It's good to see a school like GA Tech actually make a change like that. It's not about people breaking the rules to get those in charge to loosen the rules by sheer mass ('Everyone's doing it, it's simply not enforcable'), it's about breaking the rules to get those in charge to bloody look AT the rules, and see how applicable they are now in comparison to when the rules were originally written. It's heartening that at least one group of people knows how to do this nowadays...
Now, imagine if only a government would do something like that. Gee, what a novel concept...
"U.S. citizens: Ours is not to question why, ours is to bend over and expose our behinds..."
If this is a court in Germany, about a machine physically located -in- Germany, then yes, it's okay for German laws to be applied in court.
Consider, for a moment, the alternative. Right now, countries around the world are allowed to apply laws generally according to geographic boundaries. What's the alternative to this? An international organization/body that would most likely be given the ability to dictate law at an international level. As things are now, people like the members of RIAA, MPAA, etc., would have to bribe- err, 'finance' politicians of each country in question, to further their agendas. But suppose there were only one body to deal with...?
The DMCA is in effect, the CBDTPA is on the board (and will most likely be pared down to 'show a positive, cooperative attitude, willing to come to the table and compromise' - BS ), and who knows what we'll face in the US in the future. They've done it in the US, just imagine if these same groups could do it internationally with relative easy (read, 'plenty of $')...
"As it was with the Romans conquering new lands, so is it with installing software packages. One must learn who and how to worship for each one, lest the accompanying patron god smite thee..." - me
Now, if M$ products are deemed as an integral part of US infrastructure to the point M$ is claiming, would that mean the US government would be able to seize control of such in a 'time of emergency,' just as it can other things deemed 'integral to US infrastructure'...?
My father's currently admining for a state government, and had something to say on the subject about a recent hiring experience. With the crunch recently on the tech industry, the majority of people dropped were comparitively recent-hires. With less actual 'hands on experience', they've come in direct competition with those recently graduated and just entering the job market with their freshly printed diplomas. In short, it's a hard market right now, much moreso for those with less practical experience.
In terms of certifications, it depends on who's doing the hiring. 'Techno-savvy' managers are likely to outright dismiss certifications and look at experience above all else (including education). Managers who are less technically inclined are the ones who are impressed by certifications and education.
And lastly for experience, in my father's example he was looking for around five years experience minimum... and out of the hundreds who applied, only 6 had that kind of experience... It's quite the buyer's market right now, and experience can go a -long- way.
Well, good thing I brought Jetfire with me on my flight last Dec... Still though, I wonder what they're afraid of? Granted, Jetfire's a decent size and has a bit of heft to him, but I just can't picture myself holding a stewardess in one arm (... okay, scratch that, I most certainly CAN imagine that bit... ) and waving Jetfire around in my other hand. "Don't come any closer or I'll bash her good!"
Then again, I personally can't see holding a plane hostage effectively with a box-cutter, but it's obviously been done......
Now, if a bunch of people such as, say.../.'ers, joined onto the forum at Pets Warehouse and made numerous defaming remarks about a news service such as, oh, I don't know, maybe.../. for coverage of this news story, couldn't this guy be held responsible for the remarks of people on his board, were said news service to go after him, as he himself is doing? I'm sure plenty of people have had 'bad experiences' with/. they could cite, so it certainly wouldn't be lying, and the forum is free for you to join and be a member of, right?
Granted, this is merely a hypothetical situation (and probably wouldn't work against someone like Pets Warehouse (aka. 'it's hard to con a con-man')), but how would something like this work in real life? Say, there is no 'evidence' of some kind of 'conspiracy' beyond a statement that is clearly stated to be nothing more than hypothetical and the author goes on to make a disclaimer about use of said hypothetical (btw, I take no responsibility for how others may use the ideas presented in this post, I am merely posting to present a hypothetical situation in order to explore the legal ramifications of the actions resulting from following said hypothetical situation).
Could things be twisted around enough so that the prosecuting party has to prove the poster is legit, and not just someone from that hypothetical situation? I mean, could it really be considered to be 'libel' or something that would lead to 'a loss of money' if the poster has never bought anything from the company in the first place (anyone know enough about law to provide some enlightenment on this point)? Now imagine burdening the company with producing 'proof' that the poster is even a valid customer to begin with, and let's see how it would affect people who want to try stuff like this. And if the company has to provide such 'proof', how easy would it be to take it a step further and make the records 'talk' in court? If the records show poor performance on the company's side (as it would appear with Pets Warehouse), how would that look to the judge...?
