But if you just put the marble there it will roll down toward the mass that is deforming the sheet. This breaks the analogy for me.
Okay, take a marble, hold it out at arm's length, and let go. Note how, in your frame of reference, the marble falls straight down. Try doing it from the top of a building, and you might even be able to detect the effects of atmosphere or the earth's rotation on it. Feel free to place an object further out in earth's gravity well, or in the sun's gravity well, with no angular momentum relative to the central object (earth or sun) and it too will fall straight down, providing there are no other forces acting on it.
So how is it any different from placing a stationary object at the edge of the sheet and having it roll down?
Well said. Also, it maps with some degree of accuracy the behaviour of objects in a 4-dimensional spacetime into a 3-dimensional spacetime, allowing us to alter the degree of deformation, manipulate objects in it, and observe their behaviour. Outside of a 3D computer model, I don't see any easy way for us to do that in the classroom.
Ah, ColdSam, you are a barrel of laughs. Everyone is supposed to know the exact amount of traction their car will have on a given day in a given location so that they can make sure their car doesn't slide an inch or two past a line which is ALWAYS put at such a distance as to allow for a foot or more of sliding before a pedestrian or another vehicle would be at risk, and you are perfectly fine if they are penalized for that. Yet, when a law is enacted for your safety and the convenience of everyone around you that says you can be fined for not crossing in clearly marked locations, that's the law that isn't useful.
Another item to note. Without the contract, Boeing will have less for their employees, which means they will have less to spend on whatever they like. This means, to some degree, any market that is supported by a typical employee, from farmers to hair stylists to fast food employees to airplane parts manufacturers are affected, to a greater or lesser degree. Of course, for those who understand, this is what the concept of "the economy" means...
Yes, many science fiction stories touch upon this. The one concern I have is the use of artificial scarcity as a means of control. With this weapon, one can direct masses of people whereas otherwise you would have no ability to do so, for good or bad. And, of course, having that power runs the risk of it corrupting the wielder...
There is one way you could make it covered and still not confuse users - have the sliding door activated by the computer when the camera is active. Then you could see when the camera was active, and the door could hard-wire an LED activation...
Only on slashdot would this be given as an alternative to a camera and LED being set on a single circuit during a discussion involving the KISS principle.
As another responder said, no, I'm not always confident I made the right choice. Yes, there might be other solutions. Some may be too expensive to try out, some just may not be an option given my circumstances. But I am confident I made the best decision I could, and continue to hope that, if it wasn't the right one, it was good enough to at least have a beneficial outcome.
And what exactly would you be doing in your response? There's a reason most of the speeding cameras don't trigger until you've done some percentage above the speed limit. How many judges do you think would throw out a speeding ticket if you were doing 50.5 km/h in a 50 km/h zone? Would you even be able to tell if you were going 1% over the speed limit? Shall we also have police start handing out fines for jaywalking on empty streets?
I would more call it well-adjusted, which I consider to be a subset of sanity. If you're a drug dealer, know you sell poison (pick the "really bad drug" of your choice), never use it yourself, are happy with the money and relative ease it takes to acquire it (a debatable point, I'm sure), and have no qualms letting people be responsible for their own actions, would that be considered sane by the definition above? I'd think not. You know your actions are harmful, and choose not to change them, and are not empathizing with your clients and their further harm that you facilitate. OTOH, I'd still consider them sane by conventional standards, just not very well-adjusted.
This is not to say that the above definition isn't a laudable standard to strive for, and people who meet it would be very easy to interact with.
So, for you non-obvious is the combination of a flat power connector and a child-safe lock. Yes, I'm sure there are minor differences, much like there are between a state-of-the-art tumbler lock and one from ancient history, but that doesn't make it unrecognizable or non-obvious to an expert in the field.
Well, to be fair, McAfee and Norton are constrained by false advertising laws. The NSA doesn't have such constraints, not being in a position to sell us anything. They just force their work down our throats.
I personally can't stop thinking that the critical infrastructure that they corrected that would have crippled the economy had it not been stopped was the Clipper Chip. So, I guess they aren't really lying!
They do work, they get paid for part of the value of their work (if they got paid the full value of their work, it wouldn't be profitable for their employer to hire them).
This is totally broken logic. Had you said, "They do work, they get paid for part of the value of the resulting good or service (if they got paid the full value of the resulting good or service, it wouldn't be profitable for their employer to hire them)," that would be a valid statement. As it stands, your statement is the equivalent of, "The only way an employer is able to make a profit is by screwing his employees." Note that I assume that the employer also brings something to the table, such as marketing, locating better suppliers, allowing economies of scale, and finding more efficient ways of producing the good or service. You know, the difference between working for yourself versus working as part of an organization (besides the ability to screw its employees).
There is now a precedent. Screw up too badly, and the government might bail you out. Fuck them over in the process, and well, maybe they won't.
Politicians are a quantity that GM has to consider. Certainly, there is no evidence that politicians care if they spend money poorly. However, leave them with egg on their faces, and it might take more "campaign contributions" to make them forget that.
