What they now need to do is compare Wii games vs. other controllers, to see if that's a significant factor. And determine which games are best. (eg, Trauma Center: Second Opinion).
I'd also be interested if someone made some sort of simulator/trainer or the laproscopic tools, or if that would make things worse. (as they couldn't 100% recreate the controls in software alone).
Is it the spatial reasoning training (from the 2004 study's Super Monkey Ball), the controls (the recent Wii study), or just simply unwinding and relaxing playing video games the important factor? Or is it a combination?
Can we develop fun, engaging games that improve skills that are useful for other professions? (eg... can Boom Blox help the demolition industry? can Order Up! help people with multitasking?)
So if the journal dies, does it take all of his archives with it?
I've gone on record on a lot of forums in support of open access (hell, I even managed to throw an AGU election last year after I read the society's response to last year's call for comments that led to the OMB memo that got released last week as it pissed me off so much).
But the problem is that some of the publishers have built themselves a pyramid scheme... they've siphoned too much money out of the system (Elsevier has been paying ~$1.40 in dividends these last few years... about ~3.5% of their value), and they rely on people shelling out $30+ to read some 20 year old article to pay for their continuing operations, rather than stashing their page fees away as an endowment to pay for preservation of the documents.
So, when the companies do go backrupt... will the papers fall into the public domain? Maybe, if it was a society journal, and they had a contract that didn't completely take advantage of them. More likely, however, is that it'll go up for auction... and some other big publisher who still has money will take it over, and try to find some other way to 'extract value' from their 'new investment'.
Elsevier should be boycotted (I'm doing it myself), but so they listen and open the stuff up *before* they die.
Look, if they *really* add value by peer reviewing, charge for the peer reviewing -- make people pay to submit in the first place (rather than authors fees, downloading fees, etc.) But if they did that, they couldn't claim how 'exclusive' they are with the ratio of papers they reject.
Not always. It's been used as such a buzzword that it's come to be used any time when the amount or complexity becomes a limit to what you're trying to do.
So in the case of NRT (near real time), it might be a relatively small amount of data. Or it might be that there's enough different formats of data or other complexity that it's a problem.
And it's also discipline specific... I've heard of groups complaining about 50GB being a lot of data... because they're dealing with tens of thousands of Excel spreadsheets. For those in astronomy, 50GB is nothing; you have to get up into the multi-TB range before you have to worry... and that's still small for some disciplines who deal in PB of data.
I went to a private 'research university' for my undergrad, and I had a rule of thumb:
There are the good professors, and then there are the tenured ones.
Admitedly, you'd occassionally get the bad but as yet untenured professors, or the actual good tenured ones, but there was a definite correlation between tenured & good teaching skills.
Those that are still working towards tenure have to worry about their classes and actually prepare to present something. Those with tenure might show up and give an incoherent presentation with 20 year old slides and tell you that things haven't really changed since then, so don't worry. (and it was a computer security class... albeit, 15 years ago)
My least favorite professor would copy problems from the book (his book) on the overhead machine, and refuse to let you take notes in his class (because 'if you were writing, you weren't listening', but I remember things spatially, and remember things like 'that was on the bottom right of my page of notes'). And from just sitting there listening to him drone on, I fell asleep in *every* class, no matter the time of day.
What you're describing is a 'series hybrid', such as the Chevy Volt, although I wouldn't say 'continuously'. Unless they've made some change in the newer generation of Priuses (Priii?) are 'parallel hybrid', where both the electric motor and gas engine can turn the wheels.
SMTP works through 'store and forward'... and many systems won't alert that they've had a problem forwarding e-mail for at least 2 hours, possibly as many as 48.
So by then, your homework's late... but what if it got caught up in a spam trap? Then you might get *no* indication that it wasn't delivered. When I worked for GW, we had a little incident when an update to our mail system's anti-virus flagged every e-mail with a 'w' in it... and all of that e-mail was trashed.
I once went to a conference where the abstract submissions were via e-mail... they ended up cutting the conference from 5 to 3 days because of the low number of submissions... but it turned out that their spam filter had eaten over 50% of the submissions.
I took a class once where we had a take-home final; but the teacher e-mailed it to us. Luckily, I gave him more than one e-mail address, as my university e-mail was locked a few days before the final. (I worked for the university, and was fired for 'use of sarcasm'). The email account had been set up as a student e-mail account, but they refused to unlock it, and their system wouldn't let me create a new account as I already had one associated with my SSN. (I mean 'GW ID number... it's just a conincidence that they were your SSN... they'd never put those so that every adminstrator could see them, right?)
