1. For any other 'year' based on the moon, the planets, etc, the ages of all the bible heroes could be recalculated, and then shown to be normal. I haven't seen any one do this yet.
It's been done quite a few times. It's not a year based on the moon as far as I understand it but rather a scribal error akin to adding an extra zero on, or similar misinterpretation. Regardless, the ages turned out perfectly reasonable (linging them up with the Sumerian Kinglist).
It's hard to hunt down a good link because there's all this new age stuff in the way:-(
As one of the most massive, densest and least-disturbed barred spirals known (nearly TWO TRILLION SOLAR MASSES), the Milky Way is a heavyweight where it counts - lots of minerals, little dispersion due to gasses because it has not suffered a major galactic collision yet, unlike Andromeda.
Nor is Sol an average star. Only 10% of stars are Sol's size, and of those, not all are going to be so mineral-heavy.
Nor an average planet. Its crust is the densest in the solar system, and was made by another planet colliding into it and the lighter stuff getting kicked off, leaving us with a large supply of iron and other heavier minerals close to the surface.
Chances of life existing elsewhere are almost certain, but I doubt it's mindboggingly common.
First in the universe I would doubt. Perhaps the first in the galaxy. That's not quite so far off.
As I recall, only one of the planets found so far has a gas giant with a circular orbit like Jupiter.
Of all the star systems out there, only 10% are like our sun (not necessarily a requirement for life, but one that supplies us with enough energy to kick ass and take names is handy).
The way our moon was made made Earth very, very dense. This gives us ample materials to grow and actually get into space. I doubt there could be more than a few hundred civilizations like ours in the entire galaxy. The Solar system is a mineral-rich system (for Sol's size) in a mineral-rich galaxy.
Minerals are good, they allow for life, production and the pursuit of happiness. They're also bad, they mean meteors and lots of them.
I mean, I'm sure they realize this, but I'd have to think they had to look at tens of thousands of stars to catch 100 planets passing by, at least. Am I missing something?
Probably not, the planet only has to pass in front of the star's corona for us to notice, and a lot of these might be hot giants (orbiting very close to the star) - which I'm leery to count as a real discovery.
In addition, a greater majority of planetary orbits will be laying on the galactic plane. Our system isn't, which means that we also have a bit more range to work with.
Sort of. Stars will fuse elements into heavier and heavier elements, up to iron (since making heavier elements actually takes energy, any larger atoms are made in negligable quantities outside of supernovas).
Anyway, my (educated) guess would be that this given star had enough mass to fuse elements up to carbon, but not further - not enough to sustain its continued existance as a 'star', anyway.
At least, I'm inferring from the article that this star is fast becoming a 'black dwarf' - I could be wrong and this is just a white dwarf in its carbon stage, but by that measure there would certainly be far, far larger diamonds out there (and in great numbers).
My stuff is my stuff and I'll thanky ou to keep your hands off it. If you wish to audit anyhting I have, physical or virtual, you'd better ask my permission first, or you'll face consequences.
If I have given you my credit card number in good faith for a lawful exchange of services or goods, it is 'morally' repugnant of you to be lax in security, unless you destroy that information.
7. Make your data look innocuous. Chatting with some friends on IM? Why not chat in Arabic (if you're on an unecrypted connection, be aware that this method reduces the possibility for parental-snooping, but increases the likelyhood of unconstitutional racial profiling. You've been warned). If you don't have the time or inclination to learn a foreign language, at least learn ROT-13. ROT-13 is so simple that, after a few weeks of practice, the overhead for conversing in it online gets to be pretty low. Keep in mind that it's by no means secure, but it prevents parents from catching naughty words with their peripheral vision. If your friends aren't as "safety-conscious" as you, you can probably write a quick script to do ROT-13 on the fly to incoming messages. Learning to do RSA in your head would be truly impressive (I can do it with small keys with pen and paper, but nothing's stopping you short of the computational limit of the human brain)
Actually, an easier way to do this is set your 15" monitor to 1600x1200 resolution. You need pretty good reading vision and few parents will be able to see what you are reading.
Wouldn't it be more like the "computer industry, with its roots in IBM," not the other way around? Though that's not entirely accurate either - maybe if it was changed to be the personal computer industry.
And the mainframe industry, and the software industry, and...
Other companies were involved, sure, but they invented FORTRAN and built at least half of the computing industry as we know it, both from their successes and their failures.
