as to go around the earth, thus the same side always faces the earth.
There were what 4 and now 3 big companies? Still not a monopoly, and didn't they already get convicted of price fixing with just the 4 of them? What we have here is an oligopoly, before and after. I realize that this will be one big player, but can you think of any abuses that could be perpetuated now that couldn't have been (and weren't) done before? I think Anti Trust issues only come in when a true monopoly occurs.
This is helpful.
From the review
Personally, I'm still not sure that I believe in file sharing. Just because something isn't tangible (it's music or it's words or it's code) doesn't mean someone didn't work hard for it and invest in it. But Biggs' illuminating discussion certainly made me see how the industry has mismanaged their very lifeblood. I may not be file sharing anytime soon, but I won't be part of the angry mob hunting down file sharers any longer.
This suggests that the way to get this message out to people is more through media (books, maybe films?) than just whining about it amongst ourselves or trying to argue with people.
On the other hand, the reviewer is specifically reading the book, looking for this information, rather than having it forced on him, so would seem to be more receptive.
It's just too bad that the media is owned by so few people, all of whom have a vested interest in keeping things the way they are.
According to the summary
The Centennial Challenges program is supported by the X Prize Foundation, the Aldridge Commission and some members of Congress, but not all.
And when the "not all" link is clicked on, here is one blurb
However, in a June 17 letter to NASA, Reps. James Walsh (R-NY) and Alan Mollohan (D-WV), the chair and ranking member, respectively, of the House Appropriations Committee subcommittee that oversees NASA, denied that request as well as another request to move $24.2 million from two space science missions. It doesn't appear that the two Congressmen have anything against the Centennial Challenges program itself; instead, they are concerned NASA is moving too far ahead on the overall exploration program without Congressional approval.
This does not say that these Congressman are against the idea, it's possible that they just think NASA is jumping the gun.
then, because of pacman, teenagers would gather in
dark rooms, listen to electronic music and pop pills. Oh wait...
It is interesting that the court appears to have said that obscenity can not be used as a justification (i.e. can't sell Playboy to minors) because obscenity deals with sexual matters, rather than violence.
While I think that this is a great win for free speech, does it seem a bit weird that the ability to blow someone's head clean off is given a higher protection than showing someone's nipple? Which one is really worse in the long run?
Note: I am not for censorship of any kind, though I think voluntary ratings and PARENTAL INVOLMENT I N CHOICES are the best solution, but it speaks volumes that violence seems to be celebrated but anything sexual must be covered up "for the children". It really goes to show the almost paradoxical prudist warrior culture that permeates America today.
Why wouldn't a musician make sense about DRM? Musicians are creative, intelligent people. (The ones that aren't "manufactured" anyway). They also generally get royally screwed by the RIAA, etc, the whole 5 cents on the dollar generated, etc. I doubt that piracy really affects their cut at all. They tend to value the music, much more than the record executives. I am actually suprised more musicians aren't making sense about DRM.
I wrote
And marvel at what was, and think back of what we thought could be, and see what is, I ask simply WHY?
Flamebait? I simply meant that there was so much awe at the accomplishment, and the promise of a manned Mars mission not much later, or a permanent moon colony, but that when the entire moon project was acrapped after 1972, and we relegated ourself to "shuttles", I am extremely disappointed. Why is that flamebait?
And marvel at what was, and think back of what we thought could be, and see what is, I ask simply WHY?
Boy, some mods have no sense of humor. Hint 2 6 stage plans add to 1 how many step plan? (Think Stuart Smalley).
I'll take two.
It's at the bottom of the page on your own McCarthy link.
You do recall that Congress authorized the use of force in Iraq? Don't put all the blame with the exective branch.