Now, that might not have been worded the best and I feel like I'm rambling, but you should get general underlying ideas...
MST3K commentary! Also, fandubbing my own anime comes to mind more and more...
This -does- make me wonder, though, if/when our friends in the MPAA would do something about this, trying to blur what defines a 'derivative work'. Look up 'The Wind Done Gone' sometime, a parody of 'Gone With the Wind' that re-tells the story from a different viewpoint. The Margaret Mitchell estate tried to sue the author, but fortunately was unsuccessful with the attempt. Still though, were truly big media to flex political muscle/money, who knows what they can do. After all, look at the DMCA and CBDTPA...
Gee, I suddenly have a gift idea for all my friends: a new ergonomic keyboard. 'Oh, don't pay attention to the Scroll Lock light flickering now and then, this particular model is known for that...'
Damn, imagine if the BSA ever got to use guns. *shudder*
As long as I've been a member of the Boy Scouts of America, I can't help but imagine hordes of Boy Scouts pouring through doors, windows, etc, all dressed in Class A uniform in some raid...:3
User: Yes, I got a copy of Office, and my computer hasn't acted the same ever since.
M$: Okay, what operating system are you running?
User: Linux-Mandrake 8.1, with Gnome for m-
M$: (breaking in) Excuse me sir, but did you say Linux?
User: Yeah...
M$: I'm sorry sir, but I can't give you support.
User:... What??
M$: I can't help you.
User: But it says I have support on the box! I called the number that was there, and got you!
M$: Well yes, that's the number for Micro$oft's main tech support. For Linux, I need to transfer you to our Linux support area. Hold please...
(user gets put on hold, with comercials for M$'s line of products. HOURS later, finally gets fed up and hangs up)
User: (looking at computer) Damn machine! If I'd stuck with Windows instead of changing to Linux, I'd never have this problem...(muttermutter, grumble)
Oh yes, I can see how remedies like this can really help someone. Compatability is good, compatability is great. But why doesn't the gov't do something like... make M$ open up their file 'standards' instead or something...?
Yes, I'm going to bitch a little here. Being a bit of a war-buff, something in the Rueter's article caught my eye. It reads:
In an earlier high-profile find, ADC was testing equipment in late 2000 off Havana Bay when it spotted the century-old wreck of the American battleship USS Maine. The ship had not been located since it blew up mysteriously in 1898, killing 260 American sailors and igniting the Spanish-American War.
That's very odd to hear, considering the Maine explosion was investigated the second time in 1911, then the ship was raised and finally sunk off the coast of Cuba in early 1912. Read more about the Maine here.
Ironic, how the Maine incident was pointed at and derided as an example of 'yellow journalism' to stir up war, when most people never really notice how 'yellow' our journalism is today...
Defendants moved to dismiss the suit by seeking protection from a California law written to protect individuals from retaliatory lawsuits by corporations that feel they have been disparaged. These are referred to as "Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation," or SLAPP lawsuits.
It speaks of gases from combustion powering this, but I wonder why. I mean, are we talking pressure here primarily, what? How much pressure does it need for each turbine? Could you pipe a gas through it from other sources, if all you need is a gas to turn these turbines?
I'm imagining a two bladder system: one under heel, one in mid-step with ducted turbines between. Step on the 'heel bladder', push gas through ducts for power one way, take pressure off again, suck gas back into chamber under the heel for turbines configured the other way, with one-way valves to regulate flow each way. Have an accordion pump where I can sit and 'pump-power' my laptop with my foot?
Dunno all the operating parameters involved for these micro turbines, just some thoughts...
Personally, I'm not interested in this historical project of finding which guesses were right, or Tech TV style observations of "Gee Whiz, isn't this tech great!" I'm more interested with the dialog about future trends, and more of our society thinking about the future.
On a side note, it seems that predictive science fiction is drawing back its horizons more and more. It seems good predictive science fiction is concerned with the next few years, maybe a few generations at most, while hundreds to thousands of years in the future is the domain of fantastical science fiction and lite sci-fi shows. Is this because all the predictive science fiction writers are having a hard time thinking past the singularity?
