Would it really be that much trouble to float a lightweight car on a trailer rather than drive it between events?
The drive over was the event!
They were showing that solar power works by driving solar cars around. They had a car accident. Someone died. Its sad.
one has to assume that the car was not safe for highway.
Not for regular highway use, no. THEY (there was more than one car) were safe enough for escorted highway driving. The fact that there was a fatal accident is not some sign from god that they shouldn't have done this. Its a deadly car accident, watch the news, these happen every day. This one was in a solar car, hence its extraordinary interest.
Car accident, sad but mundane. Solar car accident, sad but noteworthy.
Accidents happen. You want to ban every make of car that ever had a fatal accident?
Its sad, its probably caused by a mechanical malfunction (or a bee flew in and stung him in the eye, nobody knows yet), but you are overreacting. Many other such event happened without anyone dying. An accident doesn't mean that the event "shouldn't have happened".
People die taking a shower for ctying out loud, we don't ban the use of soap on a wet smooth surfaces!
Why can't solar-powered cars be built using modern safety technology? What do seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, etc have to do with the type of fuel the car uses?
Power to weight ratios.
I suppose that in many head-on collisions, the mass of the engine itself does a great deal to protect the driver.
So very wrong. Modern cars are designed so the engine will be pushed beneath the driver specifically because in older models, when in a head-on collision the engine would be pushed into the driver and passagers and kill or maim them. There's just something about having a massive hunk of metal shoved into you with great force that just isn't healthy.
But surely solar-powered cars can be more massive?
Frankly that car was not street legal, it shouldn't have been allowed on the highway
"solar cars have to get a special permit from the Ministry of Transportation to drive on roads and highways, and must travel with a regular vehicle in front and behind. Those vehicles must have flashing yellow lights on their roofs. The U of T car was following these regulations."
The fact that there's a really old book that says he exists is not enough evidence to believe something as out there and unreconsilable with reality as an invisible man in the sky.
That is why it is important to indoctrinate them as soon as possible, and to get those youth to submit to indoctrination on a regular basis. At least once a week on sundays, and preferably everyday; before eating, before going to bed...
You'd be amazed what you can make people believe in if you indoctrinate them well. Godspeed;-)
If they stored my fingerprint afterwards and kept it connected to my name, then yes, of course I'd be against it, but I HIGHLY doubt this happens.
I highly doubt this DOEN'T happen. In fact, I'm pretty sure they keep that fingerprint stored with a few choice pictures from the security cameras, while they're at it. What? You think there's no cameras?
Wait for it, in a few years, this fingerprint "news" will come out, and you'll be surprised.
I don't mind being checked against a terrorist database. I'm not a terrorist.
Are you sure? You're probably safe, no one was ever unjustly arrested or anything... they're not detaining people for years without trials in secret locations, nobody's been deported to Syria to be tortured a little...
And why don't they use time travel as a tool (think The End of Eternity), rather than merely as an all-too-convenient plot device?
Meh, if you start thinking like that, you'll end up wondering why they don't put their critically ill patients in suspended animation until they find the damn cure instead of letting a few red shirts die before saving the important people at the very last moment. Then you wonder when in future history the technology of the circuit breaker was lost, leading to a neverending stream of exploding computer terminals...
Then its only a short hop to the "why isn't there a big ol' OFF switch on the holodeck" train of thought and from there, madness.
my absolute favorite episode of Deep Space 9 was the Trials and Tribbleations episode, now, granted, they spliced them into an old TOS episode, but still
Me too. In fact, I find it quite telling that the best DS9 episode was 90% something else.
Take best episode from a good show.
Add characters from your own crappy show.
PROFIT!
Personally I just wish someone would kill Rick Berman in a violent and painfull way, and possibly wound that Mr. Braga, so that they will finally stop producing horrible TV shows with the name "Star Trek" deceptively tagged on.
Um, what? If they didn't need the money from circulation ("need" here including their desired rate of return) they wouldn't charge it -- if the paper were free, it'd have more readers, driving up revenue from the supposedly omni-important advertisers.
Many papers are like that. The "Metro" is a small, free newspaper distributed in subway stations of many metropolis of the world.
In fact, it's a balance. The Post has decided it needs to charge $0.50 to meet its expenses and goals. For online, they've decided that they need demographic info. Either way it's their right to set whatever price they want... and your right to pay it or not. But I don't understand why everyone seems to be griping like it's immoral for them to ask for the info.
