Almost never will damages be covered. Come to think of it, I think in this case I can say "Damages will never be covered." You have to show value and proof of destruction of that value. Your homework being destroyed? Your dissertation being destroyed? While it may have a large amount of value to you, monetarily it has very little value. Lost homework is usually only about 1-3 weeks of lost work. Often less. Dissertations are a whole different beast.
A lost dissertation has a lot more value than sentimental value. You've spent X years of your life working on it, with the clear expectation that you have a high probability of getting a PhD. Having a PhD means getting a job that pays better than the pay of a graduate student. If graduate student pay is $Y, and reasonable post-doctoral pay is $Z, and you lost X years of work due to the bug, the monetary value of a lost dissertation is X*(Z-Y). This is assuming the entire dissertation can be recreated again, which in some cases is not possible.
As a PhD student in the social sciences, my graduate student pay is ~$15k on average. Starting PhD pay is ~$40k. It takes 7 years to get a PhD on average, but for realistic sake, lets say I've been working on my dissertation for 2.5 years (ignoring the time spent on comprehensive exams and coursework). Using these values in the formula above, I'd expect to lose $62,500 dollars if I had to start my dissertation from scratch. These values go much higher in the hard sciences, with little question.
Knowing this, I've got backups of stuff, because I'm not an idiot. But were I to lose everything, it'd be really, really hard for you to claim that my loss was minimal in monetary terms, and only a large loss in personal sentimental value. If someone were to maliciously burn down my home, including a large portion of my notes and drafts for my dissertation, you better believe I'm going to claim monetary losses on those. I fail to see how it's any different if a corporation's negligence does similar damage.
As a relativist, I believe it's Yahoo's right to choose whether or not to cooperate with the Chinese government.
The word "right" is an absolutist word. Relativists coherently can't believe in rights, as the word "right" implies a standard of correctness outside of one's own perspective. The best you can do, as a relativist who wishes to remain coherent, is to say "I think Yahoo can do whatever it wants." And Congress can then reply "I don't think it can!" And because you're a relativist, you've got no way to mitigate these two claims, because you certainly don't have access to the language of "rights."
I suppose you could just have no desire to be coherent. But if you're incoherent, you shouldn't really be too surprised when people don't respect your opinions.
The sign out front looks like it had a bigger budget than the room itself.
Truthfully, it looks just like any other conference room, except they have fewer food items in the cabinets, and the place looks much less professional. I dare say it even looks cheaply done.
Not quite a virtual partion, but I play World of Warcraft under Linux using Cedega. I assume that the Warden can only interact with other processes using Cedega (which isn't much).
I wonder if it would be possible to run bot like processes independent of Cedega, outside of the view of the windows API, but still on the same machine.
You should be making more than you're currently making. Generally a dumbass who takes a job as the entire IT department will not realize his true value.
Linguistically, there's sort of a reason for this. Let me point you to the definition of the word "artificial" from http://www.m-w.com/
Main Entry: artificial Pronunciation: "är-t&-'fi-sh&l Function: adjective 1 : humanly contrived often on a natural model : MAN-MADE 2 a : having existence in legal, economic, or political theory b : caused or produced by a human and especially social or political agency 3 obsolete : ARTFUL, CUNNING 4 a : lacking in natural or spontaneous quality b : IMITATION, SHAM 5 : based on differential morphological characters not necessarily indicative of natural relationships
Specifically, note definitions 1 and 4. Something that is artificial tends to be something man-made. In addition, it lacks a natural or spontaneous part to it. Thus, if things that are man made are, by definition, not natural, then it cannot be the case that a human caused fire is not a natural fire.
I agree with this statement. Undergraduate education in the United States is really geared towards a much more general (and balanced) degree than most people seem to realize. They require you to take things such as Social Sciences, Hard Sciences, and the like, in addition to the stuff that you are going to major in. If you are going to a University for the sole purpose of getting a well paying job, you're probably going to be surprised. Universities don't train you to be good workers, they are supposed to teach you to think and be relatively well balanced intellectually. Most of the other posts in this thread seem to agree with this by suggesting you get certifications and experience if you actually want to do work in Computer Networking.
That said, you can specialize in a specific field while still in the University requirement. As the parent to this post has said, you do this in graduate school. However, graduate school doesn't give you specialization that may be good for the job market. On the contrary, it may make you overspecialized, such that you've gone so far into theory that you no longer have any idea how stuff actually works in the real world. Going the full academic route is really on a good idea if you really care more for the field than you care for money.
