The Mechanical Universe is a fantastic series produced by Caltech and the Annenberg/CPB Project. I watched it on my local PBS station when I was a whippersnapper. Not only will it give you solid physics, Caltech professor David Goodstein gives you biographical and historical insight into the minds and times of the principal scientists. The info is often humorous. The story about Galileo's finger will crack you up. I'm not exaggerating when I say it will even change your life. I think the insights I gained from this series had a big impact on how I turned out (and I'm still turning.)
The video format is invaluable for physics instruction because physics very often involves changing quantities (hence the need for calculus.) The series is chock full of brilliant animations to illustrate complex formulae and phenomena. The section on angular momentum is an excellent example. (Dot products, dot products)
And I think it is absurd to imply that hardware manufacturers would ever restrict their hardware to only work with Microsoft.
Why do you think that? OEMs are already genuflexing to pope Bill the first. When you're a monopoly you can force others to do anything you want. If they feel that their current tactic of forcing OEMs to ship only Windows on their PCs isn't airtight enough they'll just apply pressure to the chip/mobo manufacturers until they comply. Any company that resists doesn't get Windows for their hardware and they go out of business. Your optimism at Microsoft's motives is refreshing, though.
Open means open to any application we want to run on the hardware so that we aren't restricted to only applications that are signed by some controlling authority **coughmicrosoftcough**. Did you miss all the Palladium/Trusted Computing announcements?
In order to collect interstellar dust grains, wouldn't the spacecraft have to travel out beyond the heliopause? That's a pretty long trip. I don't think the pioneer or voyager spacecrafts have even made it there yet.
Yes. That is a sticky wicket, ain't it?
Hey, we don't actually do the things we propose. We just propose them, right?:)
OK, how about a small publisher who specializes in more radical titles and who's customers are more likely to understand what's happening?
It's not about forcing companies to divulge trade secrets. It's about a researcher's right to reverse engineer code to see how it works. Are you in favor of jailing people who conduct research?
I'm glad this case is going forward but it's another one of those fringe cases that is defending against the rough edges of the DMCA instead of striking it at its unconstitutional heart. We need something that throws a spotlight on the huge potential of this law to do harm to fundamental freedoms that most people take for granted. Suppose we could enlist the cooperation of one of the major book publishing houses to bring an offensive and egregious suit against a library (for example) that accuses the library of theft of so-called "intellectual property" by allowing people to consume their product without compensation to them as the copyright holder. When the headlines start blaring about how the DMCA is being used to make libraries illegal then non-technical people might understand what's really wrong with this law.
IANAL (but lawyers are good, despite the corporate "tort reform" rhetoric intended to smear lawyers and limit our access to the only branch of government left that hasn't been closed to the citizens.)
Don't forget, this is the chip that inspired Jerry Sanders to testify on Microsoft's behalf in the Tunney Act proceedings. Kind of like a hooker giving a free blow-job with the hope of getting something in return. The "something" he wants in return is OS support from MS. Billy G. could always say "Psych! No OS support for you!" It's unlikely though.
On the good side, the state's lawyers exposed Sanders in the obvious quid-pro-quo so his testimony is unlikely to hold much sway with Kollar-Kotelly.
He says in the byline "stronger then any man" so I guess he wants a stronger man if he can get him but if not then he'll take any man.
Before you roll out your "Spelling Nazi" replies, this isn't a spelling error. Taco and Hemos always use the word "then" when they mean "than" so it's a grammar error. Hell, everybody makes spelling errors. This is something different. It shows that slashdot is helmed by semiliterate authors who spew crap left and right. I wonder if timothy can stage a coup? I'll back him.
I'm not saying that they shouldn't be sued, but that its pretty unconvincing that anyone besides a few money-grubbing bureaucrats are begind these lawsuits.
Where, in the states' proposal, do you see the part where the "money-grubbing bureaucrats" are demanding money? Even if they were demanding money, it wouldn't go into the bureaucrats' pockets. It would go to the people in the form of revenue to the state. I'm from one of the 9 states with a dog in the fight and I'm very happy I have an Attorney General willing to fight for my rights as a consumer to be allowed to choose which products to support rather than having an unchecked corporate monopoly choose for me.
Oh, it is so much more comfortable to anchor in the harbor or ignorance than to set sail on the stormy seas of thought.
It's amusing to see the political censorship come out when a petty Slashdot moderation tyrant sees something he can't deal with - namely, the truth.