Its normal to ask money for goods, but asking personnal info in exchange for the news...its wrong. They want to get to know you the better to exploit you. Its an invasion of privacy, its just plain damn creepy man.
Nintendo was releasing two disk games near the Gamecube launch (Resident Evil 0). It's clear games have grown too big for CDs
No they haven't, Nintendo simply decided to make their DVDs smaller. Sure, its hell for the evil pirates, but man, you're stuck releasing gorram 2 discs games. Its the 21st century people, get with the times!
I assume (and it may be a bad assumption) that most of the PS2s that are out there are not used for any sort of DVD playback even though they have that feature.
I use it as my DVD, so does most people I know who got one. I know someone who uses mostly for DVDs and PS1 games. I Knew someone who made fun of me for using a PS2 to watch movies until his DVD player died for no reason at all and he started using his PS2 for that too...
So while the feature will likely never be used, it has a marketing aspect to it
Its used buddy, oh yeah. : )
I keep seeing comments that say "if you can afford a PS2 you can afford a DVD player too", first of all, not necessarily, and secondly, if I can have both a PS2 and DVD player in one convenient small box instead of 2, I'm happy. I have enough electronic junk crowding my living room real estate as it is.
require registration for full access. In this case full access is a default post score of 1.
Er, no, full access is the ùbility to access all parts of the site. Which is granted to all anonymous readers. Hell, unregistered readers can even post freely in all discussions, though with lower visibility than registered users.
A default post score of 1 is a reward for registering, just as a default post score of 2 is a reward for participating and gaining positive karma. That has nothing at all to do with access. You can read everything on slashdot without registering, unlike the NYT.
I'm a normal guy, some gadgets and services interest me, I *might* go visit some companys webpage from an ad, just not ads that have zero relevance. Let ME pick, then you don't have to guess! Just give me a quick list to scan, I make my selections, then poof on to the content. No registering needed then, no cookies needed, no transfer of email address, no hard feelings.
I wouldn't mind the "registering" if it was just a quick lil' non-invasive survey and a cookie. Like, male, between ages of x and y, etc. No personal stuff about income and email adresses, just things a good salesman could tell from looking at me if I walked in his workplace. I would possibly only see ads for stuff I might be interrested in.
Hell, I would love to live in a world where I would never again see an ad for feminine hygiene products when I'm not in the company of women. If its just me or me and the guys, showing us ads for extra absorbant whatnots is just a waste of time for everyone and of money for the advertiser. I will never, in my life, make a purchase of feminine hygiene products based on a ad I saw (I might run an errand, but I'm not making any decsions).
But I do mind giving them any personal info, how much money I make, my adress, etc. That is personnal, private, none of their buisness.
Of course, they're also giving you the news without asking for 50 cents, either... Registration is the "price" you pay for full access to the online newspaper.
Bullshit. 50 cents is what I pay for a hard copy, printed on dead trees and lugged around in the wee hours of the morning by the truckfull.
The price I pay for the news is having to sift through the ads to get to the news. Newspapers make their money from selling readers to advertisers, not from selling papers at 50 cents a piece.
The reason I don't own [a mac] (and probably never will) is that that niche caters to those who desire a pre-produced, non-gaming-capable tool for "productivity".
It IS gaming capable machine! There ARE games on it. Its not Apple's fault that most publishers and developpers don't bother to make mac versions of the games!
In practice, you are totally right, the Mac isn't for gamers, because most games are not realeased (or are released later) on the mac. But please, don't imply that they want it that way.
I yearn for the old days, when most games were multi-platform, before Microsoft secured its gaming monopoly : (
Somehow this is different when we hack open Microsoft gaming consoles?
This isn't we, this is them.
Down with Microsoft for creating a closed format that we cannot do what we want with! How dare they! Apple creates a unit that is closed, refuses to allow Real to come in and have an alliance for it, and so Real hacks it to do something cool. Apple "lays the smack down" and somehow that is a good thing? Killing innovation?
I think this is all a big turf war. Real isn't innovating, they're jamming their foot in the door Apple is trying to shut in their face. Real wants to make money by telling their client "buy from us, play it on your shiny new iPod!", Apple says "Nah-huh! They buy from us, you give us a cut or we don't let you in!", Real doesn't want to give them a cut, so they get in by force, Apple says "No fair! I'm telling the judge!", and here we are, picking sides.
Apple has the bigger end of the stick, they are gonna end up making a deal with Real, and they will get their cut.
Zealotry is one thing but blatant fence hopping is another.
Oh, there's definatly some heavy duty zealotry going on, but we're still on the same side of the fence, the one Real isn't on. God I hate Real...