Notice: I am am currently working on my PhD, but not in the field of Computer Science, or anything really computer related (I'm actually somewhere between a social science and philosophy). While I do not have first hand experience with graduate studies in Computer Science, I do have experience with graduate school in general, and while the concepts learned are different, the culture and process seems to be similar across all subjects. Your experiences may vary.
Most environmentalists (or at least, journalists writing on environmentalism) don't seem to grasp this.
I think most environmentalists who've thought about things for more than two seconds have grasped it, quite fully. This is why you see them doing things like riding their bikes places, giving up meat and dairy products, and cutting down on as much of their activity that could be associated with waste. These people know quite well that everything comes at a price, and their decision to be environmentally conscious has required rather significant changes to their lifestyle.
The people who don't grasp it are the ones driving a giant SUV down the coast of California, while at the same time saying its criminal that they spoiled the beautiful coast with oil wells. Those people aren't environmentalists.
Dissent appropriately took a very American form: the project's Washington monument had been replaced by a giant tower of tea crates; the baseball stadium rendered unusable by similar stacks; the Route 66 gas station set ablaze by an insurrectionist midget shooting off seditious fireworks.
Those insurrectionist midgets with seditious fireworks...sounds an awful lot like real life. One of those insurrectionist midgets attacked me the other day for my own stance on taxes. This is just another sign that the Internet mirrors real life rather realistically.
It means the Commadore was released more then 21 years ago, which is that age at which its legal to drink alcohol in the US. I believe the original release was in 1982.
The main advantage in this case is that they were already growing the macadamia nuts in the area, and they were already shelling them. The shells were then, previously, just being discarded. Because the "fuel" for this power plant was previously considered "waste", the result is much more efficient economically then a lot of things.
Think of it like this:
macadamia = shell + nut
Old equasion: profit = sale of nut - disposal of shell
New equasion: profit = sale of nut + electricity generation from shell
This, of course, assumes that the electricity produced from the shells can be sold at a profit that is greater than the cost of disposing of the nuts. From everything I've heard here, the power plant is relatively inexpensive to construct ($3 million), as such, the cost of electricity generation probably won't be that great. However, we'd need more data to say that for sure.
As an added bonus, the CO2 output is neutral over a single year. Ie: shell takes 1 year's worth of CO2 in as it grows, we then burn it, and 1 years worth of CO2 is released. Comparatively, coal takes in X number of years (thousands of years ago), we burn it, and it releases it into the atmosphere now, resulting in a gain in CO2 in the atmosphere.
Keep in mind that this means we won't be powering the entire country with macadamia nut shells. This plant only powers 1200 homes. The brilliant aspect of this is that its powered off of waste that was already present in the region. This would be similar to a facility that produces corn creating a power plant next to it that is fueled by corn husks and the unedible parts of the corn. Its simply just a comparative advantage. Its fuel that you have here and now, so there are little to no transportation costs. Even if another biomass is more efficient, you'd have to transport it to the generation facility, decreasing its overall efficiency.
Ideally, for something like this, you'd build lots of smaller facilities, wherever burnable bio-waste is produced. 1200 homes here, 1200 homes there, mix it with some solar and wind generation, and other alternative energies, and eventually the fossil fuel habit might be kicked.
My understanding is they had an existing facility that shells and cans macadamia nuts, and previously the shells were just being discarded as waste product. Someone had the bright idea to use the waste shells as fuel for a power plant. Basically, they just turned an expense (waste disposal) into a profit (electricity generation). And the facility only cost $3 million to create. All in all, I think this was an absolutely brilliant move.
The article doesn't really say how you would dial when you're immersed in complete sensory deprivation. I mean, your sense of sight, sound, and smell are supposedly completely removed by the device, and your body is supposed to be in body temperature water, getting rid of gravity and most of your touch. Wouldn't that make dialing a number difficult?
I suppose maybe you could only receive calls on the thing. But then, wouldn't it be impossible for two people to use them? If the point is to focus everything onto the conversation itself, if only one person has the experience, I imagine the person in the deprivation would be pretty pissed that the other person wasn't pay as much attention as they were.
Then again, this is a luxury item, and might only be available to executives for business calls. Perhaps they have their secretaries do all the dialing and then its just forwarded to the device, so they don't even have to worry about that aspect of it.
Ultimately, I think its impractical, though I'm glad that some people are doing truly innovative work. I give it a B for effort.