You appear to be one of those "first thinkers" as I like to call them. Other people like to call them conservatives but they don't conserve much of anything except their own power. You'll never hear one say, "on second thought..." because they never get that far. The simple, oft repeated lie is easier for their minds to grasp than the truth which they will try to bury if anyone brings it to light as illustrated by the down-modding of my previous post as "Flame Bait." Obviously, it wasn't flame bait because it drew no replies thus disproving your moderation.
You can mod me down as often as you like because I could care less about Slashdot karma. What's more important to me is the freedom to express my views as guaranteed me by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. You, on the other hand, appear to have no respect for the Constitution or freedom and would rather engage in the practice of censorship.
Go ahead, mod me down again. I'll just keep posting and we can have a little censorship tango in the spotlight. I've noticed that roaches really hate bright lights.
Score:5 ?????!!!!!! On an ancient and disproven cheap shot like that? Really, you guys need to get a clue. Here's the real story behind the crap being peddled.
ZENworks
and iFolder
But they come from that beFUDdled company that everyone likes to ignore
these days, even though they have hellatious solutions to real problems.
Linux is great but it can't touch the features available from a platform
with a mature and stable directory service. With the directory, you can pick
a user and then make their environment and remake it every time they login.
You can customize the environment depending on what kind of device they are
logging in from or what type of connection they have. But these things wouldn't
be useful would they? Just ignore these products. Wait until Microsoft releases
version 3! It'll really work then!
Do I know you? Have I ever met you? Do I have any assurance that you are at all competent at doing anything?
And yet you do not seem to find it absurd that you (as part of "the people") should have power over me.
Your lack of understanding of the democratic process is sad. No, I do not, in any way, shape or form, find it absurd that the people should be allowed to determine for themselves the rules under which they will be governed as a group. In fact I find that prospect quite attractive. I don't advocate that I, myself, should have power over you. You've apparently lost your ability to reason if you believe that democracy equals one individual having power over you.
Do you not like the Constitution or are you just a straight-up selfish, me-first, screw-rest-of-the-world kind of person? If you don't like having a government of, by, and for the people then I think you're going to need to move somewhere else soon because times change and democracy is coming back in style.
Man, you Libertarians crack me up.
You act as if the government is some kind of third party in our lives like a referee in a football game. Ostensibly, the government is us . . . "We the People." So by advocating the reduction of the power of government you're advocating a reduction of the power of the people. I take that personally as I am one of those people. The people of the United States of America are already on their knees bowing to the power of the corporation. Why would you advocate reducing our only means of defending ourselves from exploitation?
>What is the point here? That "government" is the key to making these peoples' lives easier/better?
Yes. That's exactly the point. Here's a quote which you've apparently never read before.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
> How about they do it themselves?
What resources do you propose they use to counter the resources brought to the table by the rich and powerful who oppose them, other than the power of their numbers as is ostensibly represented by the government. (We the People, remember)
Geez. Some peoples' ignorance of the democratic process is mind-boggling. Do you think the government is some third-party entity like a referee in a football game? The government is us. We the People! WE THE F@#KING PEOPLE!
Unless, of course, the rich and powerful find some way to stack the deck against the people by using money or something.
> Demographics say more than HALF of that HALF is middle to lower income and minority.
Duh! Take anything that's distributed on a bell-shaped curve, such as income, and select two thirds of the X-axis (middle to lower income) and you'll get way more than half the population. Nice analysis, Einstein. I think the argument was about people at the lower end of the curve. You know, those little people that you dismiss with a click of your mouse.
>How can more people voting cause "less political representation" ????
The issue is more one of skewed representation. If the middle to upper income voters have MUCH easier access to the polls then their voting participation will soar while the voters who don't have that kind of access will not see a similar surge in participation.
No. But the Constitution says that voting MUST be.
Easing access to the polls for those who can afford the technology equates directly to greater representation for those voters than for voters who don't have the skids greased for them.
Slashdot Mirror
NetWare admins have to laugh when they read stories like this. NetWare has been self-tuning for many years.
The Mechanical Universe is a fantastic series produced by Caltech and the Annenberg/CPB Project. I watched it on my local PBS station when I was a whippersnapper. Not only will it give you solid physics, Caltech professor David Goodstein gives you biographical and historical insight into the minds and times of the principal scientists. The info is often humorous. The story about Galileo's finger will crack you up. I'm not exaggerating when I say it will even change your life. I think the insights I gained from this series had a big impact on how I turned out (and I'm still turning.)