If you're going to take submissions electronicly, you'd be better off using FTP, or a website, or anything that has a positive confirmation that the file's actually been submitted.
Both CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-SA have never been clearly defined for research, where it's the ideas, not the specific document used to convey those ideas that matter.
So, for instance -- if I write a paper on using (MethodX) to solve (ProblemY1), and someone realizes that (MethodX) might also be able to solve (ProblemY2), are they allowed to do it, or using it in new ways a derivitive? What if they wrote a paper about their findings, is that a derivitive? How about if I realize that there's a larger (ProblemY), is that a derivitive? Or if I realized that I could improve on (MethodX), is that a derivitive? Or even if you just have another occurance of (ProblemY1), are you allowed to use this knowledge of (MethodX) to apply it to the problem, or is any application of the research considered a derivitive?
The other one that people suggest for papers is CC-BY-NC, thinking that it'd prevent someone from using the ideas in the paper from trying to create a business around the idea... but does this also mean that you're not allowed to publish new research that builds in a CC-BY-NC paper in a for-profit journal? Or attempt to get grants to extend the work?
The CC licenses (other than CC0) just don't work for research articles. I'm not even sure if CC-BY really works. (it's one thing to cite a paper... but does it chain? Do we have issues with publishers who limit number of items in a reference list?) How do you give attribution when it actually gets used? (Do you acknowledge the authors when you install a road using asphalt they developed, or during the grand opening, or every time someone drives on it?)
Yes, this all may seem pedantic, but the CC licenses were developed for a specific purpose, and it was *not* research. I was at a meeting a couple of years back (not sure if it was BRDI or DataCite, as they were back-to-back), where John Wilbanks (at the time with Science Commons) was recommending CC0 for research data, in part because of these problems.
(In the case of data, the discussion typically comes up as either 'Data Use' vs. 'Data Re-Use' or as 'Data Repurposing', or the greater concept of 'Data Policies')
Until we get these cleared up, CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-SA should *NOT* be used for publishing research.
I *never* had problem with cat3. But there are some makers of cat5 that use this annoying kinda shimery colors on their cables that make it damned hard to see brown vs. green in low light conditions (eg, when you're hunched over a wall plate, and you're blocking the ceiling light from shining in).
I just carried a flashlight. The other solution would be to buy from those who don't use those ugly pastel shades on their cables. (if the saturated stuff still exists; I now work in a place where we're not allowed to pull & terminate our own cables, so I only do it when helping friends every couple of years or so)
As I see it, the bigger problem is that once you get over a certain size, you have enough money to set up all of the string of businesses in Ireland, the Netherlands and the Cayman Islands to do your necessary tax dodging.
So if you said that companies over a certain size had a second fomula without all of the same deductions allowed, and they had to pay the greater of the two, then you've got something similar to our current AMT.
Just for starters... lobbying should not be tax-exempt. Sure, it's typically a cost to the company and so counts against profits, but if you spend $50M/year on lobbying Congress to give you even more tax breaks, that should be taxed. Maybe add advertising, too. Or only allow deductions for direct salaries up to some amount (eg, 5x or 10x minimum wage)
Then, take all of the other loopholes that are being abused by companies to reduce their tax liability, and cap 'em so that you can only use them to take out something like 50% of your tax liability.
I don't know all of the numbers, so I can't give more specifics, but this would either show the absurdity of AMT on so many people, or raise some money from the corporations who don't like paying their fair share of taxes.
Sorry, I don't consider IP issues 'theft', although in this case, I'm not sure, as you actually *are* denying the original owner from using what they had. And as none of the administration would directly profit from this proposal, I'm going to go with Hanlon's Razor on the corruption interpretation:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
(product of PG county schooling for grades K, 1, 6-12... and I don't care what the MNCPPC folks argue, there's nothing wrong with calling it PG. It's not like Chuck county, where we're potentially using it as an insult. (Charles just sounds too formal... there are way too many SMIBs there for it to be formal))
I thought that we had gotten rid of the idiotic school board when they disbanded it in 2002 and got Marilyn Bland and the others out of there. (although, we haven't gotten rid of her yet)
Just as with COBOL and Fortran, with the language being less popular, it's more difficult to find people who really know the language, so that they can maintain and develop existing systems.