By providing Open Source software without a warranty, these largest vendors avoid significant costs while increasing their services revenue.
I was under the impression that most Proprietary software is offered without a warranty, and often without real support (unless you pay for additional support). Why is what's good for the goose not good for the gander?
If my ISP gave me a slick web interface that allowed me to open or block ports specific to when I connect, I'd be all for it. Set the defaults to block things, to protect against worms and the like, but if I want those ports open to do something, it should be easy for me to open them. I think that's the perfect middle ground. People who don't know (or care) will be protected. Those who care can easily do whatever they want. The ISP just has to make it clear where the options are.
You can't take a sample like "all IBM employees" and compare it to "all the people in the United States." Analysis needs to be tuned to a population that has a similar demographic. Age, geography, economic background, pollution, family history, smoking, and even diet affect cancer rates tremendously.
We're not talking about a small age difference here. Quote:
All of them died after contracting malignant illnesses, most of them succumbing in their 30's and 40's.
People dying of cancer in their thirties is not normal. Especially not when its several of them who worked in the same conditions. My understanding is that people who smoke chronically die of cancer in their 50s to 60s for the most part. These people are dying 10-30 years earlier then that, and it seems to be a significant number of them.
"If we'd known all this from the beginning," he said, "we'd never have gone to work for I.B.M. We'd all have become shoe salesmen or something."
This seems like an odd statement to me. I mean, if I had found out that I had gone to school for 4-12 years, and that my chosen field would involve toxic materials, I likely would have said "Hey, can I get some safety equipment to shield me from this stuff? Maybe some gloves and some lead garments?" not "Ah, well...I think its time to go sell women's shoes."
Despite that, I think the employees have a fairly good point. Even if IBM didn't know about the toxic conditions, it was IBM who put the employees there, and they should likely have to deal with the consequences. Its really sad that it had to turn out this way.
This is why someone needs to make a bittorrent like setup, only for the WWW and static content. IE: you go to a page that's setup with the webtorrent module for apache, and instead of directly loading the page, it goes to look for the files required on a torrent swarm before displaying them. Once you've got a displayed version on your machine, you then serve those files to other people looking for the site. Of course, if you have loads of bandwidth, the whole thing is horribly inefficient. But, this is slashdot, and we kill bandwidth all the time. But with a webtorrent setup, slashdotting would become near impossible.
Its too bad thinking up ideas doesn't instantly cause them to be coded, implemented, and widely accepted. Ah well.
MSN is not an interconnected mesh network. Microsoft is the only one who owns the servers. There are no other MSN servers other then the Microsoft servers.
It'd be more like Tim Berners Lee charging people who access his website with clients that block banner ads.
To the best of my knowledge, this move will completely lock out all Linux MSN clients. There are no third party clients which charge people, but there are a few free clients (GAIM, AMSN, etc) which have no way of raising money for a licensing fee.
Personally it just means I need to try and convince people to run Jabber. That's not an easy task mind you.
They know they don't tax income. They've made a conscious decision to not have a state income tax. The reason is because Florida is a heavily tourist based economy. They get a good deal of the state tax revenue from tourist related expenses. They do this because tourists don't vote, so they can't really complain about Florida's taxes, as opposed to Florida residents.
Florida attracts a decent number of business owners and other people to their state, because Folrida doesn't have a personal income tax. This is why many of the rich and famous have homes in Florida.
Slashdot Mirror
A lost dissertation has a lot more value than sentimental value. You've spent X years of your life working on it, with the clear expectation that you have a high probability of getting a PhD. Having a PhD means getting a job that pays better than the pay of a graduate student. If graduate student pay is $Y, and reasonable post-doctoral pay is $Z, and you lost X years of work due to the bug, the monetary value of a lost dissertation is X*(Z-Y). This is assuming the entire dissertation can be recreated again, which in some cases is not possible.
As a PhD student in the social sciences, my graduate student pay is ~$15k on average. Starting PhD pay is ~$40k. It takes 7 years to get a PhD on average, but for realistic sake, lets say I've been working on my dissertation for 2.5 years (ignoring the time spent on comprehensive exams and coursework). Using these values in the formula above, I'd expect to lose $62,500 dollars if I had to start my dissertation from scratch. These values go much higher in the hard sciences, with little question.
Knowing this, I've got backups of stuff, because I'm not an idiot. But were I to lose everything, it'd be really, really hard for you to claim that my loss was minimal in monetary terms, and only a large loss in personal sentimental value. If someone were to maliciously burn down my home, including a large portion of my notes and drafts for my dissertation, you better believe I'm going to claim monetary losses on those. I fail to see how it's any different if a corporation's negligence does similar damage.
