I think in Phoenix, Arizona they banned any further homes from having a grass turf and going instead with native vegetation which is what they ought to be doing.
Science is purely objective, why do the personalities of those who practice it matter?
Because scientists don't live in a societal vacuum. Personalities DO matter.
People haven't advanced much. 700 years ago, you either believed in the bible or you were burned at the stake. 70 years ago in Germany or the Soviet Union, you "believed" in Hitler or Stalin respectively, or you were sent to the concentration camp. 7 years ago, you went "hoo-rah!" with invading Iraq, or you were person non grata some places.
Even today there are these cherished beliefs you CANNOT question. They are all over society. Not just in third world, in first worlds you get ostracized all the time from these little factions or even jailed for voicing the wrong thing. People love their fucking little beliefs and love even more making sure that you believe the same thing they do or at the least you STFU if you don't. Hell, it happens at places like/. or Digg if you go against groupthink - it's one of the fundamental truths about humanity.
From the summary:
But only five of the 275 in-depth interviewees actively oppose religion
And you know why this is? Because there is nothing to be gain and a lot to be lost in actively opposing religion. Just go to someplace relatively mainstream like the Hannity forum and look at some of the extreme nutters on there. There are people in this country that will kill you because you think abortion is okay, fundamentalism isn't a purely middle east thing. Maybe the repercussions aren't as bad, but a scientist who actively opposes religion in this country where the money still says "In God We Trust" and after every speech the President has to say "God Bless America" still has some balls.
It's not at a level of going "**** Allah" in Afghanistan to be sure, but I'm sure real obstacles would be put in that person's path by someone with both faith and power.
If you're developing for the Mac OS... you should be working on a Mac. Not that it will be even close to your greatest cost, but just saying. Especially with UI considerations and knowing what your customer is used to and all that.
Losing an election does not mean you deserve punishment or are a bad person. Winning an election does not mean you are a good person.
I would like an appeal of the 17th amendment. Senate was supposed to be the voice of the states. People are already represented by the House.
I would like ballots to contain only a Name, DOB, and Residency and not political party. I hate parties, can't outlaw them, but at least we can stifle their effectiveness. If you don't know who you are voting for besides party, you don't deserve to vote. If you would like a single checkmark to vote down the line, you should be severely disappointed that you are made to think.
I would like the apt-tax to replace all national taxes. I would like in times of peace (no declared war, and no war on terror doesn't count) there be a balanced budget amendment.
I would like the electoral college either strengthen so that the electorate actually can vote something different as representatives... or cast out entirely and have a democratic vote. I would like the president to have lots of powers yanked away in either case.
The congress too should stop abusing the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses to turn a limited government into an unlimited one.
Saying that he was only a great man on the surface because he wasn't a great family man is like saying Alan Turing wasn't all that great because he was rubbish at water polo*.
Plenty of kids and neighborhoods are all the worse because of negligent/never_there fathers. No one grew up harmed because someone wasn't a good water polo player.
I don't think it's devolving. To me, many of these developments are closer to shorthand. People always sought to abbreviate their communications somehow, although I don't think this iConji will catch on too much.
Among other things, Foxconn produces the Mac mini, the iPod, the iPad, and the iPhone for Apple Inc.; Intel-branded motherboards for Intel Corp.; various orders for American computer manufacturers Dell and Hewlett-Packard; motherboards for UK computer manufacturer Zoostorm; the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 for Sony; the Wii for Nintendo; the Xbox 360 for Microsoft, cell phones for Motorola, the Amazon Kindle, and Cisco equipment.[2][3][4][5]
You're the end customer. Put your money where you mouth is. Stop buying all these products or were you trying for a cheap bashfest on Apple alone?
Tesla, to me, seems to be the same old inefficient car bodies with a bunch of batteries squeezed into it. Batteries where the elements come from strip mining and other nasty things, so the environmental impact is just shifted and reduced a bit, but not a lot.
OTOH, Aptera, to me, represents a new way of thinking.
Apple is suing because it's being eclipsed by it's competitors.
Based on what? Having more android phones sold (how many models on how many carriers)?
They're probably suing because they thought they had an edge with multitouch, having bought fingerworks around 2006ish and having implemented it in their laptops, magic mouse, iPad, and iPhone.
Now sure they're correct on this, but I don't think it's because they've been eclipsed yet.
In practical terms then, there definitely is something wrong in downloading a file to check it out, and it will be viable evidence against you in a court of law.
For another, you're not opening a magazine to see if you want to buy it or not. You're inducing copyright infringement to get an illegal copy. Even if it is to "decide if you want to buy," the fact remains that someone violated copyright at your request, and that you most definitely knew it was going to happen. At minimum, that makes you guilty of being an accessory to copyright infringement, inducing copyright infringement, and conspiracy to commit copyright infringement, which have been ruled illegal in various locals at various times.
Your entire argument is retarded. First, you're using language (accessory) to a criminal offense, not a civil one -- which AFAIK, copyright infringement is.