Most of the people with strong knowledge aren't looking for new work. Those who still know Perl 4 are around, as are inexperienced folks who can write C in Perl. (you know the type -- using
for ( my $i=0; $i++; $i < $max) {... }
vs.
for my $i ( 0.. $max-1 ) {... }
or delaring and initializing every damned variable on its own line. Or keeping 4 parallel arrays around, when an array of hashes or array of arrays would make the code easier to work with. Ie, not knowing the shortcuts & efficiencies of a given language).
Some of what's in the perl 5 planning have me genuinely excited (see Jesse Vincent's many talks on the future of perl)... perl 6 is a good idea, but the focus on was like Netscape deciding to rewrite Navigator from the ground up... so much momentum was lost. We'll be better off when it's finally done, but the energy might've been better spent elsewhere.
My guess is that it has some information about how they could've saved money through other means (eg, not buying licenses for software for people who don't need it, etc.)... which if other groups actually did, would cut into their profits.
If it's MacOS X, go into the 'Universal Access' control panel, and there's a 'contrast' slider, and you can force greyscale, black on white, or white on black.
Most X windows managers have ways to do similar things, although in some you have to mess with configuration files.
I've seen ones years ago that were PHP scripts that had different behavior based on who was coming in. (one of the more clever ones actually took over the site's main index... but if the visitor was from the same domain as the server, it returned a near-duplicate of the original content and not the drug ads)
The 404 aspect does give me an idea that I think could make things trickier, but I'll be damned if I'm going to give spammers any ideas for things that they're not already using. (although, I guess it's possible that what I'm thinking of is what they're actually doing, but no security person would call a whitelist... some person who's not really familiar with the security lingo might, though)
For years I've been saying we need something for dogs to keep them as puppies, so they're small and cute for life.
The problem is that you'd need enough time so that you could properly train them... you'd want to make sure they could at least make it past the 'potty training' phase, or there'd be problems. (I think the litter training for cats happens faster).
But if you retard the mental development, that'd mean they could do all of the dumb puppy things that people find so cute. (Or cats... I remember when my boss's cat was scared of a laser pointer, before she decided she should chase the dot)
And as for the person who pointed out that 5 years is middle aged for a cat... we have dog years to work with. So the dog would be um.. (12 * 5 / 7 ) = 8.5 months old.
He obtained copies of the documents through automated means, but there has been no proof that he intended to distribute them (although that's what prosecutors claimed).
It's possible that he was planning on doing content analysis of the documents, for which he might've needed a sufficiently large corpus to do the analysis. (and if seems that JSTOR allows that sort of thing, but it wasn't well known, which my understanding was part of the reason they asked the case to be dropped; see http://about.jstor.org/news/jstor-statement-misuse-incident-and-criminal-case )
Yes, he did release the PACER documents -- but those were government files that should've been in the public domain; I view him to be like Carl Malamud in that regard : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Malamud .
I don't know about everyone else, but the last time I had a CT scan (I think it was a CT, I was pretty out of it), once I got done, I proceeded to puke it all up.
So yes, I see recycling it as a possibility.
Of course, they'd probably have released most people before it came out the more natural way, so unless they're holding someone for observation, and have them use a toilet that's specifically diverted, it'll be more difficult. (I doubt it'd be worth diverting *all* septic waste to check it for Barium)
ps. The bottle said 'pleasantly flavored'. The bottle lied.
Where have you been? C'mon... the walkman, trinitron... minidisc!
Okay, sure minidisc wasn't popular in the US... and they tried keeping CRTs around for too long due to trinitron... but back in the 80s and 90s, Sony was way ahead in technology.
Even their laptops were considered years ahead in design 'til Apple put out the TiBook.
So, if you said 'behind on technology for the last 15 years', sure, I could agree... but *always* behind? no. I mean, they had some of the most advanced rootkits for their time.
(in the bluray vs. hddvd wars, bluray wouldn't have won over HD-DVD if it hadn't taken payoffs to other companies and selling PS3s at a loss... I refuse to change over to their crap format that just means that I'm forced to sit through 10 min of commercials every time I put in a disk)
Slashdot Mirror
What they now need to do is compare Wii games vs. other controllers, to see if that's a significant factor. And determine which games are best. (eg, Trauma Center: Second Opinion).
I'd also be interested if someone made some sort of simulator/trainer or the laproscopic tools, or if that would make things worse. (as they couldn't 100% recreate the controls in software alone).
Is it the spatial reasoning training (from the 2004 study's Super Monkey Ball), the controls (the recent Wii study), or just simply unwinding and relaxing playing video games the important factor? Or is it a combination?