The word "right" is an absolutist word. Relativists coherently can't believe in rights, as the word "right" implies a standard of correctness outside of one's own perspective. The best you can do, as a relativist who wishes to remain coherent, is to say "I think Yahoo can do whatever it wants." And Congress can then reply "I don't think it can!" And because you're a relativist, you've got no way to mitigate these two claims, because you certainly don't have access to the language of "rights."
I suppose you could just have no desire to be coherent. But if you're incoherent, you shouldn't really be too surprised when people don't respect your opinions.
The sign out front looks like it had a bigger budget than the room itself.
Truthfully, it looks just like any other conference room, except they have fewer food items in the cabinets, and the place looks much less professional. I dare say it even looks cheaply done.
Not quite a virtual partion, but I play World of Warcraft under Linux using Cedega. I assume that the Warden can only interact with other processes using Cedega (which isn't much).
I wonder if it would be possible to run bot like processes independent of Cedega, outside of the view of the windows API, but still on the same machine.
You should be making more than you're currently making. Generally a dumbass who takes a job as the entire IT department will not realize his true value.
Linguistically, there's sort of a reason for this. Let me point you to the definition of the word "artificial" from http://www.m-w.com/
Main Entry: artificial
Pronunciation: "är-t&-'fi-sh&l
Function: adjective
1 : humanly contrived often on a natural model : MAN-MADE
2 a : having existence in legal, economic, or political theory b : caused or produced by a human and especially social or political agency
3 obsolete : ARTFUL, CUNNING
4 a : lacking in natural or spontaneous quality b : IMITATION, SHAM
5 : based on differential morphological characters not necessarily indicative of natural relationships
Specifically, note definitions 1 and 4. Something that is artificial tends to be something man-made. In addition, it lacks a natural or spontaneous part to it. Thus, if things that are man made are, by definition, not natural, then it cannot be the case that a human caused fire is not a natural fire.
I agree with this statement. Undergraduate education in the United States is really geared towards a much more general (and balanced) degree than most people seem to realize. They require you to take things such as Social Sciences, Hard Sciences, and the like, in addition to the stuff that you are going to major in. If you are going to a University for the sole purpose of getting a well paying job, you're probably going to be surprised. Universities don't train you to be good workers, they are supposed to teach you to think and be relatively well balanced intellectually. Most of the other posts in this thread seem to agree with this by suggesting you get certifications and experience if you actually want to do work in Computer Networking.
That said, you can specialize in a specific field while still in the University requirement. As the parent to this post has said, you do this in graduate school. However, graduate school doesn't give you specialization that may be good for the job market. On the contrary, it may make you overspecialized, such that you've gone so far into theory that you no longer have any idea how stuff actually works in the real world. Going the full academic route is really on a good idea if you really care more for the field than you care for money.
Notice: I am am currently working on my PhD, but not in the field of Computer Science, or anything really computer related (I'm actually somewhere between a social science and philosophy). While I do not have first hand experience with graduate studies in Computer Science, I do have experience with graduate school in general, and while the concepts learned are different, the culture and process seems to be similar across all subjects. Your experiences may vary.
Debian/Unstable can install 2.6.0 a regular apt-get install at this very moment. Its just something like:
apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.0-1-processor type
If you're running stable, you shouldn't be running a 2.6 kernel anyway.
Mr. Toad's Wild Ride is still open and running in Disney Land. They only closed the Walt Disney World version in 1998.
The people who don't grasp it are the ones driving a giant SUV down the coast of California, while at the same time saying its criminal that they spoiled the beautiful coast with oil wells. Those people aren't environmentalists.
It means the Commadore was released more then 21 years ago, which is that age at which its legal to drink alcohol in the US. I believe the original release was in 1982.
The main advantage in this case is that they were already growing the macadamia nuts in the area, and they were already shelling them. The shells were then, previously, just being discarded. Because the "fuel" for this power plant was previously considered "waste", the result is much more efficient economically then a lot of things.
Think of it like this:
macadamia = shell + nut
Old equasion:
profit = sale of nut - disposal of shell
New equasion:
profit = sale of nut + electricity generation from shell
This, of course, assumes that the electricity produced from the shells can be sold at a profit that is greater than the cost of disposing of the nuts. From everything I've heard here, the power plant is relatively inexpensive to construct ($3 million), as such, the cost of electricity generation probably won't be that great. However, we'd need more data to say that for sure.