Well, take a look at what these former sci-fi authors -wrote- about. In those days, there was a space program that actually had strong funding (gotta love the Cold War...) and strong public backing. Mankind was going into space, and dammit, it was a BIG THING. Now, I have a hard time finding out from mainstream media that a US Space Shuttle has either launched, landed, or has done something in space besides working with some X million dollar experiment that: a. has been faulty on the ground, b. has been faulty in deployment, c. is the pet project of politician Y who the media happens to like at the time, d. has to deal with some 'controversial' experimentation, or e. deals with something that is 'trully innovative' in the eyes of media.
Look at the writings of people like Asimov, or Herbert. Now be brutally honest: how many of the events with dates attached to them, or short 'windows of time' from when they were written (anything less than 40 years, pretty much), have actually happened? Look at sci-fi now. Just how many authors actually put dates on events, or write of events in that short 'window of time' of 40 years or less from now? By 2001, Arthur Clarke had us sending a manned exploration mission to Jupiter. Now 2001 is almost over, and we can barely keep a handful of people up in a severely under-funded tin-can called the ISS.
I think authors currently writing have seen what has happened with such 'predictions' to date, and have taken a lesson from it all. It's easy to write about events 'X hundred/thousand years/generations' from now, but it's damned hard to write about things in just 10 to 20 years from now...
Wether or not Asimov completely developed the Three Laws of Robotics on his own, he certainly fleshed them out through his numerous 'robot stories'.
After all, it's one thing to come up with an 'arbitrary set of rules' for robot behavior; while it's quite another to then go and probe all the paradoxes and pretty much attempt to 'stress test' the ins and outs of said rules.
I'm certainly not involved in robotics or the development of AI myself, but I don't imagine there would be many researchers in those fields who would say the Three Laws have not affected 'professional thinking' in those fields, wether positively or negatively.
This little snippit caught my eye: The problem isn't the desktop metaphor at all--it's that we're trying to use our personal computers for tasks they weren't meant to perform. Peel those tasks away to specialized devices--music to MP3 players, films to movie players, news and information to specialized readers--and you've solved the desktop metaphor problem. Each device will evolve its own best interface, depending on its specialized use.
I can't really see how this person is supposed to be seen as 'forward-thinking'. I mean, just how many various failed 'appliances' have we seen offered at discount/clearout, with X number of Linux hacks in recent months? For the current time, appliances have been tried and have been found wanting.
Another snippit: You could verbally ask your Web browser to go to CNN Online. While you're there, the browser might observe where you look on the page and offer pages with related content for viewing--in theory making it virtually effortless to get what you want from your computer at all times without having to stop at the desktop.And at the same time, make it virtually effortless to get what we don't want. You think pop-ups are bad now, imagine it they did things if you just look at the buggers ("the user is looking at the icon, therefor he/she has an interest in the product!"). Only one good thing I could see from it: the replacement for click-through banner ads. Advertising is for getting the attention of the consumer, in getting the company's/product's name/image/whatever out there for people to look at (think billboards, magazine/newspaper spreads, television spots, they don't require any action comparable to a banner ad 'click-through'). Just imagine what would happen to all those companies if they had to pay site owners 'per eye view' of their ads, for the site owner renting out part of their space for the ad.;)
My Big Brother can beat up your Big Brother any day!
Worked at a computer distributor in GA for a while, first in the shipping, then in the tech dept. We'd get shipments via UPS, FedEx, and other smaller carriers who's names I've forgotten since then. Here are some of my experiences:
UPS: had the worst computer parts/systems shipping, we'd often get packages beat to Hell. And this was back in late '97. By the time I got there, the company had figured which parts they could ship via UPS, in terms of durability. When people would ask us to ship via UPS, but if they -insisted-, well... the customer's always right, right?;) FedEx: between the two 'big names,' FedEx treated the packages better, and often the FedEx people we dealt with were much nicer. Maybe we were towards the end of a hard run for the UPS guys, I don't know. the 'other' guys: often, these smaller carriers had service that came out -better- than the big boys. Sure, they didn't have the bells and whistles of online tracking and whathaveyou in those days, but our packages came through very well (barring an accident involving a forklift and a pallet stacked with monitors). I think the smaller carriers treated our stuff better, because they -had- to. Customers are -much- more important to the smaller carriers. UPS can lose unsatisfied customers by the couple hundred, but the smaller carriers would just about shrivel up and blow away with a loss that big.
