"Just wait until Obama and congress start blowing their wads on domestic spending (buying votes)."
I think you should mention here how much money Bush spent "buying votes" by sending out all those millions of worthless little checks to American households.
"NASA's budget will look like a piggy bank."
It already does. Oddly enough, the number you mentioned (700 billion) is just about exactly what has been spent on NASA in total. Ever. That means since its inception in 1958.
Yes. I'm also pretty sure that also in the contract is the right for AT&T to come to my house at any time they please and take my car out of the garage. There are lots of illegal things put into those EULAs and contracts. Just because it's in a contract does not make it enforceable. Or even right.
Of course, the correct and awesome behavior would be if people actually read all the crap they're supposedly agreeing to and then quietly declined to sign in the first place.
Minor point if you're not all that into it, but I believe the projected mission was 90 Martian days, or sols as they call them. Not Earth days. With a Martian day being about 24 hours, 37 minutes (sidereal) that makes the mission projected length a little over 92 Earth days. So, as I said, it's a minor point.:-)
The easiest way to stay upbeat is to remember that you, too, are an idiot. Everyone is an idiot from time to time. When you see idiocy in others that is the time to take an even closer look at yourself to see what lacunae reside in your own thinking.
Nope. England is getting nearly as bad. I'm thinking Antarctica. Time to build a new civilization based on 21st century evolved values, not 16th century ones.
Do you know why we are ill-equipped to come to any serious judgments? It's because the Bush administration operated in cloaked secrecy, that's why. If you can't see this as a problem then that's a problem.
"It is one thing to design an awesome computer - its another to take one that propels a multi-billion dollar industry forward."
Apparently it always takes a raving ego maniac to do it, however. And I'm not just talking about Steve Jobs. The world is run by the nearly and the wholly sociopathic. One could argue that those types drive progress, but there is plenty of wreckage left in their wakes. And in the end it might be that some people who got screwed over by people like Jobs refused to see him--and others like him--for what he was simply because they got dollar signs in their eyes.
"It must be demonstrated by an experiment to call it science."
And here we have the nut of the situation. Science must offer proof. Creationism only has to say "god did it." Aren't you even slightly embarrassed by that? By the way, there is far more evidence for the scientific viewpoint than the creationist viewpoint.
'Even once a cell somehow came into existence, there are living structures that the certainly occurring "natural selection" cannot rationally explain.'
A "cell" did not spring into existence. Even the single celled organism evolved from lower structures such as the first self-replicating amino acids. As to living structures that cannot be explained by evolution I would like an example or two. And even if evolution cannot yet explain something that doesn't automatically make the answer ID.
As far as something like that randomly happening there is no difference between a Ferrari appearing or "even only a Toyota automobile." Unless of course there are more parts in one or the other.
But that has nothing to do with evolution. Those who make the argument as you have simply have not even the most basic understanding of evolution. We did not spontaneously come together out of a "junkyard" of parts. The incredibly slow process of evolution is all about incremental steps. Did I mention incredibly slow process already? Human beings are used thinking of things on the order of days and weeks. Sometimes even years. Evolution is millions of years. That needs to be kept in mind
E.M. Forster wrote a story call The Machine Stops in which humans have become so isolated as to live in individual cells with all their needs provided by machinery that delivers everything to their isolated habitats. It is considered weird to actually meet someone in person. It's a great read and the parallels to the internet are a little eerie.
A couple of points. First, could you define "productize" for those of us without MBAs?
Second, I don't see the point of FOSS helping to move labor overseas. The reason labor moves overseas is because it is cheaper. Period. Not because the product is based on FOSS. Also, it's terribly hard to imagine that contributing to FOSS will affect my job 20-30 years in the future. What software are you aware of that was developed in 1978 that is still in heavy demand today? The whole hardware/software industry is constantly moving forward, perhaps faster now than it would have without FOSS. You'll have to explain how FOSS is eroding future jobs.