As an added bonus, the CO2 output is neutral over a single year. Ie: shell takes 1 year's worth of CO2 in as it grows, we then burn it, and 1 years worth of CO2 is released. Comparatively, coal takes in X number of years (thousands of years ago), we burn it, and it releases it into the atmosphere now, resulting in a gain in CO2 in the atmosphere.
Keep in mind that this means we won't be powering the entire country with macadamia nut shells. This plant only powers 1200 homes. The brilliant aspect of this is that its powered off of waste that was already present in the region. This would be similar to a facility that produces corn creating a power plant next to it that is fueled by corn husks and the unedible parts of the corn. Its simply just a comparative advantage. Its fuel that you have here and now, so there are little to no transportation costs. Even if another biomass is more efficient, you'd have to transport it to the generation facility, decreasing its overall efficiency.
Ideally, for something like this, you'd build lots of smaller facilities, wherever burnable bio-waste is produced. 1200 homes here, 1200 homes there, mix it with some solar and wind generation, and other alternative energies, and eventually the fossil fuel habit might be kicked.
My understanding is they had an existing facility that shells and cans macadamia nuts, and previously the shells were just being discarded as waste product. Someone had the bright idea to use the waste shells as fuel for a power plant. Basically, they just turned an expense (waste disposal) into a profit (electricity generation). And the facility only cost $3 million to create. All in all, I think this was an absolutely brilliant move.
The article doesn't really say how you would dial when you're immersed in complete sensory deprivation. I mean, your sense of sight, sound, and smell are supposedly completely removed by the device, and your body is supposed to be in body temperature water, getting rid of gravity and most of your touch. Wouldn't that make dialing a number difficult?
I suppose maybe you could only receive calls on the thing. But then, wouldn't it be impossible for two people to use them? If the point is to focus everything onto the conversation itself, if only one person has the experience, I imagine the person in the deprivation would be pretty pissed that the other person wasn't pay as much attention as they were.
Then again, this is a luxury item, and might only be available to executives for business calls. Perhaps they have their secretaries do all the dialing and then its just forwarded to the device, so they don't even have to worry about that aspect of it.
Ultimately, I think its impractical, though I'm glad that some people are doing truly innovative work. I give it a B for effort.
If my ISP gave me a slick web interface that allowed me to open or block ports specific to when I connect, I'd be all for it. Set the defaults to block things, to protect against worms and the like, but if I want those ports open to do something, it should be easy for me to open them. I think that's the perfect middle ground. People who don't know (or care) will be protected. Those who care can easily do whatever they want. The ISP just has to make it clear where the options are.
We're not talking about a small age difference here. Quote:
People dying of cancer in their thirties is not normal. Especially not when its several of them who worked in the same conditions. My understanding is that people who smoke chronically die of cancer in their 50s to 60s for the most part. These people are dying 10-30 years earlier then that, and it seems to be a significant number of them.
Despite that, I think the employees have a fairly good point. Even if IBM didn't know about the toxic conditions, it was IBM who put the employees there, and they should likely have to deal with the consequences. Its really sad that it had to turn out this way.
This is why someone needs to make a bittorrent like setup, only for the WWW and static content. IE: you go to a page that's setup with the webtorrent module for apache, and instead of directly loading the page, it goes to look for the files required on a torrent swarm before displaying them. Once you've got a displayed version on your machine, you then serve those files to other people looking for the site. Of course, if you have loads of bandwidth, the whole thing is horribly inefficient. But, this is slashdot, and we kill bandwidth all the time. But with a webtorrent setup, slashdotting would become near impossible.
Its too bad thinking up ideas doesn't instantly cause them to be coded, implemented, and widely accepted. Ah well.
MSN is not an interconnected mesh network. Microsoft is the only one who owns the servers. There are no other MSN servers other then the Microsoft servers.
It'd be more like Tim Berners Lee charging people who access his website with clients that block banner ads.
To the best of my knowledge, this move will completely lock out all Linux MSN clients. There are no third party clients which charge people, but there are a few free clients (GAIM, AMSN, etc) which have no way of raising money for a licensing fee.
Personally it just means I need to try and convince people to run Jabber. That's not an easy task mind you.
Florida attracts a decent number of business owners and other people to their state, because Folrida doesn't have a personal income tax. This is why many of the rich and famous have homes in Florida.