The comparisons are interesting. Now if only there was someone out there truly analogous to Henry Ford - coming out with a true alternative commodity. Kazaa and its ilk are merely repackaging someone else's property, intellectual though it may be - the point of the Ford case is he won based on the reality that the patent was BS. The copyrights the music industry owns are not BS. They're solid. The DMCA may fall but it will still be illegal to dupe and share stuff with someone else's copyright on it.
They aren't solid, and that, eight or so years from now, will probably be the key.
Copyrights gained through heavy-handed means - from forcing minors into signing contracts backed by morally dubious laws, for example - and sometimes not entirely then - are not 'solid'.
The RIAA is either going to lose to the customers, or lose to the artists. Hopefully both.
We're talking about a Torus, not a spherical universe. If true, the universe is still 'flat', there's no 'wrapping' as you put it, it just repeats in all directions.
Re:sigh .. there is no such thing as "macroevoluti
on
Shapes of Time
·
· Score: 2
But can we observe speciation or massive shifts from one type of organism to another? No. We know how you you could walk from SF to NY, but exactly how does a dinosaur become a bird or a monkey become a man? There are vague and general theories, but the case is far from closed. Evolutionists respond that we shouldn't expect to see this happening because of the vast amounts of time required, when pressed on this issue.
We observe speciation quite regularly, even in mammals (ie, Fenroe Island house rats).
As for monkey to man, well, take a chimpanzee, strip the duplicate of chromosome 2, and change the ~2,000,000 genetic variables that matter (give or take half a million) (only 3-5% of our genes matter).
Obviously, such things are not that simple, at with only ~100 mutations occurring in any given generation, well, that's a lot of time to get things straight, as it were - humans and chimpanzees are about a quarter million generations apart (About 3 billion base pairs, a 1.8% difference between the two, for about 50 million base pairs different (ignoring the duplicated second chromosome in the chimpanzee), they are diverging, ie, split in two, they only need half the generational diference, at 100 mutations a generation, leaves you with a quarter million generations).
I think the problem most antievolutionists have is that they can't wrap their heads around the (admittingly) mind-boggling timescales involved. They certainly are very humbling, to say the least.
I don't know about how exactly this plays out in the courts, but I have heard of cases where they pulled stunts like 'Well, releasing any of our APIs would be a security risk!'
Here's the reality: a principled few may boycott. But can there said to be competition for music? If people like Band X's music, and Band X's music comes out on Label A, then a boycott of Label A is going to mean nothing for fans of Band X, and that's the end of the story. This isn't like cars, or beverages, or hard drives, or CPU's.
A couple of things: 1: This issue has not escaped people's notice. I get a lot of questions, and a lot of support, when I wear my anti DVD/CCA T-Shirt. Only one person out of hundreds (I kid you not, I've had girls walk up and ask, too!) said it didn't bother him.
I can be good with words when I have to, which helps, certainly.
2: I have yet to meet someone who is NOT getting more and more disgusted with the crap being called music on the radio. Even the 80's and oldies stations here in Minneapolis are getting pretty bad.
KDWB is now KRAP, all RAP, all the time, and boy to they put the K in it...
Which isn't to say that a platform can't fail - vis. the Mini Disk. But there's a difference between a platform failing and trying to imagine that simple competitive pressue exists for musical content.
When it sucks, it sucks, and people won't buy it. MP3 players have become too mainstream to be ignored - half the people in the gym I go to carry one, even (CDs are too bulky). It's not just a geek thing, anymore.
It's big, but each manufacturer assignment 'only' comes with sixteen million addresses.
If they have auto-banning on, a group of people could say, go nuts and try to get all 3Com NICs banned (some 21 assignments, plus 8 more for Europe, a hella lotta addresses, true...)
Eventually someone very visable is going to point out that the OSS community is a giant, loose-knit volunteer organization, among the largest in history.
It won't be this year, next year, or the year after that, but politicians around the world have already noticed the movement.
That's where I think the 'Then you win.' comes in. Someone makes a speech that encapsules Microsoft's position in two or three easily understood sentances, that sends public opinion through the floor.
Slashdot Mirror
1. For any other 'year' based on the moon, the planets, etc, the ages of all the bible heroes could be recalculated, and then shown to be normal. I haven't seen any one do this yet.
:-(
It's been done quite a few times. It's not a year based on the moon as far as I understand it but rather a scribal error akin to adding an extra zero on, or similar misinterpretation. Regardless, the ages turned out perfectly reasonable (linging them up with the Sumerian Kinglist).