The video format is invaluable for physics instruction because physics very often involves changing quantities (hence the need for calculus.) The series is chock full of brilliant animations to illustrate complex formulae and phenomena. The section on angular momentum is an excellent example. (Dot products, dot products)
And I think it is absurd to imply that hardware manufacturers would ever restrict their hardware to only work with Microsoft.
Why do you think that? OEMs are already genuflexing to pope Bill the first. When you're a monopoly you can force others to do anything you want. If they feel that their current tactic of forcing OEMs to ship only Windows on their PCs isn't airtight enough they'll just apply pressure to the chip/mobo manufacturers until they comply. Any company that resists doesn't get Windows for their hardware and they go out of business.
Your optimism at Microsoft's motives is refreshing, though.
How is hardware not currently open?
Open means open to any application we want to run on the hardware so that we aren't restricted to only applications that are signed by some controlling authority **coughmicrosoftcough**.
Did you miss all the Palladium/Trusted Computing announcements?
In order to collect interstellar dust grains, wouldn't the spacecraft have to travel out beyond the heliopause? That's a pretty long trip. I don't think the pioneer or voyager spacecrafts have even made it there yet.
Yes. That is a sticky wicket, ain't it? :)
Hey, we don't actually do the things we propose. We just propose them, right?
OK, how about a small publisher who specializes in more radical titles and who's customers are more likely to understand what's happening?
Are you in favor of jailing software developers?
That response doesn't even make any sense, dude. Your Rush Limbaugh reasoning makes my guffaws giggle.
It's not about forcing companies to divulge trade secrets. It's about a researcher's right to reverse engineer code to see how it works.
Are you in favor of jailing people who conduct research?
I'm glad this case is going forward but it's another one of those fringe cases that is defending against the rough edges of the DMCA instead of striking it at its unconstitutional heart.
We need something that throws a spotlight on the huge potential of this law to do harm to fundamental freedoms that most people take for granted.
Suppose we could enlist the cooperation of one of the major book publishing houses to bring an offensive and egregious suit against a library (for example) that accuses the library of theft of so-called "intellectual property" by allowing people to consume their product without compensation to them as the copyright holder.
When the headlines start blaring about how the DMCA is being used to make libraries illegal then non-technical people might understand what's really wrong with this law.
IANAL (but lawyers are good, despite the corporate "tort reform" rhetoric intended to smear lawyers and limit our access to the only branch of government left that hasn't been closed to the citizens.)
Don't forget, this is the chip that inspired Jerry Sanders to testify on Microsoft's behalf in the Tunney Act proceedings. Kind of like a hooker giving a free blow-job with the hope of getting something in return. The "something" he wants in return is OS support from MS. Billy G. could always say "Psych! No OS support for you!" It's unlikely though.
On the good side, the state's lawyers exposed Sanders in the obvious quid-pro-quo so his testimony is unlikely to hold much sway with Kollar-Kotelly.
I'm going to need lost of electricity to run my cheap digital wall paper (another dream I hope to see in my lifetime).
OK. Your wait may be near and end. The floppy TV is coming.
He says in the byline "stronger then any man" so I guess he wants a stronger man if he can get him but if not then he'll take any man.
Before you roll out your "Spelling Nazi" replies, this isn't a spelling error. Taco and Hemos always use the word "then" when they mean "than" so it's a grammar error. Hell, everybody makes spelling errors. This is something different. It shows that slashdot is helmed by semiliterate authors who spew crap left and right. I wonder if timothy can stage a coup? I'll back him.
I'm not saying that they shouldn't be sued, but that its pretty unconvincing that anyone besides a few money-grubbing bureaucrats are begind these lawsuits.
Where, in the states' proposal, do you see the part where the "money-grubbing bureaucrats" are demanding money?
Even if they were demanding money, it wouldn't go into the bureaucrats' pockets. It would go to the people in the form of revenue to the state. I'm from one of the 9 states with a dog in the fight and I'm very happy I have an Attorney General willing to fight for my rights as a consumer to be allowed to choose which products to support rather than having an unchecked corporate monopoly choose for me.
Oh, it is so much more comfortable to anchor in the harbor or ignorance than to set sail on the stormy seas of thought.
It's amusing to see the political censorship come out when a petty Slashdot moderation tyrant sees something he can't deal with - namely, the truth. You appear to be one of those "first thinkers" as I like to call them. Other people like to call them conservatives but they don't conserve much of anything except their own power. You'll never hear one say, "on second thought..." because they never get that far. The simple, oft repeated lie is easier for their minds to grasp than the truth which they will try to bury if anyone brings it to light as illustrated by the down-modding of my previous post as "Flame Bait." Obviously, it wasn't flame bait because it drew no replies thus disproving your moderation.