If I buy an iPod, it's mine. If I want to tear it open and take out the drive, I will. If I want to hack the software, I will. If I want to play Real music on it (though why, I don't know), I will.
Damn straight.
Fuck any damn comapny that wants to tell me what I can do with *MY* hardware!
But, AFAICT, they are not telling YOU what you can't do with YOUR hardware, they are telling Real what THEY can't do with THEIR hardware.
This isn't a big company crushing the little guy with the DMCA, this is two companies duking it out, with their respective armies of lawyers and techs using everything at their disposal to win the fight. Of course, in this instance, Real is using ingenious techs and Apple is fighting back with insidious lawyers, so we're rooting against Apple.
I think this whole thing will end up being settled with Real agreeing to give some dough to apple in exchange for letting them do their thing. That way Apple will make sure it doesn't break compatibility in the next upgrade instead of making sure they do break it, as they are threatning to do now.
Does Apple, or its customers, really want an environment where any changes to the iPod to add functionality or features can break customers' music that they've ostensibly legitimately purchased?
It really shouldn't matter what Apple wants, only what the customers want. If the customers want to put themselves in such a situation, they can make that choice. If anything it is reasonble only for Apple to demand that Real make it very clear to customers that if they do take an end run around apple on this, that their device might stop playing their music files, delete random content, or explode in their pocket, but it's not reasonable for Apple to tell people what they can or cannot do with hardware they purchased.
Oh come on, like you wouldn't see a/. article "Apple breaks compatibility, wastes its client's money!" the minute they upgrade the firmware in a way that would invalidate this hack. No matter how much they made it clear it could happen.
If you think it's reasonable for Apple to use an unjust law to control a product which consumers pay for and expect to own, then that's your business.
Here's a thought, instead of mucking around with another company's product, why doesn't Real make its music freely transferable to a format compatible with the iPod? It can play numerous formats, so if their goal is to provide the consumer with choice, why don't they stop pushing their own gorram DRM proprietary file format and provide their client with a choice that has more freedom?
P.S. DMCA sucks, lawyers suck, Apple usually rules, but their DMCA happy lawyers still suck.
Slashdot Mirror
Would it really be that much trouble to float a lightweight car on a trailer rather than drive it between events?
The drive over was the event!
They were showing that solar power works by driving solar cars around.
They had a car accident. Someone died. Its sad.
one has to assume that the car was not safe for highway.
Not for regular highway use, no.
THEY (there was more than one car) were safe enough for escorted highway driving. The fact that there was a fatal accident is not some sign from god that they shouldn't have done this. Its a deadly car accident, watch the news, these happen every day. This one was in a solar car, hence its extraordinary interest.
Car accident, sad but mundane.
Solar car accident, sad but noteworthy.
Accidents happen. You want to ban every make of car that ever had a fatal accident?
Its sad, its probably caused by a mechanical malfunction (or a bee flew in and stung him in the eye, nobody knows yet), but you are overreacting. Many other such event happened without anyone dying. An accident doesn't mean that the event "shouldn't have happened".
People die taking a shower for ctying out loud, we don't ban the use of soap on a wet smooth surfaces!
Why can't solar-powered cars be built using modern safety technology? What do seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, etc have to do with the type of fuel the car uses?
Power to weight ratios.
I suppose that in many head-on collisions, the mass of the engine itself does a great deal to protect the driver.
So very wrong.
Modern cars are designed so the engine will be pushed beneath the driver specifically because in older models, when in a head-on collision the engine would be pushed into the driver and passagers and kill or maim them. There's just something about having a massive hunk of metal shoved into you with great force that just isn't healthy.
But surely solar-powered cars can be more massive?
No. Solar cells aren't efficient enough.
Frankly that car was not street legal, it shouldn't have been allowed on the highway
"solar cars have to get a special permit from the Ministry of Transportation to drive on roads and highways, and must travel with a regular vehicle in front and behind. Those vehicles must have flashing yellow lights on their roofs.
The U of T car was following these regulations."
Quoted from a copy-paste post above...
Some prides of lions almost never made their own kills
No.
Some individual lions, yes, but prides hunt.
The fact that there's a really old book that says he exists is not enough evidence to believe something as out there and unreconsilable with reality as an invisible man in the sky.
;-)
That is why it is important to indoctrinate them as soon as possible, and to get those youth to submit to indoctrination on a regular basis. At least once a week on sundays, and preferably everyday; before eating, before going to bed...