"The physical structure of the vehicle itself can also be considered "a work of art"... which is what I guess Toyota is trying to do here. So yeah, they do have a slight point even if Toyota didn't physically take the photo."
Hardly. Commercial photographers take pictures of commercially made stuff all the time and it is quite clear that unless the photographer signs away the rights the sole owner of the copyright is the photographer, not the manufacturer of the subject of the photograph.
Toyota represents the new kind of thinking we have in the US these days where everybody seems to want obsessive compulsive control over everything they've ever created as well as everything anyone else has created that even touches upon it. Incidental music appearing in Youtube videos is a prime example.
You've still completely missed the point. Yes, personal responsibility is a must. That does not mean that there aren't going to be some people who get addicted to certain substances or activities. Your pick-yourself-up-by-your-own-bootstraps approach is admirable, but it simply will never, ever work in many cases. Now, you can go on moralizing all you want but the fact remains that there is such a thing as addiction whether or not people try to take personal responsibility or not.
Apparently you've had the good fortune to never have been addicted to anything. Good for you. But try to keep in mind that there are lots and lots of people out there who are addicted to things because they had the misfortune of not being born perfect--unlike certain Slashdotters--and far from being blase about it they are actually quite unhappy about it. And it takes a lot of work and many attempts to kick an addiction. Just ask any smoker.
No, but Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC. Microsoft simply copied them after they saw how successful it was.
Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action. I'm sure their app store will do fine. At least as fine as the Zune....
Slashdot Mirror
OMG. Astroturfing Belkin in a story about astroturfing by Belkin.
"Just wait until Obama and congress start blowing their wads on domestic spending (buying votes)."
I think you should mention here how much money Bush spent "buying votes" by sending out all those millions of worthless little checks to American households.
"NASA's budget will look like a piggy bank."
It already does. Oddly enough, the number you mentioned (700 billion) is just about exactly what has been spent on NASA in total. Ever. That means since its inception in 1958.
I know. My Senator keeps getting re-elected year after year...
Yes. I'm also pretty sure that also in the contract is the right for AT&T to come to my house at any time they please and take my car out of the garage. There are lots of illegal things put into those EULAs and contracts. Just because it's in a contract does not make it enforceable. Or even right.
Of course, the correct and awesome behavior would be if people actually read all the crap they're supposedly agreeing to and then quietly declined to sign in the first place.
Minor point if you're not all that into it, but I believe the projected mission was 90 Martian days, or sols as they call them. Not Earth days. With a Martian day being about 24 hours, 37 minutes (sidereal) that makes the mission projected length a little over 92 Earth days. So, as I said, it's a minor point. :-)
I can't explain it, but I find that to be hilarious. :-)
The easiest way to stay upbeat is to remember that you, too, are an idiot. Everyone is an idiot from time to time. When you see idiocy in others that is the time to take an even closer look at yourself to see what lacunae reside in your own thinking.
Nope. England is getting nearly as bad. I'm thinking Antarctica. Time to build a new civilization based on 21st century evolved values, not 16th century ones.
I think you're confusing CS with programming. CS people do write programs but programmers are not necessarily doing computer science.
Do you know why we are ill-equipped to come to any serious judgments? It's because the Bush administration operated in cloaked secrecy, that's why. If you can't see this as a problem then that's a problem.
Oy VASIMR...
I don't know how that could be taken as flamebait. It does, after all, come from within the profession (i.e. DrLudicrous).
"It is one thing to design an awesome computer - its another to take one that propels a multi-billion dollar industry forward."
Apparently it always takes a raving ego maniac to do it, however. And I'm not just talking about Steve Jobs. The world is run by the nearly and the wholly sociopathic. One could argue that those types drive progress, but there is plenty of wreckage left in their wakes. And in the end it might be that some people who got screwed over by people like Jobs refused to see him--and others like him--for what he was simply because they got dollar signs in their eyes.