It's hard to hunt down a good link because there's all this new age stuff in the way
What's worse is, if I recall correctly, temperature changes are now understood to affect the poles more than the equator (ie, the tropics).
As one of the most massive, densest and least-disturbed barred spirals known (nearly TWO TRILLION SOLAR MASSES), the Milky Way is a heavyweight where it counts - lots of minerals, little dispersion due to gasses because it has not suffered a major galactic collision yet, unlike Andromeda.
Nor is Sol an average star. Only 10% of stars are Sol's size, and of those, not all are going to be so mineral-heavy.
Nor an average planet. Its crust is the densest in the solar system, and was made by another planet colliding into it and the lighter stuff getting kicked off, leaving us with a large supply of iron and other heavier minerals close to the surface.
Chances of life existing elsewhere are almost certain, but I doubt it's mindboggingly common.
First in the universe I would doubt. Perhaps the first in the galaxy. That's not quite so far off.
As I recall, only one of the planets found so far has a gas giant with a circular orbit like Jupiter.
Of all the star systems out there, only 10% are like our sun (not necessarily a requirement for life, but one that supplies us with enough energy to kick ass and take names is handy).
The way our moon was made made Earth very, very dense. This gives us ample materials to grow and actually get into space. I doubt there could be more than a few hundred civilizations like ours in the entire galaxy. The Solar system is a mineral-rich system (for Sol's size) in a mineral-rich galaxy.
Minerals are good, they allow for life, production and the pursuit of happiness. They're also bad, they mean meteors and lots of them.
I mean, I'm sure they realize this, but I'd have to think they had to look at tens of thousands of stars to catch 100 planets passing by, at least. Am I missing something?
Probably not, the planet only has to pass in front of the star's corona for us to notice, and a lot of these might be hot giants (orbiting very close to the star) - which I'm leery to count as a real discovery.
In addition, a greater majority of planetary orbits will be laying on the galactic plane. Our system isn't, which means that we also have a bit more range to work with.
That, whomever lost all of his (or her) clones first, 'won'.
He won a lot. Even when given a seventh clone.
Sort of. Stars will fuse elements into heavier and heavier elements, up to iron (since making heavier elements actually takes energy, any larger atoms are made in negligable quantities outside of supernovas).
Anyway, my (educated) guess would be that this given star had enough mass to fuse elements up to carbon, but not further - not enough to sustain its continued existance as a 'star', anyway.
At least, I'm inferring from the article that this star is fast becoming a 'black dwarf' - I could be wrong and this is just a white dwarf in its carbon stage, but by that measure there would certainly be far, far larger diamonds out there (and in great numbers).
Or there will be hell to pay. Nothing else was worth reading.
He should have, rocket fuels aren't always much more volatile but definately easier on the toes.
If I have given you my credit card number in good faith for a lawful exchange of services or goods, it is 'morally' repugnant of you to be lax in security, unless you destroy that information.
7. Make your data look innocuous. Chatting with some friends on IM? Why not chat in Arabic (if you're on an unecrypted connection, be aware that this method reduces the possibility for parental-snooping, but increases the likelyhood of unconstitutional racial profiling. You've been warned). If you don't have the time or inclination to learn a foreign language, at least learn ROT-13. ROT-13 is so simple that, after a few weeks of practice, the overhead for conversing in it online gets to be pretty low. Keep in mind that it's by no means secure, but it prevents parents from catching naughty words with their peripheral vision. If your friends aren't as "safety-conscious" as you, you can probably write a quick script to do ROT-13 on the fly to incoming messages. Learning to do RSA in your head would be truly impressive (I can do it with small keys with pen and paper, but nothing's stopping you short of the computational limit of the human brain)
Actually, an easier way to do this is set your 15" monitor to 1600x1200 resolution. You need pretty good reading vision and few parents will be able to see what you are reading.
Wouldn't it be more like the "computer industry, with its roots in IBM," not the other way around? Though that's not entirely accurate either - maybe if it was changed to be the personal computer industry.
And the mainframe industry, and the software industry, and...
Other companies were involved, sure, but they invented FORTRAN and built at least half of the computing industry as we know it, both from their successes and their failures.
Of course, if you do rendering, you will notice a slight bit more than 2x difference (or even 5x.)
Some of us need the power.