Can we develop fun, engaging games that improve skills that are useful for other professions? (eg ... can Boom Blox help the demolition industry? can Order Up! help people with multitasking?)
One of my friends from high school lived in a house across the highway from the Beretta factory in Accokeek, Maryland:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Benelli+USA&hl=en&ll=38.649305,-77.036712&spn=0.013155,0.021586&cid=4117604210822074107&gl=US&t=m&z=16&iwloc=A
Google lists it as 'Benelli', which is owned by Beretta, but the road is 'Beretta Drive'
So if the journal dies, does it take all of his archives with it?
I've gone on record on a lot of forums in support of open access (hell, I even managed to throw an AGU election last year after I read the society's response to last year's call for comments that led to the OMB memo that got released last week as it pissed me off so much).
But the problem is that some of the publishers have built themselves a pyramid scheme ... they've siphoned too much money out of the system (Elsevier has been paying ~$1.40 in dividends these last few years ... about ~3.5% of their value), and they rely on people shelling out $30+ to read some 20 year old article to pay for their continuing operations, rather than stashing their page fees away as an endowment to pay for preservation of the documents.
So, when the companies do go backrupt ... will the papers fall into the public domain? Maybe, if it was a society journal, and they had a contract that didn't completely take advantage of them. More likely, however, is that it'll go up for auction ... and some other big publisher who still has money will take it over, and try to find some other way to 'extract value' from their 'new investment'.
Elsevier should be boycotted (I'm doing it myself), but so they listen and open the stuff up *before* they die.
Look, if they *really* add value by peer reviewing, charge for the peer reviewing -- make people pay to submit in the first place (rather than authors fees, downloading fees, etc.) But if they did that, they couldn't claim how 'exclusive' they are with the ratio of papers they reject.
Not always. It's been used as such a buzzword that it's come to be used any time when the amount or complexity becomes a limit to what you're trying to do.
So in the case of NRT (near real time), it might be a relatively small amount of data. Or it might be that there's enough different formats of data or other complexity that it's a problem.
And it's also discipline specific ... I've heard of groups complaining about 50GB being a lot of data ... because they're dealing with tens of thousands of Excel spreadsheets. For those in astronomy, 50GB is nothing; you have to get up into the multi-TB range before you have to worry ... and that's still small for some disciplines who deal in PB of data.
I went to a private 'research university' for my undergrad, and I had a rule of thumb:
Admitedly, you'd occassionally get the bad but as yet untenured professors, or the actual good tenured ones, but there was a definite correlation between tenured & good teaching skills.
Those that are still working towards tenure have to worry about their classes and actually prepare to present something. Those with tenure might show up and give an incoherent presentation with 20 year old slides and tell you that things haven't really changed since then, so don't worry. (and it was a computer security class ... albeit, 15 years ago)
My least favorite professor would copy problems from the book (his book) on the overhead machine, and refuse to let you take notes in his class (because 'if you were writing, you weren't listening', but I remember things spatially, and remember things like 'that was on the bottom right of my page of notes'). And from just sitting there listening to him drone on, I fell asleep in *every* class, no matter the time of day.
The law also applies to titles of scientific journal articles.
Um ... http://xkcd.com/386/
What you're describing is a 'series hybrid', such as the Chevy Volt, although I wouldn't say 'continuously'. Unless they've made some change in the newer generation of Priuses (Priii?) are 'parallel hybrid', where both the electric motor and gas engine can turn the wheels.
You're obviously new to e-mail.
SMTP works through 'store and forward' ... and many systems won't alert that they've had a problem forwarding e-mail for at least 2 hours, possibly as many as 48.
So by then, your homework's late ... but what if it got caught up in a spam trap? Then you might get *no* indication that it wasn't delivered. When I worked for GW, we had a little incident when an update to our mail system's anti-virus flagged every e-mail with a 'w' in it ... and all of that e-mail was trashed.
I once went to a conference where the abstract submissions were via e-mail ... they ended up cutting the conference from 5 to 3 days because of the low number of submissions ... but it turned out that their spam filter had eaten over 50% of the submissions.
I took a class once where we had a take-home final; but the teacher e-mailed it to us. Luckily, I gave him more than one e-mail address, as my university e-mail was locked a few days before the final. (I worked for the university, and was fired for 'use of sarcasm'). The email account had been set up as a student e-mail account, but they refused to unlock it, and their system wouldn't let me create a new account as I already had one associated with my SSN. (I mean 'GW ID number ... it's just a conincidence that they were your SSN ... they'd never put those so that every adminstrator could see them, right?)
