Umm, actually some of those things are classified under YRO. Things that are not just don't fall into the scope of "news for nerds". You wouldn't debate OP if slashdot's tagline were "News for the color blind" just because color blind people care about their freedom too, would you?
Nothing personal, but what the fuck are you on about? I even tried skipping the main page hoping to see a story that you might have had in mind when you were typing that rant.
Is it possible that a widespread use of such antennas will lower the average temperature since it is tuned to mid range infra-red? They can sell it being super eco friendly:-)
Indian government tried to enforce family planning once in seventies and the people had such strong aversions that even now the government is having tough time convincing people that family planning is a good idea. (1.2 billion and counting rather fast).
Now why am I talking about population of India in a post about digital newsstands?
Because it explains my theory for what is happening.
See, the print media was freaking out about going out of business thanks to digital media. So what did they do? They brainwashed the bigshots at print media companies (remember, they still were major players then) to go all India on people about why digital media was better.
So the bosses start something like "show me your tits!" campaign on reader data. They couldn't do anything else because to successfully install a suicide button in their companies they had to pick an idea that could be explained as well-meaning. With "show me your tits!" campaign they could say, "We wanted to check for breast cancer!"
But what it actually does is freak out the people (user data being the proverbial tits) and they think that digital media is some sort of information pervert.
Explanation to share-holders: "We just wanted a better advertisement targeting." Check.
Installation of suicide button. Check.
And that, my friends, is what it is - a conspiracy that will ensure that digital media will always be a weak sibling to print media. And even slashdot was suckered into just propagating the suicide button.
You can't trust anything out there! I mean here.. the internet, actually.
Comparing private ownership of dangerous material to access in a public institution (presumably for learning) is a bit of stretch. Educational institutions frequently have different controls. A less dangerous example: You can not let anyone copy a copyrighted book that you own, whereas libraries are allowed to do that.
Also, a knife, a car, a computer each have many legitimate uses.
I am not saying that I agree with the conviction (I don't know the details), but saying that the law being applied to ownership of kitchen knife should be the same as the one applied here is naive.
Is there a reason why gravity can't be a force unto itself but rather, the result of the other three forces? By that I mean, since the Strong and Weak forces hold things together, is there some reason they can't be creating gravity
I am having comprehension problem with what you wrote (Not a native English speaker..). Do you mean to ask:
A) Why gravity couldn't be independent of the other three forces?, or B) Why couldn't gravity be a manifestation of the other forces over a distance?
I might be wrong (IANAP) but the Standard Model already unifies the three other forces except Gravity. That means that if you can show that gravitational interaction arises from strong and weak interactions then essentially you have shown that the Standard Model is in fact GUT.
If on the other hand gravity is independent of the other forces then all attempts to unify gravity with them will fail, but since we assume one theory behind everything the lookout will continue.
If the continued search of gravitational waves do not succeed then in the long run it will point to serious flaws in GR. (Every failed attempt narrows down the search range of gravitational waves, and at some point the remaining range will conflict with something else).
The guy spent roughly 5 minutes a day on overage. That sounds to me like he wasn't wasting anymore time than the rest of us do. If the guy can focus on a goal while doing what most people would do while taking breaks, then kudos to him!
I know that projecting human values to any alien life form is heavily criticized, and you can't say with absolute certainty that any (technically advanced) alien life would share our ethics. Nevertheless I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that they would.
It is safe to assume that any technically advanced life form would be a social life form and would rely on groups as opposed to mere individuals for making leaps in technical progress. And that necessitates evolution of characteristics like empathy, altruism and so on. It is not a stretch to assume that they would project their thoughts on to others the same way we do.
Of course we can't be 100% sure, but it is still a reasonable thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, actually some of those things are classified under YRO. Things that are not just don't fall into the scope of "news for nerds". You wouldn't debate OP if slashdot's tagline were "News for the color blind" just because color blind people care about their freedom too, would you?
Nothing personal, but what the fuck are you on about? I even tried skipping the main page hoping to see a story that you might have had in mind when you were typing that rant.
Apparently so do you, grandpa ;-)
'sell it (to target audience) as being.."
Is it possible that a widespread use of such antennas will lower the average temperature since it is tuned to mid range infra-red? They can sell it being super eco friendly :-)
Woohoo!
Indian government tried to enforce family planning once in seventies and the people had such strong aversions that even now the government is having tough time convincing people that family planning is a good idea. (1.2 billion and counting rather fast).
Now why am I talking about population of India in a post about digital newsstands?
Because it explains my theory for what is happening.
See, the print media was freaking out about going out of business thanks to digital media. So what did they do? They brainwashed the bigshots at print media companies (remember, they still were major players then) to go all India on people about why digital media was better.