Taxpayers are also consumers. People rarely feel brand loyalty towards companies that screw them and their friends over. Even if it is only about $35 per person.
These are some other things that need to be weighed, rather than just what the next quarter will look like.
Otherwise it might just be the case that cat owners tend to be accident prone
An equal possibility is that cat owners have subconsciously lost the will to live and seek ways to die, no longer wishing to be the subjects of their capricious and mysteriously malevolent overlords.
I'm a cat owner. And suddenly I have a desire to go for a drive. *yawn*
Well, here's what I read: blah blah blah whine whine whine get off my lawn kid goes to bed late and can't focus in school. That's a wonderful assessment from the outside looking in, but having raised my kid with ADHD, I can assure you that putting him in bed at 8:30 to 9 just about every night for the last decade (7:30 to 8 when he was younger) has done nothing to determine when he falls asleep. It just means he's awake in bed until 10, 12, or even 2. His brother, without ADHD, has none of these problems. So it must be my parenting technique, right?
You have no clue what these people go through. The activities in their lives are totally orthogonal to any ADD/ADHD indications that may be there. I've seen kids with or without a rigorous schedule or regular bedtime routine who have no indications of ADD, likewise those who do.
Certainly there are misdiagnoses, many times for the convenience of the parents or teachers, but there are doubtless more armchair doctors who think they have a clue about something they haven't studied, lived through, or researched for decades.
For instance, some of the cables from Apple. I don't know if they can be 'upgraded' or programmed, but they can be counterfeited with malicious additional 'features' (and who better to slip one in than an employee?). This was even discussed previously on Slashdot. Yay?
This is one thing where I don't criticize the NSA. It's certain they know things we don't. The question is, "What do they know?"
Clearly you didn't read what the previous submitter was saying. Sure, depending on where you are on the scale you might be able to get away without medication. But some of the issues you're describing are results of ADD, not causes. It's like blaming the limp for your broken leg.
"This will make you safe from everyone but us" is not the same as "This will make you safe from everyone including us." And while the former may be acceptable with respect to the NSA and the State Department, I don't think it's the optimal situation with respect to the NSA and Google, or me, for instance.
Slashdot Mirror
You could call it DuckDuckGo.
But if you just put the marble there it will roll down toward the mass that is deforming the sheet. This breaks the analogy for me.
Okay, take a marble, hold it out at arm's length, and let go. Note how, in your frame of reference, the marble falls straight down. Try doing it from the top of a building, and you might even be able to detect the effects of atmosphere or the earth's rotation on it. Feel free to place an object further out in earth's gravity well, or in the sun's gravity well, with no angular momentum relative to the central object (earth or sun) and it too will fall straight down, providing there are no other forces acting on it.
So how is it any different from placing a stationary object at the edge of the sheet and having it roll down?
Well said. Also, it maps with some degree of accuracy the behaviour of objects in a 4-dimensional spacetime into a 3-dimensional spacetime, allowing us to alter the degree of deformation, manipulate objects in it, and observe their behaviour. Outside of a 3D computer model, I don't see any easy way for us to do that in the classroom.
Ah, so you too don't know the difference between a model and an analogy. In your car "model" of a Linux computer, what counts as the wheels?
Ah, ColdSam, you are a barrel of laughs. Everyone is supposed to know the exact amount of traction their car will have on a given day in a given location so that they can make sure their car doesn't slide an inch or two past a line which is ALWAYS put at such a distance as to allow for a foot or more of sliding before a pedestrian or another vehicle would be at risk, and you are perfectly fine if they are penalized for that. Yet, when a law is enacted for your safety and the convenience of everyone around you that says you can be fined for not crossing in clearly marked locations, that's the law that isn't useful.
Another item to note. Without the contract, Boeing will have less for their employees, which means they will have less to spend on whatever they like. This means, to some degree, any market that is supported by a typical employee, from farmers to hair stylists to fast food employees to airplane parts manufacturers are affected, to a greater or lesser degree. Of course, for those who understand, this is what the concept of "the economy" means...
I hate being a grammar nazi but, this Stross guy being a writer, I think it's warranted.
And there's your mistake. He's a writer, not an editor. He gets paid for conveying his ideas, not for using proper grammar and spelling.
Yes, many science fiction stories touch upon this. The one concern I have is the use of artificial scarcity as a means of control. With this weapon, one can direct masses of people whereas otherwise you would have no ability to do so, for good or bad. And, of course, having that power runs the risk of it corrupting the wielder...
There is one way you could make it covered and still not confuse users - have the sliding door activated by the computer when the camera is active. Then you could see when the camera was active, and the door could hard-wire an LED activation...
Only on slashdot would this be given as an alternative to a camera and LED being set on a single circuit during a discussion involving the KISS principle.
As another responder said, no, I'm not always confident I made the right choice. Yes, there might be other solutions. Some may be too expensive to try out, some just may not be an option given my circumstances. But I am confident I made the best decision I could, and continue to hope that, if it wasn't the right one, it was good enough to at least have a beneficial outcome.
