For the first, I forget the title. But it was about an unspecified era in which aliens try to 'help' us by giving us replicators. First there are attempts to control access to the replicators. But of course, someone manages to replicate the replicator, and it's all out of the bag. Along the way, someone speculates that the aliens were really out to ruin us by destroying our economy, which is based on scarcity. Finally, the 'hero' of the story realizes that by controlling the originals, he can still be rich. Economy of scarcity is maintained, only at the 'manuscript' level.
That would be "Business As Usual, During Alterations" by Ralph Williams (first appeared in "Astounding", July 1958)
... that currently, it's really hard to produce - as the article says there are less than 10 nanograms currently produced each year, and the projected yield from Fermilab's new equipment would be no more than 140ng or so. And this requires huge particle accelerators costing billions of dollars.
I once read that the main reason it's so slow and expensive to produce antimatter today is that the colliders used to produce it were designed as research tools, not as manufacturing equipment. Apparently there were some proposed designs for space-based colliders, specifically designed for antimatter production, that would be far more efficient, yielding on the order of kilograms per year.
Since it seem the RIAA's primary unstated goal is to maintain their stranglehold on the distribution of music, perhaps we should go on the offensive, and start a legal fund to sue the RIAA. What kind of a case do you suppose we could build?
Re:What is a non nerd/geek called?
on
Geeks vs. Nerds
·
· Score: 1
A "non-geek" is a "Mundane" (sci-fi culture's term for a non-Fan).
Re:What about the lemmings in modern-day USA?
on
The Year 1000
·
· Score: 1
I know that the Millennium starts in 2001, but it hardly matters to me that the calendar is one year offset from Way Back Then(tm).
Actually, there's no one "right" answer to this. The Gregorian calendar is scarred at the BC/AD transition, going from 1BC (-1) to 1AD (+1). You can argue that the first century is missing a year, which puts the Millenium at Jan 2000, or you can argue that a century must span 100 years, which puts the Millenium at Jan 2001.
While it's true that a century is by definition 100 years long, it's also true that 0 comes between -1 and 1, also by definition. So both positions are equally valid, and it really comes down to personal preference.
Besides, *two* excuses to party are better than one!:)
Re:Is the backbone ready for this?
on
VDSL Demoed
·
· Score: 1
Even with 2 gig lines on your backbone, it wouldn't take an lot of 60 MBPS users to fill it out. Up until a couple of years ago, the backbone consisted of 45mbps lines
Perhaps communities of "opensource-minded" folk can use high-speed services like this to add additional backbone capacity, instead of merely being an added burden on the existing backbones.
Actually, guns don't equalize people -- they just change the grounds of competition from physical strength to "aggresssion", or "willingness to use a gun". So they would select for a society of the short-tempered, ather than the merely strong.
Short-tempered folks would get into more gunfights, so I'd expect them to have a much shorter expected lifetime. Ubiquitous firearms should actually select for politeness and restraint.
Actually, guns don't equalize people -- they just change the grounds of competition from physical strength to "aggresssion", or "willingness to use a gun". So they would select for a society of the short-tempered, ather than the merely strong.
Short-tempered folks would get into more gunfights, so I'd expect them to have a much shorter expected lifetime. Ubiquitous firearms should actually select for politeness and restraint.
Everytime I see you, you are wagging your finger at me calling me stupid and ignorant. What else am I supposed to think but "hypocrite" when you come use my pool?
This would be hypocrisy only if it's the same individuals:
"Every time I see this one particular guy who happens to own a Buick, he is wagging his finger at me calling me stupid and ignorant. What else am I supposed to think but "hypocrite" when guys who own Buicks come use my pool?
but on the other hand, management has been sued, sometimes successfully, for doing (or not doing) something useful for shareholders. Think about it: if they believe, e.g. that writing and selling proprietary extensions to Linux, will make the company more profitable, then the RedHat management has a duty to do this.
I was one of the folks who got locked out by E*Trade fiasco. I still picked up a bunch of shares right after the IPO, mostly so I'd be in a position as a shareholder to help counter any such misguided attempts to force Redhat's management to go proprietary. When more IPOs start coming out of our community in the near future, I intend to do the same.
Our community has been able to respond quickly and effectively to events like the Mindcraft tests; I'd like to think that we can be equally effective on shareholder-related problems.
>> In fact, I doubt if any box would get much >> checking - there are so many cries in this >> country of "cut the taxes down to nothing!
I saw a variation of this in Analog, long ago. The idea there was that the taxpayer would decide, dollar by dollar, where their tax money would go.
A variation on this might be a good idea. A checkbox that means paying extra taxes would never fly, but one that merely allows taxpayers to decide how the money they have to pay anyway will be allocated could be feasible.
For people too lazy to decide, there can be a checkbox that says "Let Congress decide how to spend it". Or one of the line items could be for this, so taxpayers can specify "20% to Education, 20% to Defense, $52.44 to Congress, remainder to NASA" or some such. Then the aforementioned lazy folks can say "100% to Congressional Discretion".
Slashdot Mirror
Since it seem the RIAA's primary unstated goal is to maintain their stranglehold on the distribution of music, perhaps we should go on the offensive, and start a legal fund to sue the RIAA. What kind of a case do you suppose we could build?
A "non-geek" is a "Mundane" (sci-fi culture's term for a non-Fan).
Actually, there's no one "right" answer to this. The Gregorian calendar is scarred at the BC/AD transition, going from 1BC (-1) to 1AD (+1). You can argue that the first century is missing a year, which puts the Millenium at Jan 2000, or you can argue that a century must span 100 years, which puts the Millenium at Jan 2001.
While it's true that a century is by definition 100 years long, it's also true that 0 comes between -1 and 1, also by definition. So both positions are equally valid, and it really comes down to personal preference.
Besides, *two* excuses to party are better than one! :)
Short-tempered folks would get into more gunfights, so I'd expect them to have a much shorter expected lifetime. Ubiquitous firearms should actually select for politeness and restraint.
This would be hypocrisy only if it's the same individuals:
"Every time I see this one particular guy who happens to own a Buick, he is wagging his finger at me calling me stupid and ignorant. What else am I supposed to think but "hypocrite" when guys who own Buicks come use my pool?
I was one of the folks who got locked out by E*Trade fiasco. I still picked up a bunch of shares right after the IPO, mostly so I'd be in a position as a shareholder to help counter any such misguided attempts to force Redhat's management to go proprietary. When more IPOs start coming out of our community in the near future, I intend to do the same.
Our community has been able to respond quickly and effectively to events like the Mindcraft tests; I'd like to think that we can be equally effective on shareholder-related problems.
>> In fact, I doubt if any box would get much
>> checking - there are so many cries in this
>> country of "cut the taxes down to nothing!
I saw a variation of this in Analog, long ago. The idea there was that the taxpayer would decide, dollar by dollar, where their tax money would go.
A variation on this might be a good idea. A checkbox that means paying extra taxes would never fly, but one that merely allows taxpayers to decide how the money they have to pay anyway will be allocated could be feasible.
For people too lazy to decide, there can be a checkbox that says "Let Congress decide how to spend it". Or one of the line items could be for this, so taxpayers can specify "20% to Education, 20% to Defense, $52.44 to Congress, remainder to NASA" or some such. Then the aforementioned lazy folks can say "100% to Congressional Discretion".