NO CARRIER. But we still have a frigate and a destroyer...
Thing with the ISS, is that at it's current state, with current budget, it won't make money, nor will it be of all that much use. In order to make money and/or become actually useful, the budget and support would need to be increased from where levels currently are. The long term possibilities of the ISS are being short-changed by continual budget cuts now. They're in a Catch 22; budget keeps getting cut because the ISS isn't "returning the investiment", while the ISS won't "return the investiment" without being grown to more than it is now.
In any kind of 'asteroid mining', the venture would be taken in the first place for profit. It'd be a process of 'go to asteroid, grab asteroid, bring it back.' End of mission. There would be none of this maintainence like what they have to do for the IIS; just go, grab, and bring back for (hopefully) profit. If seen as economically feasible, operations would grow from there, with money prompting growth and improvement.
I'm certainly not an expert, but this is how I think things might be done. Probe to asteroid, which would wind up straping a small booster to the asteroid, and move it into an earth orbit (picking a small one for starters, of course). With the Apollo program, we know we can handle free-fall re-entry of things the size of the Apollo command capsule. Strap on some small manuvering thrusters, main recovery parachutes, and some kind of inflatable recovery for when it hits the water. Send up a convex heatshield in segments in the Space Shuttle, assembled by the crew in space, attach to asteroid. Have the heatshield work much like the Apollo command capsule; proportionate to keep the center of gravity where it needs to be, and big enough in diameter so the asteroid stays in the shield's slipstream (I guess that's the best word for what I'm thinking). Manuevering thrusters get it into position and send it down, letting gravity and air resistance do their work.
It won't stay in space, we just don't have the facilities/capabilities. First 'mined asteroids' will need to be brought down to earth until we figure out what the hell we're going to do with 'em, how we can do it in space, and if it'll be economically feasible to even bother with. If things fail and it burns up in the atmosphere (with the manuevering thrusters, it's downward path will be generally 'guided' (we hope) into the ocean anyways if it doesn't burn up), no big loss, maybe just some brief, bad press. If it's some kind of manned operation and things screw up... someone would have hell to pay when the media gets hold of them.
Some of the X-box kiosks I've seen, have a huge list of games, but guess what... only TWO THINGS are listed as 'interactive'; the Oddworld demo, and at the bottom of the list... hold your breath for this one... the 'Microsoft Legal Information'.
That's right, an 'interactive' dose of bloody freakin' M$ legalese. I tell ya, I'm about as excited to go through that as I would be playing with a 'Molest Me Elmo'.
I'm going to hold off before I start comparing these systems, as titles are released that actualy -utilize- the systems to fuller potential. I mean, imagine what it would have been like, judging the PS2 by watching/playing a demo of 'Fantavision'... In the meanwhile, I'll just play 'Devil May Cry' and continue to hasten the day for the onset of arthritis in my thumbs.
My father was contracted as a network admin for the CDC in Atlanta, and would tell us of the multiple Tb of storage used in the facility.
That was in '97... so one can only imagine what they're at now.
But just imagine how fun it could be that day, talking circles around Joe Sixpack. "See, it says 'PB' right there on this box! This is one of the brand new Peanut Butter drives, uses the proteins in the peanut butter to form an organic data matrix,."
The Corporations of America (angelic singing), eyes shining with profit margins, held forth a Trade Agreement which your government signed, signifying that you, Country ________, was to be whored out and globalized!
A waist is a terrible thing to mind. Hey, wait a minute...
Slashdot Mirror
"Your mind is like a parachute. If it doesn't work, you're screwed." - me
Now, imagine if only a government would do something like that. Gee, what a novel concept...
"U.S. citizens: Ours is not to question why, ours is to bend over and expose our behinds..."
Consider, for a moment, the alternative. Right now, countries around the world are allowed to apply laws generally according to geographic boundaries. What's the alternative to this? An international organization/body that would most likely be given the ability to dictate law at an international level. As things are now, people like the members of RIAA, MPAA, etc., would have to bribe- err, 'finance' politicians of each country in question, to further their agendas. But suppose there were only one body to deal with...?