"It must be demonstrated by an experiment to call it science."
And here we have the nut of the situation. Science must offer proof. Creationism only has to say "god did it." Aren't you even slightly embarrassed by that? By the way, there is far more evidence for the scientific viewpoint than the creationist viewpoint.
'Even once a cell somehow came into existence, there are living structures that the certainly occurring "natural selection" cannot rationally explain.'
A "cell" did not spring into existence. Even the single celled organism evolved from lower structures such as the first self-replicating amino acids. As to living structures that cannot be explained by evolution I would like an example or two. And even if evolution cannot yet explain something that doesn't automatically make the answer ID.
As far as something like that randomly happening there is no difference between a Ferrari appearing or "even only a Toyota automobile." Unless of course there are more parts in one or the other.
But that has nothing to do with evolution. Those who make the argument as you have simply have not even the most basic understanding of evolution. We did not spontaneously come together out of a "junkyard" of parts. The incredibly slow process of evolution is all about incremental steps. Did I mention incredibly slow process already? Human beings are used thinking of things on the order of days and weeks. Sometimes even years. Evolution is millions of years. That needs to be kept in mind
At the very least, congratulations on breaking the cycle.
E.M. Forster wrote a story call The Machine Stops in which humans have become so isolated as to live in individual cells with all their needs provided by machinery that delivers everything to their isolated habitats. It is considered weird to actually meet someone in person. It's a great read and the parallels to the internet are a little eerie.
A couple of points. First, could you define "productize" for those of us without MBAs?
Second, I don't see the point of FOSS helping to move labor overseas. The reason labor moves overseas is because it is cheaper. Period. Not because the product is based on FOSS. Also, it's terribly hard to imagine that contributing to FOSS will affect my job 20-30 years in the future. What software are you aware of that was developed in 1978 that is still in heavy demand today? The whole hardware/software industry is constantly moving forward, perhaps faster now than it would have without FOSS. You'll have to explain how FOSS is eroding future jobs.
"The physical structure of the vehicle itself can also be considered "a work of art"... which is what I guess Toyota is trying to do here. So yeah, they do have a slight point even if Toyota didn't physically take the photo."
Hardly. Commercial photographers take pictures of commercially made stuff all the time and it is quite clear that unless the photographer signs away the rights the sole owner of the copyright is the photographer, not the manufacturer of the subject of the photograph.
Toyota represents the new kind of thinking we have in the US these days where everybody seems to want obsessive compulsive control over everything they've ever created as well as everything anyone else has created that even touches upon it. Incidental music appearing in Youtube videos is a prime example.
Er, by the way, this post is copyrighted.
You mean, even bigger than Dick Cheney?
You've still completely missed the point. Yes, personal responsibility is a must. That does not mean that there aren't going to be some people who get addicted to certain substances or activities. Your pick-yourself-up-by-your-own-bootstraps approach is admirable, but it simply will never, ever work in many cases. Now, you can go on moralizing all you want but the fact remains that there is such a thing as addiction whether or not people try to take personal responsibility or not.
Apparently you've had the good fortune to never have been addicted to anything. Good for you. But try to keep in mind that there are lots and lots of people out there who are addicted to things because they had the misfortune of not being born perfect--unlike certain Slashdotters--and far from being blase about it they are actually quite unhappy about it. And it takes a lot of work and many attempts to kick an addiction. Just ask any smoker.
Hey, way to completely miss the point on what addiction means.
Let's not forget he is also the founder of the FIRST Robotics competition. I'd say he's trying to change our world.
No, but Apple legally licensed/bought the tech from PARC. Microsoft simply copied them after they saw how successful it was.
Whether or not Apple did invent these things it has been a fairly consistent paradigm that Apple (or Google, or whoever) comes up with something and makes it successful and then Microsoft tries to get in on the action. I'm sure their app store will do fine. At least as fine as the Zune....