If you're going to take submissions electronicly, you'd be better off using FTP, or a website, or anything that has a positive confirmation that the file's actually been submitted.
Both CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-SA have never been clearly defined for research, where it's the ideas, not the specific document used to convey those ideas that matter.
So, for instance -- if I write a paper on using (MethodX) to solve (ProblemY1), and someone realizes that (MethodX) might also be able to solve (ProblemY2), are they allowed to do it, or using it in new ways a derivitive? What if they wrote a paper about their findings, is that a derivitive? How about if I realize that there's a larger (ProblemY), is that a derivitive? Or if I realized that I could improve on (MethodX), is that a derivitive? Or even if you just have another occurance of (ProblemY1), are you allowed to use this knowledge of (MethodX) to apply it to the problem, or is any application of the research considered a derivitive?
The other one that people suggest for papers is CC-BY-NC, thinking that it'd prevent someone from using the ideas in the paper from trying to create a business around the idea ... but does this also mean that you're not allowed to publish new research that builds in a CC-BY-NC paper in a for-profit journal? Or attempt to get grants to extend the work?
The CC licenses (other than CC0) just don't work for research articles. I'm not even sure if CC-BY really works. (it's one thing to cite a paper ... but does it chain? Do we have issues with publishers who limit number of items in a reference list?) How do you give attribution when it actually gets used? (Do you acknowledge the authors when you install a road using asphalt they developed, or during the grand opening, or every time someone drives on it?)
Yes, this all may seem pedantic, but the CC licenses were developed for a specific purpose, and it was *not* research. I was at a meeting a couple of years back (not sure if it was BRDI or DataCite, as they were back-to-back), where John Wilbanks (at the time with Science Commons) was recommending CC0 for research data, in part because of these problems.
(In the case of data, the discussion typically comes up as either 'Data Use' vs. 'Data Re-Use' or as 'Data Repurposing', or the greater concept of 'Data Policies')
Until we get these cleared up, CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-SA should *NOT* be used for publishing research.
I *never* had problem with cat3. But there are some makers of cat5 that use this annoying kinda shimery colors on their cables that make it damned hard to see brown vs. green in low light conditions (eg, when you're hunched over a wall plate, and you're blocking the ceiling light from shining in).
I just carried a flashlight. The other solution would be to buy from those who don't use those ugly pastel shades on their cables. (if the saturated stuff still exists; I now work in a place where we're not allowed to pull & terminate our own cables, so I only do it when helping friends every couple of years or so)
As I see it, the bigger problem is that once you get over a certain size, you have enough money to set up all of the string of businesses in Ireland, the Netherlands and the Cayman Islands to do your necessary tax dodging.
So if you said that companies over a certain size had a second fomula without all of the same deductions allowed, and they had to pay the greater of the two, then you've got something similar to our current AMT.
Just for starters ... lobbying should not be tax-exempt. Sure, it's typically a cost to the company and so counts against profits, but if you spend $50M/year on lobbying Congress to give you even more tax breaks, that should be taxed. Maybe add advertising, too. Or only allow deductions for direct salaries up to some amount (eg, 5x or 10x minimum wage)
Then, take all of the other loopholes that are being abused by companies to reduce their tax liability, and cap 'em so that you can only use them to take out something like 50% of your tax liability.
I don't know all of the numbers, so I can't give more specifics, but this would either show the absurdity of AMT on so many people, or raise some money from the corporations who don't like paying their fair share of taxes.
Sorry, I don't consider IP issues 'theft', although in this case, I'm not sure, as you actually *are* denying the original owner from using what they had. And as none of the administration would directly profit from this proposal, I'm going to go with Hanlon's Razor on the corruption interpretation :
(product of PG county schooling for grades K, 1, 6-12 ... and I don't care what the MNCPPC folks argue, there's nothing wrong with calling it PG. It's not like Chuck county, where we're potentially using it as an insult. (Charles just sounds too formal ... there are way too many SMIBs there for it to be formal))
I'm just thankful that we've made the news without any murders, theft, or corruption.
I thought that we had gotten rid of the idiotic school board when they disbanded it in 2002 and got Marilyn Bland and the others out of there. (although, we haven't gotten rid of her yet)
Just as with COBOL and Fortran, with the language being less popular, it's more difficult to find people who really know the language, so that they can maintain and develop existing systems.