The DMCA is in effect, the CBDTPA is on the board (and will most likely be pared down to 'show a positive, cooperative attitude, willing to come to the table and compromise' - BS ), and who knows what we'll face in the US in the future. They've done it in the US, just imagine if these same groups could do it internationally with relative easy (read, 'plenty of $')...
"As it was with the Romans conquering new lands, so is it with installing software packages. One must learn who and how to worship for each one, lest the accompanying patron god smite thee..." - me
THERE'S a thought to ponder upon......
In terms of certifications, it depends on who's doing the hiring. 'Techno-savvy' managers are likely to outright dismiss certifications and look at experience above all else (including education). Managers who are less technically inclined are the ones who are impressed by certifications and education.
And lastly for experience, in my father's example he was looking for around five years experience minimum... and out of the hundreds who applied, only 6 had that kind of experience... It's quite the buyer's market right now, and experience can go a -long- way.
Then again, I personally can't see holding a plane hostage effectively with a box-cutter, but it's obviously been done......
Granted, this is merely a hypothetical situation (and probably wouldn't work against someone like Pets Warehouse (aka. 'it's hard to con a con-man')), but how would something like this work in real life? Say, there is no 'evidence' of some kind of 'conspiracy' beyond a statement that is clearly stated to be nothing more than hypothetical and the author goes on to make a disclaimer about use of said hypothetical (btw, I take no responsibility for how others may use the ideas presented in this post, I am merely posting to present a hypothetical situation in order to explore the legal ramifications of the actions resulting from following said hypothetical situation).
Could things be twisted around enough so that the prosecuting party has to prove the poster is legit, and not just someone from that hypothetical situation? I mean, could it really be considered to be 'libel' or something that would lead to 'a loss of money' if the poster has never bought anything from the company in the first place (anyone know enough about law to provide some enlightenment on this point)? Now imagine burdening the company with producing 'proof' that the poster is even a valid customer to begin with, and let's see how it would affect people who want to try stuff like this. And if the company has to provide such 'proof', how easy would it be to take it a step further and make the records 'talk' in court? If the records show poor performance on the company's side (as it would appear with Pets Warehouse), how would that look to the judge...?
Now, that might not have been worded the best and I feel like I'm rambling, but you should get general underlying ideas...
This -does- make me wonder, though, if/when our friends in the MPAA would do something about this, trying to blur what defines a 'derivative work'. Look up 'The Wind Done Gone' sometime, a parody of 'Gone With the Wind' that re-tells the story from a different viewpoint. The Margaret Mitchell estate tried to sue the author, but fortunately was unsuccessful with the attempt. Still though, were truly big media to flex political muscle/money, who knows what they can do. After all, look at the DMCA and CBDTPA...
-Mudpuppy
"Carpe vitam globis!"
'Carpe vitam globis!'
As long as I've been a member of the Boy Scouts of America, I can't help but imagine hordes of Boy Scouts pouring through doors, windows, etc, all dressed in Class A uniform in some raid...
User: Yes, I got a copy of Office, and my computer hasn't acted the same ever since.
M$: Okay, what operating system are you running?
User: Linux-Mandrake 8.1, with Gnome for m-
M$: (breaking in) Excuse me sir, but did you say Linux?
User: Yeah...
M$: I'm sorry sir, but I can't give you support.
User:
M$: I can't help you.
User: But it says I have support on the box! I called the number that was there, and got you!
M$: Well yes, that's the number for Micro$oft's main tech support. For Linux, I need to transfer you to our Linux support area. Hold please...
(user gets put on hold, with comercials for M$'s line of products. HOURS later, finally gets fed up and hangs up)
User: (looking at computer) Damn machine! If I'd stuck with Windows instead of changing to Linux, I'd never have this problem...(muttermutter, grumble)
Oh yes, I can see how remedies like this can really help someone. Compatability is good, compatability is great. But why doesn't the gov't do something like... make M$ open up their file 'standards' instead or something...?
In an earlier high-profile find, ADC was testing equipment in late 2000 off Havana Bay when it spotted the century-old wreck of the American battleship USS Maine. The ship had not been located since it blew up mysteriously in 1898, killing 260 American sailors and igniting the Spanish-American War.