And what exactly would you be doing in your response? There's a reason most of the speeding cameras don't trigger until you've done some percentage above the speed limit. How many judges do you think would throw out a speeding ticket if you were doing 50.5 km/h in a 50 km/h zone? Would you even be able to tell if you were going 1% over the speed limit? Shall we also have police start handing out fines for jaywalking on empty streets?
I would more call it well-adjusted, which I consider to be a subset of sanity. If you're a drug dealer, know you sell poison (pick the "really bad drug" of your choice), never use it yourself, are happy with the money and relative ease it takes to acquire it (a debatable point, I'm sure), and have no qualms letting people be responsible for their own actions, would that be considered sane by the definition above? I'd think not. You know your actions are harmful, and choose not to change them, and are not empathizing with your clients and their further harm that you facilitate. OTOH, I'd still consider them sane by conventional standards, just not very well-adjusted.
This is not to say that the above definition isn't a laudable standard to strive for, and people who meet it would be very easy to interact with.
Quoting the grandparent:
they came to a complete stop INCHES past the intersection painted lines
Did you notice the relevant part of that comment this time?
So, for you non-obvious is the combination of a flat power connector and a child-safe lock. Yes, I'm sure there are minor differences, much like there are between a state-of-the-art tumbler lock and one from ancient history, but that doesn't make it unrecognizable or non-obvious to an expert in the field.
Well, to be fair, McAfee and Norton are constrained by false advertising laws. The NSA doesn't have such constraints, not being in a position to sell us anything. They just force their work down our throats.
I personally can't stop thinking that the critical infrastructure that they corrected that would have crippled the economy had it not been stopped was the Clipper Chip. So, I guess they aren't really lying!
They do work, they get paid for part of the value of their work (if they got paid the full value of their work, it wouldn't be profitable for their employer to hire them).
This is totally broken logic. Had you said, "They do work, they get paid for part of the value of the resulting good or service (if they got paid the full value of the resulting good or service, it wouldn't be profitable for their employer to hire them)," that would be a valid statement. As it stands, your statement is the equivalent of, "The only way an employer is able to make a profit is by screwing his employees." Note that I assume that the employer also brings something to the table, such as marketing, locating better suppliers, allowing economies of scale, and finding more efficient ways of producing the good or service. You know, the difference between working for yourself versus working as part of an organization (besides the ability to screw its employees).
I pity you your worldview.
Well, I suppose welfare and jails are cheaper than police and prisons...seems to me you pay either way.
There are a number of things to consider, though.
There is now a precedent. Screw up too badly, and the government might bail you out. Fuck them over in the process, and well, maybe they won't.
Politicians are a quantity that GM has to consider. Certainly, there is no evidence that politicians care if they spend money poorly. However, leave them with egg on their faces, and it might take more "campaign contributions" to make them forget that.
Taxpayers are also consumers. People rarely feel brand loyalty towards companies that screw them and their friends over. Even if it is only about $35 per person.
These are some other things that need to be weighed, rather than just what the next quarter will look like.
Otherwise it might just be the case that cat owners tend to be accident prone
An equal possibility is that cat owners have subconsciously lost the will to live and seek ways to die, no longer wishing to be the subjects of their capricious and mysteriously malevolent overlords.
I'm a cat owner. And suddenly I have a desire to go for a drive. *yawn*
Well, here's what I read: blah blah blah whine whine whine get off my lawn kid goes to bed late and can't focus in school. That's a wonderful assessment from the outside looking in, but having raised my kid with ADHD, I can assure you that putting him in bed at 8:30 to 9 just about every night for the last decade (7:30 to 8 when he was younger) has done nothing to determine when he falls asleep. It just means he's awake in bed until 10, 12, or even 2. His brother, without ADHD, has none of these problems. So it must be my parenting technique, right?
You have no clue what these people go through. The activities in their lives are totally orthogonal to any ADD/ADHD indications that may be there. I've seen kids with or without a rigorous schedule or regular bedtime routine who have no indications of ADD, likewise those who do.
Certainly there are misdiagnoses, many times for the convenience of the parents or teachers, but there are doubtless more armchair doctors who think they have a clue about something they haven't studied, lived through, or researched for decades.
For instance, some of the cables from Apple. I don't know if they can be 'upgraded' or programmed, but they can be counterfeited with malicious additional 'features' (and who better to slip one in than an employee?). This was even discussed previously on Slashdot. Yay?
This is one thing where I don't criticize the NSA. It's certain they know things we don't. The question is, "What do they know?"
Clearly you didn't read what the previous submitter was saying. Sure, depending on where you are on the scale you might be able to get away without medication. But some of the issues you're describing are results of ADD, not causes. It's like blaming the limp for your broken leg.
"This will make you safe from everyone but us" is not the same as "This will make you safe from everyone including us." And while the former may be acceptable with respect to the NSA and the State Department, I don't think it's the optimal situation with respect to the NSA and Google, or me, for instance.
May be the police are just slow, to react to anything, from the scanner report to ars technica.
Ah yes, slow to react is just what I'm looking for in an emergency response organization.