You'd be amazed what you can make people believe in if you indoctrinate them well. Godspeed
If they stored my fingerprint afterwards and kept it connected to my name, then yes, of course I'd be against it, but I HIGHLY doubt this happens.
I highly doubt this DOEN'T happen.
In fact, I'm pretty sure they keep that fingerprint stored with a few choice pictures from the security cameras, while they're at it. What? You think there's no cameras?
Wait for it, in a few years, this fingerprint "news" will come out, and you'll be surprised.
I don't mind being checked against a terrorist database. I'm not a terrorist.
Are you sure?
You're probably safe, no one was ever unjustly arrested or anything... they're not detaining people for years without trials in secret locations, nobody's been deported to Syria to be tortured a little...
Think of how different Abu Ghraib might have been if prisoners and jailers had been on camera the whole time.
Exactly not at all.
The whole reason you know the name Abu Ghraib is because they were on camera.
And why don't they use time travel as a tool (think The End of Eternity), rather than merely as an all-too-convenient plot device?
Meh, if you start thinking like that, you'll end up wondering why they don't put their critically ill patients in suspended animation until they find the damn cure instead of letting a few red shirts die before saving the important people at the very last moment. Then you wonder when in future history the technology of the circuit breaker was lost, leading to a neverending stream of exploding computer terminals...
Then its only a short hop to the "why isn't there a big ol' OFF switch on the holodeck" train of thought and from there, madness.
Me too.
In fact, I find it quite telling that the best DS9 episode was 90% something else.
Personally I just wish someone would kill Rick Berman in a violent and painfull way, and possibly wound that Mr. Braga, so that they will finally stop producing horrible TV shows with the name "Star Trek" deceptively tagged on.
On the other hand, slashdotters will long remember that Penguin acted in an unethical manner. Perhaps they might even avoid buying books from them.
Yeah, slashdotters will boycott a penguin. That'll be the day!
Um, what? If they didn't need the money from circulation ("need" here including their desired rate of return) they wouldn't charge it -- if the paper were free, it'd have more readers, driving up revenue from the supposedly omni-important advertisers.
Many papers are like that.
The "Metro" is a small, free newspaper distributed in subway stations of many metropolis of the world.
In fact, it's a balance. The Post has decided it needs to charge $0.50 to meet its expenses and goals. For online, they've decided that they need demographic info. Either way it's their right to set whatever price they want... and your right to pay it or not.
But I don't understand why everyone seems to be griping like it's immoral for them to ask for the info.
Its normal to ask money for goods, but asking personnal info in exchange for the news...its wrong. They want to get to know you the better to exploit you. Its an invasion of privacy, its just plain damn creepy man.
Nintendo was releasing two disk games near the Gamecube launch (Resident Evil 0). It's clear games have grown too big for CDs
No they haven't, Nintendo simply decided to make their DVDs smaller.
Sure, its hell for the evil pirates, but man, you're stuck releasing gorram 2 discs games. Its the 21st century people, get with the times!
I assume (and it may be a bad assumption) that most of the PS2s that are out there are not used for any sort of DVD playback even though they have that feature.
I use it as my DVD, so does most people I know who got one.
I know someone who uses mostly for DVDs and PS1 games.
I Knew someone who made fun of me for using a PS2 to watch movies until his DVD player died for no reason at all and he started using his PS2 for that too...
So while the feature will likely never be used, it has a marketing aspect to it
Its used buddy, oh yeah. : )
I keep seeing comments that say "if you can afford a PS2 you can afford a DVD player too", first of all, not necessarily, and secondly, if I can have both a PS2 and DVD player in one convenient small box instead of 2, I'm happy. I have enough electronic junk crowding my living room real estate as it is.
require registration for full access. In this case full access is a default post score of 1.
Er, no, full access is the ùbility to access all parts of the site. Which is granted to all anonymous readers. Hell, unregistered readers can even post freely in all discussions, though with lower visibility than registered users.
A default post score of 1 is a reward for registering, just as a default post score of 2 is a reward for participating and gaining positive karma. That has nothing at all to do with access. You can read everything on slashdot without registering, unlike the NYT.
I'm a normal guy, some gadgets and services interest me, I *might* go visit some companys webpage from an ad, just not ads that have zero relevance. Let ME pick, then you don't have to guess! Just give me a quick list to scan, I make my selections, then poof on to the content. No registering needed then, no cookies needed, no transfer of email address, no hard feelings.