That's very odd to hear, considering the Maine explosion was investigated the second time in 1911, then the ship was raised and finally sunk off the coast of Cuba in early 1912. Read more about the Maine here.
Ironic, how the Maine incident was pointed at and derided as an example of 'yellow journalism' to stir up war, when most people never really notice how 'yellow' our journalism is today...
Your mind is like a parachute: if it doesn't work, you're screwed.
Defendants moved to dismiss the suit by seeking protection from a California law written to protect individuals from retaliatory lawsuits by corporations that feel they have been disparaged. These are referred to as "Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation," or SLAPP lawsuits.
Ah, the irony in a name...
Current motto: Carpe vitae globis!
I'm imagining a two bladder system: one under heel, one in mid-step with ducted turbines between. Step on the 'heel bladder', push gas through ducts for power one way, take pressure off again, suck gas back into chamber under the heel for turbines configured the other way, with one-way valves to regulate flow each way. Have an accordion pump where I can sit and 'pump-power' my laptop with my foot?
Dunno all the operating parameters involved for these micro turbines, just some thoughts...
On a side note, it seems that predictive science fiction is drawing back its horizons more and more. It seems good predictive science fiction is concerned with the next few years, maybe a few generations at most, while hundreds to thousands of years in the future is the domain of fantastical science fiction and lite sci-fi shows. Is this because all the predictive science fiction writers are having a hard time thinking past the singularity?
Well, take a look at what these former sci-fi authors -wrote- about. In those days, there was a space program that actually had strong funding (gotta love the Cold War...) and strong public backing. Mankind was going into space, and dammit, it was a BIG THING. Now, I have a hard time finding out from mainstream media that a US Space Shuttle has either launched, landed, or has done something in space besides working with some X million dollar experiment that: a. has been faulty on the ground, b. has been faulty in deployment, c. is the pet project of politician Y who the media happens to like at the time, d. has to deal with some 'controversial' experimentation, or e. deals with something that is 'trully innovative' in the eyes of media.
Look at the writings of people like Asimov, or Herbert. Now be brutally honest: how many of the events with dates attached to them, or short 'windows of time' from when they were written (anything less than 40 years, pretty much), have actually happened? Look at sci-fi now. Just how many authors actually put dates on events, or write of events in that short 'window of time' of 40 years or less from now? By 2001, Arthur Clarke had us sending a manned exploration mission to Jupiter. Now 2001 is almost over, and we can barely keep a handful of people up in a severely under-funded tin-can called the ISS.
I think authors currently writing have seen what has happened with such 'predictions' to date, and have taken a lesson from it all. It's easy to write about events 'X hundred/thousand years/generations' from now, but it's damned hard to write about things in just 10 to 20 years from now...
-and actually get it right.
After all, it's one thing to come up with an 'arbitrary set of rules' for robot behavior; while it's quite another to then go and probe all the paradoxes and pretty much attempt to 'stress test' the ins and outs of said rules.
I'm certainly not involved in robotics or the development of AI myself, but I don't imagine there would be many researchers in those fields who would say the Three Laws have not affected 'professional thinking' in those fields, wether positively or negatively.
...
Okay, nevermind.
Blessed are the geek, for they shall admin as root.
The problem isn't the desktop metaphor at all--it's that we're trying to use our personal computers for tasks they weren't meant to perform. Peel those tasks away to specialized devices--music to MP3 players, films to movie players, news and information to specialized readers--and you've solved the desktop metaphor problem. Each device will evolve its own best interface, depending on its specialized use.
I can't really see how this person is supposed to be seen as 'forward-thinking'. I mean, just how many various failed 'appliances' have we seen offered at discount/clearout, with X number of Linux hacks in recent months? For the current time, appliances have been tried and have been found wanting.
Another snippit: ;)
You could verbally ask your Web browser to go to CNN Online. While you're there, the browser might observe where you look on the page and offer pages with related content for viewing--in theory making it virtually effortless to get what you want from your computer at all times without having to stop at the desktop.And at the same time, make it virtually effortless to get what we don't want. You think pop-ups are bad now, imagine it they did things if you just look at the buggers ("the user is looking at the icon, therefor he/she has an interest in the product!"). Only one good thing I could see from it: the replacement for click-through banner ads. Advertising is for getting the attention of the consumer, in getting the company's/product's name/image/whatever out there for people to look at (think billboards, magazine/newspaper spreads, television spots, they don't require any action comparable to a banner ad 'click-through'). Just imagine what would happen to all those companies if they had to pay site owners 'per eye view' of their ads, for the site owner renting out part of their space for the ad.