So the bosses start something like "show me your tits!" campaign on reader data. They couldn't do anything else because to successfully install a suicide button in their companies they had to pick an idea that could be explained as well-meaning. With "show me your tits!" campaign they could say, "We wanted to check for breast cancer!"
But what it actually does is freak out the people (user data being the proverbial tits) and they think that digital media is some sort of information pervert.
Explanation to share-holders: "We just wanted a better advertisement targeting."
Check.
Installation of suicide button.
Check.
And that, my friends, is what it is - a conspiracy that will ensure that digital media will always be a weak sibling to print media. And even slashdot was suckered into just propagating the suicide button.
You can't trust anything out there!
I mean here.. the internet, actually.
Just that?
My past-me was clogging the internet posting lame "Ahahahaha.. man; you killed me!" comments.
So actually, my past-me ate parts of everyone's donuts!
Ahahahaha.. man, you killed me!
Posts like these make me not regret all the hours I waste on slashdot reading (mostly) junk news and (mostly) predictable comments.
Thank you!
Visa *is* doing the same thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Om_mani_padme_hum
Comparing private ownership of dangerous material to access in a public institution (presumably for learning) is a bit of stretch. Educational institutions frequently have different controls. A less dangerous example: You can not let anyone copy a copyrighted book that you own, whereas libraries are allowed to do that.
Also, a knife, a car, a computer each have many legitimate uses.
I am not saying that I agree with the conviction (I don't know the details), but saying that the law being applied to ownership of kitchen knife should be the same as the one applied here is naive.
Is there a reason why gravity can't be a force unto itself but rather, the result of the other three forces? By that I mean, since the Strong and Weak forces hold things together, is there some reason they can't be creating gravity
I am having comprehension problem with what you wrote (Not a native English speaker..). Do you mean to ask:
A) Why gravity couldn't be independent of the other three forces?, or
B) Why couldn't gravity be a manifestation of the other forces over a distance?
I might be wrong (IANAP) but the Standard Model already unifies the three other forces except Gravity. That means that if you can show that gravitational interaction arises from strong and weak interactions then essentially you have shown that the Standard Model is in fact GUT.
If on the other hand gravity is independent of the other forces then all attempts to unify gravity with them will fail, but since we assume one theory behind everything the lookout will continue.
If the continued search of gravitational waves do not succeed then in the long run it will point to serious flaws in GR. (Every failed attempt narrows down the search range of gravitational waves, and at some point the remaining range will conflict with something else).
D'oh!
It is 5 minutes every hour on avg. not in a day.
The keys are right next to each other..
The guy spent roughly 5 minutes a day on overage. That sounds to me like he wasn't wasting anymore time than the rest of us do. If the guy can focus on a goal while doing what most people would do while taking breaks, then kudos to him!
----
Space monster need space Nom.. Nom..
So you're comparing the iPad and Apple products with the "discovery" of gravity or the theory of general relativity?
No, he is not. The whole point of an analogy is to highlight some part of an argument by exaggerating its implication in another scenario.
And whether or not Leibniz and Post deserve any credit or not has no bearing on the fact that Newton and Turing do.
It would have been very difficult for us to figure out how much the fine would be if you lost the records of 1000 people.
It would have been nicer though if you gave us another example. How much would the fine have been for losing records of 2000 people?
I find that highly doubtful. You need individuals that are advanced enough biologically to be able to manipulate, use and make tools.
You also need a group based society because one individual will only get so far.
I don't really see a truly hive like society building rocket ships.
(The other comment about mechanical/robotic entities does create a plausible scenario for an alien form lacking any sort of human ethic.)
I know that projecting human values to any alien life form is heavily criticized, and you can't say with absolute certainty that any (technically advanced) alien life would share our ethics. Nevertheless I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that they would.
It is safe to assume that any technically advanced life form would be a social life form and would rely on groups as opposed to mere individuals for making leaps in technical progress. And that necessitates evolution of characteristics like empathy, altruism and so on. It is not a stretch to assume that they would project their thoughts on to others the same way we do.
Of course we can't be 100% sure, but it is still a reasonable thought.
Or he only watches "reputable porn"?
Disregard what I said.. My dates are all wrong
August 2009 - April 2010..
That's eight freaking months!
Problem 1: Bob, are you sure you are talking to Alice, and not Eve?
Problem 2: Bob, even if you were talking to Alice, are you sure Eve is not listening?
Just because problem 1 is tricky does not mean that solving the second one is completely useless.
All it takes is one individual who is not busy playing games otherwise.
Also, the article is dated May 1st, 2006. Is seed magazine run by the same guys running /.?