I wouldn't mind the "registering" if it was just a quick lil' non-invasive survey and a cookie. Like, male, between ages of x and y, etc. No personal stuff about income and email adresses, just things a good salesman could tell from looking at me if I walked in his workplace. I would possibly only see ads for stuff I might be interrested in.
Hell, I would love to live in a world where I would never again see an ad for feminine hygiene products when I'm not in the company of women. If its just me or me and the guys, showing us ads for extra absorbant whatnots is just a waste of time for everyone and of money for the advertiser. I will never, in my life, make a purchase of feminine hygiene products based on a ad I saw (I might run an errand, but I'm not making any decsions).
But I do mind giving them any personal info, how much money I make, my adress, etc. That is personnal, private, none of their buisness.
Of course, they're also giving you the news without asking for 50 cents, either... Registration is the "price" you pay for full access to the online newspaper.
Bullshit. 50 cents is what I pay for a hard copy, printed on dead trees and lugged around in the wee hours of the morning by the truckfull.
The price I pay for the news is having to sift through the ads to get to the news. Newspapers make their money from selling readers to advertisers, not from selling papers at 50 cents a piece.
I think you meant stakes.
Thank you, spellchecker.
Many more torches, pitch forks and steaks.
Like I don't have enough of THOSE in my life already...
The reason I don't own [a mac] (and probably never will) is that that niche caters to those who desire a pre-produced, non-gaming-capable tool for "productivity".
It IS gaming capable machine! There ARE games on it.
Its not Apple's fault that most publishers and developpers don't bother to make mac versions of the games!
In practice, you are totally right, the Mac isn't for gamers, because most games are not realeased (or are released later) on the mac.
But please, don't imply that they want it that way.
I yearn for the old days, when most games were multi-platform, before Microsoft secured its gaming monopoly : (
Somehow this is different when we hack open Microsoft gaming consoles?
This isn't we, this is them.
Down with Microsoft for creating a closed format that we cannot do what we want with! How dare they!
Apple creates a unit that is closed, refuses to allow Real to come in and have an alliance for it, and so Real hacks it to do something cool. Apple "lays the smack down" and somehow that is a good thing? Killing innovation?
I think this is all a big turf war.
Real isn't innovating, they're jamming their foot in the door Apple is trying to shut in their face. Real wants to make money by telling their client "buy from us, play it on your shiny new iPod!", Apple says "Nah-huh! They buy from us, you give us a cut or we don't let you in!", Real doesn't want to give them a cut, so they get in by force, Apple says "No fair! I'm telling the judge!", and here we are, picking sides.
Apple has the bigger end of the stick, they are gonna end up making a deal with Real, and they will get their cut.
Zealotry is one thing but blatant fence hopping is another.
Oh, there's definatly some heavy duty zealotry going on, but we're still on the same side of the fence, the one Real isn't on.
God I hate Real...
If I buy an iPod, it's mine. If I want to tear it open and take out the drive, I will. If I want to hack the software, I will. If I want to play Real music on it (though why, I don't know), I will.
Damn straight.
Fuck any damn comapny that wants to tell me what I can do with *MY* hardware!
But, AFAICT, they are not telling YOU what you can't do with YOUR hardware, they are telling Real what THEY can't do with THEIR hardware.
This isn't a big company crushing the little guy with the DMCA, this is two companies duking it out, with their respective armies of lawyers and techs using everything at their disposal to win the fight.
Of course, in this instance, Real is using ingenious techs and Apple is fighting back with insidious lawyers, so we're rooting against Apple.
I think this whole thing will end up being settled with Real agreeing to give some dough to apple in exchange for letting them do their thing. That way Apple will make sure it doesn't break compatibility in the next upgrade instead of making sure they do break it, as they are threatning to do now.
Oh come on, like you wouldn't see a
If you think it's reasonable for Apple to use an unjust law to control a product which consumers pay for and expect to own, then that's your business.
Here's a thought, instead of mucking around with another company's product, why doesn't Real make its music freely transferable to a format compatible with the iPod? It can play numerous formats, so if their goal is to provide the consumer with choice, why don't they stop pushing their own gorram DRM proprietary file format and provide their client with a choice that has more freedom?
P.S. DMCA sucks, lawyers suck, Apple usually rules, but their DMCA happy lawyers still suck.
Right... because it's Apple doing it, it's not wrong...
;-)
The way I see it, because they're doing it to Real, its not wrong.
I want those suckers to pay!
Good books that people want to read and which will only be ported to this medium.
So, in other words, it will require monopolistic control of copyrighted content?
God, I hope eBooks never get adopted.