You can mod me down as often as you like because I could care less about Slashdot karma. What's more important to me is the freedom to express my views as guaranteed me by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. You, on the other hand, appear to have no respect for the Constitution or freedom and would rather engage in the practice of censorship.
Go ahead, mod me down again. I'll just keep posting and we can have a little censorship tango in the spotlight. I've noticed that roaches really hate bright lights.
Here again is the true story behind the "Gore claimed to have invented the Internet" lie.
NPR has posted a RealAudio interview with George Lucas and a review by LA Times critic Kenneth Turan (Kenneth, what is the frequency?)
Bottom line . . . Spider-Man is a good movie.
Score:5 ?????!!!!!!
On an ancient and disproven cheap shot like that?
Really, you guys need to get a clue.
Here's the real story behind the crap being peddled.
Max Fleischer invented this technology many years ago. This is just multiplane animation in real time.h tm
http://users.bestweb.net/~mentzerm/popeye.
ZENworks and iFolder
But they come from that beFUDdled company that everyone likes to ignore these days, even though they have hellatious solutions to real problems. Linux is great but it can't touch the features available from a platform with a mature and stable directory service. With the directory, you can pick a user and then make their environment and remake it every time they login. You can customize the environment depending on what kind of device they are logging in from or what type of connection they have. But these things wouldn't be useful would they? Just ignore these products. Wait until Microsoft releases version 3! It'll really work then!
I do. But I live here so I'm not allowed to say that openly. Be thankful you live in a free country.
Do I know you? Have I ever met you? Do I have any assurance that you are at all competent at doing anything?
And yet you do not seem to find it absurd that you (as part of "the people") should have power over me.
Your lack of understanding of the democratic process is sad.
No, I do not, in any way, shape or form, find it absurd that the people should be allowed to determine for themselves the rules under which they will be governed as a group. In fact I find that prospect quite attractive. I don't advocate that I, myself, should have power over you. You've apparently lost your ability to reason if you believe that democracy equals one individual having power over you.
Do you not like the Constitution or are you just a straight-up selfish, me-first, screw-rest-of-the-world kind of person? If you don't like having a government of, by, and for the people then I think you're going to need to move somewhere else soon because times change and democracy is coming back in style.
Require a binding "none of the above" entry on all elections.
How about this . .
Allow all voters to cast one vote either for or against one candidate.
Then when a candidate wins an election by a count of -80,145 votes to -121,345 votes maybe they'll get the hint.
Man, you Libertarians crack me up.
You act as if the government is some kind of third party in our lives like a referee in a football game. Ostensibly, the government is us . . . "We the People." So by advocating the reduction of the power of government you're advocating a reduction of the power of the people. I take that personally as I am one of those people. The people of the United States of America are already on their knees bowing to the power of the corporation. Why would you advocate reducing our only means of defending ourselves from exploitation?
We the People!
>What is the point here? That "government" is the key to making these peoples' lives easier/better?
Yes. That's exactly the point. Here's a quote which you've apparently never read before.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
> How about they do it themselves?
What resources do you propose they use to counter the resources brought to the table by the rich and powerful who oppose them, other than the power of their numbers as is ostensibly represented by the government. (We the People, remember)
Geez. Some peoples' ignorance of the democratic process is mind-boggling. Do you think the government is some third-party entity like a referee in a football game? The government is us. We the People! WE THE F@#KING PEOPLE!
Unless, of course, the rich and powerful find some way to stack the deck against the people by using money or something.
That's right. "Let them eat cake."
> Demographics say more than HALF of that HALF is middle to lower income and minority.
Duh! Take anything that's distributed on a bell-shaped curve, such as income, and select two thirds of the X-axis (middle to lower income) and you'll get way more than half the population. Nice analysis, Einstein. I think the argument was about people at the lower end of the curve. You know, those little people that you dismiss with a click of your mouse.
>How can more people voting cause "less political representation" ????
The issue is more one of skewed representation. If the middle to upper income voters have MUCH easier access to the polls then their voting participation will soar while the voters who don't have that kind of access will not see a similar surge in participation.
> Geez. Nobody ever said life was fair.
No. But the Constitution says that voting MUST be.
Easing access to the polls for those who can afford the technology equates directly to greater representation for those voters than for voters who don't have the skids greased for them.