Most of the people with strong knowledge aren't looking for new work. Those who still know Perl 4 are around, as are inexperienced folks who can write C in Perl. (you know the type -- using
vs.
or delaring and initializing every damned variable on its own line. Or keeping 4 parallel arrays around, when an array of hashes or array of arrays would make the code easier to work with. Ie, not knowing the shortcuts & efficiencies of a given language).
Some of what's in the perl 5 planning have me genuinely excited (see Jesse Vincent's many talks on the future of perl) ... perl 6 is a good idea, but the focus on was like Netscape deciding to rewrite Navigator from the ground up ... so much momentum was lost. We'll be better off when it's finally done, but the energy might've been better spent elsewhere.
My guess is that it has some information about how they could've saved money through other means (eg, not buying licenses for software for people who don't need it, etc.) ... which if other groups actually did, would cut into their profits.
No ... because that would be obvious to what they're doing ...
The 404 makes someone think that it's already been cleaned up and already been dealt with.
If it's MacOS X, go into the 'Universal Access' control panel, and there's a 'contrast' slider, and you can force greyscale, black on white, or white on black.
Most X windows managers have ways to do similar things, although in some you have to mess with configuration files.
No idea how to do it in Amiga or Haiku, though.
I've seen ones years ago that were PHP scripts that had different behavior based on who was coming in. (one of the more clever ones actually took over the site's main index ... but if the visitor was from the same domain as the server, it returned a near-duplicate of the original content and not the drug ads)
The 404 aspect does give me an idea that I think could make things trickier, but I'll be damned if I'm going to give spammers any ideas for things that they're not already using. (although, I guess it's possible that what I'm thinking of is what they're actually doing, but no security person would call a whitelist ... some person who's not really familiar with the security lingo might, though)
For years I've been saying we need something for dogs to keep them as puppies, so they're small and cute for life.
The problem is that you'd need enough time so that you could properly train them ... you'd want to make sure they could at least make it past the 'potty training' phase, or there'd be problems. (I think the litter training for cats happens faster).
But if you retard the mental development, that'd mean they could do all of the dumb puppy things that people find so cute. (Or cats ... I remember when my boss's cat was scared of a laser pointer, before she decided she should chase the dot)
And as for the person who pointed out that 5 years is middle aged for a cat ... we have dog years to work with. So the dog would be um .. (12 * 5 / 7 ) = 8.5 months old.
This person needs to be in charge of the investigation into the sub-prime mortgage fiasco.
Then maybe some charges will actually be brought against the people running these 'too big to fail' banks.
He obtained copies of the documents through automated means, but there has been no proof that he intended to distribute them (although that's what prosecutors claimed).
It's possible that he was planning on doing content analysis of the documents, for which he might've needed a sufficiently large corpus to do the analysis. (and if seems that JSTOR allows that sort of thing, but it wasn't well known, which my understanding was part of the reason they asked the case to be dropped; see http://about.jstor.org/news/jstor-statement-misuse-incident-and-criminal-case )
Yes, he did release the PACER documents -- but those were government files that should've been in the public domain; I view him to be like Carl Malamud in that regard : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Malamud .
I don't know about everyone else, but the last time I had a CT scan (I think it was a CT, I was pretty out of it), once I got done, I proceeded to puke it all up.
So yes, I see recycling it as a possibility.
Of course, they'd probably have released most people before it came out the more natural way, so unless they're holding someone for observation, and have them use a toilet that's specifically diverted, it'll be more difficult. (I doubt it'd be worth diverting *all* septic waste to check it for Barium)
ps. The bottle said 'pleasantly flavored'. The bottle lied.
So how well does it make popcorn?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089886/
Where have you been? C'mon... the walkman, trinitron ... minidisc!
Okay, sure minidisc wasn't popular in the US ... and they tried keeping CRTs around for too long due to trinitron ... but back in the 80s and 90s, Sony was way ahead in technology.
Even their laptops were considered years ahead in design 'til Apple put out the TiBook.
So, if you said 'behind on technology for the last 15 years', sure, I could agree ... but *always* behind? no. I mean, they had some of the most advanced rootkits for their time.
(in the bluray vs. hddvd wars, bluray wouldn't have won over HD-DVD if it hadn't taken payoffs to other companies and selling PS3s at a loss ... I refuse to change over to their crap format that just means that I'm forced to sit through 10 min of commercials every time I put in a disk)
If the code really sucks, it'll either teach him why it's bad code, or it'll bog him down enough that he doesn't have time to write new bad code.
If the code's working ... then you don't have to look at it. (but he still has time to write more)