My Big Brother can beat up your Big Brother any day!
UPS: had the worst computer parts/systems shipping, we'd often get packages beat to Hell. And this was back in late '97. By the time I got there, the company had figured which parts they could ship via UPS, in terms of durability. When people would ask us to ship via UPS, but if they -insisted-, well... the customer's always right, right?
FedEx: between the two 'big names,' FedEx treated the packages better, and often the FedEx people we dealt with were much nicer. Maybe we were towards the end of a hard run for the UPS guys, I don't know.
the 'other' guys: often, these smaller carriers had service that came out -better- than the big boys. Sure, they didn't have the bells and whistles of online tracking and whathaveyou in those days, but our packages came through very well (barring an accident involving a forklift and a pallet stacked with monitors). I think the smaller carriers treated our stuff better, because they -had- to. Customers are -much- more important to the smaller carriers. UPS can lose unsatisfied customers by the couple hundred, but the smaller carriers would just about shrivel up and blow away with a loss that big.
NO CARRIER. But we still have a frigate and a destroyer...
from The Fellowship of the Ring, Chapter 1, fifth paragraph, fifth sentence:
"At that time Frodo was still in his tweens, as the hobbits called the irresponsible twenties
between childhood and coming of age at thirty-three."
Mu*puppy: 'tween' and damn proud of it.
In any kind of 'asteroid mining', the venture would be taken in the first place for profit. It'd be a process of 'go to asteroid, grab asteroid, bring it back.' End of mission. There would be none of this maintainence like what they have to do for the IIS; just go, grab, and bring back for (hopefully) profit. If seen as economically feasible, operations would grow from there, with money prompting growth and improvement.
I'm certainly not an expert, but this is how I think things might be done. Probe to asteroid, which would wind up straping a small booster to the asteroid, and move it into an earth orbit (picking a small one for starters, of course). With the Apollo program, we know we can handle free-fall re-entry of things the size of the Apollo command capsule. Strap on some small manuvering thrusters, main recovery parachutes, and some kind of inflatable recovery for when it hits the water. Send up a convex heatshield in segments in the Space Shuttle, assembled by the crew in space, attach to asteroid. Have the heatshield work much like the Apollo command capsule; proportionate to keep the center of gravity where it needs to be, and big enough in diameter so the asteroid stays in the shield's slipstream (I guess that's the best word for what I'm thinking). Manuevering thrusters get it into position and send it down, letting gravity and air resistance do their work.
It won't stay in space, we just don't have the facilities/capabilities. First 'mined asteroids' will need to be brought down to earth until we figure out what the hell we're going to do with 'em, how we can do it in space, and if it'll be economically feasible to even bother with. If things fail and it burns up in the atmosphere (with the manuevering thrusters, it's downward path will be generally 'guided' (we hope) into the ocean anyways if it doesn't burn up), no big loss, maybe just some brief, bad press. If it's some kind of manned operation and things screw up... someone would have hell to pay when the media gets hold of them.
That's right, an 'interactive' dose of bloody freakin' M$ legalese. I tell ya, I'm about as excited to go through that as I would be playing with a 'Molest Me Elmo'.
I'm going to hold off before I start comparing these systems, as titles are released that actualy -utilize- the systems to fuller potential. I mean, imagine what it would have been like, judging the PS2 by watching/playing a demo of 'Fantavision'... In the meanwhile, I'll just play 'Devil May Cry' and continue to hasten the day for the onset of arthritis in my thumbs.
That was in '97... so one can only imagine what they're at now.
But just imagine how fun it could be that day, talking circles around Joe Sixpack. "See, it says 'PB' right there on this box! This is one of the brand new Peanut Butter drives, uses the proteins in the peanut butter to form an organic data matrix, ."
Then 'ow did we get globalized?
The Corporations of America (angelic singing), eyes shining with profit margins, held forth a Trade Agreement which your government signed, signifying that you, Country ________, was to be whored out and globalized!
A waist is a terrible thing to mind. Hey, wait a minute...