The comparisons are interesting. Now if only there was someone out there truly analogous to Henry Ford - coming out with a true alternative commodity. Kazaa and its ilk are merely repackaging someone else's property, intellectual though it may be - the point of the Ford case is he won based on the reality that the patent was BS. The copyrights the music industry owns are not BS. They're solid. The DMCA may fall but it will still be illegal to dupe and share stuff with someone else's copyright on it.
They aren't solid, and that, eight or so years from now, will probably be the key.
Copyrights gained through heavy-handed means - from forcing minors into signing contracts backed by morally dubious laws, for example - and sometimes not entirely then - are not 'solid'.
The RIAA is either going to lose to the customers, or lose to the artists. Hopefully both.
I've always agreed with that, only stupid people eat paint. I guess the one thing is little kids who don't know any better.
I remember in Preschool, I was -THREE-, mind you, and I thought the kids who were eating glue and paint were pretty stupid.
We're talking about a Torus, not a spherical universe. If true, the universe is still 'flat', there's no 'wrapping' as you put it, it just repeats in all directions.
Is that the universe is donut shaped.
But can we observe speciation or massive shifts from one type of organism to another? No. We know how you you could walk from SF to NY, but exactly how does a dinosaur become a bird or a monkey become a man? There are vague and general theories, but the case is far from closed. Evolutionists respond that we shouldn't expect to see this happening because of the vast amounts of time required, when pressed on this issue.
We observe speciation quite regularly, even in mammals (ie, Fenroe Island house rats).
As for monkey to man, well, take a chimpanzee, strip the duplicate of chromosome 2, and change the ~2,000,000 genetic variables that matter (give or take half a million) (only 3-5% of our genes matter).
Obviously, such things are not that simple, at with only ~100 mutations occurring in any given generation, well, that's a lot of time to get things straight, as it were - humans and chimpanzees are about a quarter million generations apart (About 3 billion base pairs, a 1.8% difference between the two, for about 50 million base pairs different (ignoring the duplicated second chromosome in the chimpanzee), they are diverging, ie, split in two, they only need half the generational diference, at 100 mutations a generation, leaves you with a quarter million generations).
I think the problem most antievolutionists have is that they can't wrap their heads around the (admittingly) mind-boggling timescales involved. They certainly are very humbling, to say the least.
I've seen AMD chips on Intel motherboards.
Made me do a double take for a moment, but it does make a weird bit of sense.
Think of how much oil it takes to move these supertankers 12,000 miles.
I don't know about how exactly this plays out in the courts, but I have heard of cases where they pulled stunts like 'Well, releasing any of our APIs would be a security risk!'
And proceeded to get slapped.
Here's the reality: a principled few may boycott. But can there said to be competition for music? If people like Band X's music, and Band X's music comes out on Label A, then a boycott of Label A is going to mean nothing for fans of Band X, and that's the end of the story. This isn't like cars, or beverages, or hard drives, or CPU's.
A couple of things:
1: This issue has not escaped people's notice. I get a lot of questions, and a lot of support, when I wear my anti DVD/CCA T-Shirt. Only one person out of hundreds (I kid you not, I've had girls walk up and ask, too!) said it didn't bother him.
I can be good with words when I have to, which helps, certainly.
2: I have yet to meet someone who is NOT getting more and more disgusted with the crap being called music on the radio. Even the 80's and oldies stations here in Minneapolis are getting pretty bad.
KDWB is now KRAP, all RAP, all the time, and boy to they put the K in it...
Which isn't to say that a platform can't fail - vis. the Mini Disk. But there's a difference between a platform failing and trying to imagine that simple competitive pressue exists for musical content.
When it sucks, it sucks, and people won't buy it. MP3 players have become too mainstream to be ignored - half the people in the gym I go to carry one, even (CDs are too bulky). It's not just a geek thing, anymore.
That couldn't ever be a real /. poll.
The last option has to be:
d) The second coming of Cowboy Neal.
The poll would not be about Cowboyneal's sex life!
(Sorry, sorry, someone please name a penance)
It's big, but each manufacturer assignment 'only' comes with sixteen million addresses.
If they have auto-banning on, a group of people could say, go nuts and try to get all 3Com NICs banned (some 21 assignments, plus 8 more for Europe, a hella lotta addresses, true...)
Eventually someone very visable is going to point out that the OSS community is a giant, loose-knit volunteer organization, among the largest in history.
It won't be this year, next year, or the year after that, but politicians around the world have already noticed the movement.
That's where I think the 'Then you win.' comes in. Someone makes a speech that encapsules Microsoft's position in two or three easily understood sentances, that sends public opinion through the floor.