Second, going by your argument, if you were responsible for downloads, every time you open a webpage, you would open yourself up to liability. Who owns that font? Who owns that clipart? Or those jpegs? Haven't you ever heard of websites using other website author's templates, either knowingly or unknowingly. Should you the browser be liable then? Browsing is downloading, although we have been conditioned to associated so-called "illegal downloading" with music/movies -- in fact copyright would protect everything down to the lowly font, jpeg, and animated gif.
A downloader is not responsible to know whether the place he is downloading from owns/licensed proper copyright. Moralely perhaps, but legally he should not, if for nothing else because it would be impossible to ascertain all the elements are owned by said parties and in many cases impossible to know beforehand.
This isn't an OS war. Microsoft got/gets paid for each and every computer that gets shipped out. I'm not sure Google is in such a position to demand/get such a royalty. OTOH, Apple gets $$$ for ever iPhone shipped.
Also, desktop is upgradeable (generally) and you want to want multiple parts from multiple companies in multiple variations playing with each other nicely, perhaps with a driver install.
A phone, otoh, is an appliance. No added ram, nothing. It gets upgraded every 2 years by most people. The experience of the hardware/software will be pinned on the maker. Apple offering the iPhone OS to other makers will give away Apple's edge for little added benefit and lots of aggravation ensuring backwards compatibility and that apps work on a slew of phones.
This is not the PC war. The best things Apple can do is wholly outside of licensing out iPhone OS and that is offering the phone unlocked and on multiple carriers. This other shit is irrelevant.
-Apple said that it was still breaking even on music in the Itunes store. (Not sure if to take their word for it, but still.) -There are plenty of free games in the app store -pushing HTML5 is opposite of the walled garden people argue. There is a hulu, Netflix, pandora and Rhapsody apps where people can get videos and music outside of Apple's itunes.
I don't think this is about making money directly. My guess is that Apple's real money will come from selling them new and shiny iPhones every 2 years that perform better and better and have that perpetual upgrade path.
I think the whole flash thing is because is for the reasons Apple says, basically on a 3 inch screen without mouse, you can't offer a satisfactory flash experience and having to rely on Adobe and flash developers to consider mobile devices in their coding -- basically a losing gamble.
That's because cramming can stick things in your mind for the midterm but not longterm. I learned this the hard way in several classes, most recently when I crammed for a test (not final), got a 97%, and despite that, going towards the final exam, I could literally remember next to nothing about that section on the review sheet handed out and wouldn't have been able to do the problems if asked. Granted, this was a math class, not my most favorite subject.
I think it has to do with the amount of times you retrieve it (once during exam) vs steady learning with homework and the like where you are constantly recalling the information. Like a marathon runner, it's always best to challenge yourself but pace things out.
The patent system was originally designed to protect the small inventor from a large business entity that could simply absorb the product into their existing product line and mass-produce it at a lower cost than the inventor ever could.
Jobs doesn't say why open standards are good, because then it would be obvious that that the "freedom" Jobs offers just isn't.
Except Jobs isn't offering "freedom". He never really argued that in the essay.
Job's argument was that with open web standards, if he/Apple/or_it's_customers are unhappy with the browsing experience, Apple can throw money at it and make a better browser. But if they hate flash on the iPhone, there is NOTHING apple can do to improve it. In essence, Apple has been selling a seamless user experience. It has never been selling freedom and often times you trade in some freedom for convenience. That is Apple's market and his argument.
I own one of the last generation of PPC notebooks Apple made. It's true, it has a slow 1.67GHz G4 processor. But at it's speed it should offer somewhat decent flash, but nearly all video's are choppy for it. I never got a satisfactory answer. Apple points to Adobe saying they code a crappy implementation. Adobe points to Apple talking about not having accent to libraries they need. All I know is flash is ultra slow.
Frankly, while I think Apple is crummy on things sometimes, I know the Internet is also one giant waambulance too. If Apple wanted a super closed off garden, it's not going to get that with HTML5 anyway. I also think flash sucks, so I'd rather have it die as well.
Slashdot Mirror
If scientists worked, lived, played, and were employed by only other scientists, you'd have a point.
http://newsjunkiepost.com/2009/09/19/research-finds-that-atheists-are-most-hated-and-distrusted-minority/
It's not interesting, it's stupid.
http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/gwdepletion.html
I think in Phoenix, Arizona they banned any further homes from having a grass turf and going instead with native vegetation which is what they ought to be doing.
Golf courses are a major culprit:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91363837
Because scientists don't live in a societal vacuum. Personalities DO matter.
People haven't advanced much. 700 years ago, you either believed in the bible or you were burned at the stake. 70 years ago in Germany or the Soviet Union, you "believed" in Hitler or Stalin respectively, or you were sent to the concentration camp. 7 years ago, you went "hoo-rah!" with invading Iraq, or you were person non grata some places.
Even today there are these cherished beliefs you CANNOT question. They are all over society. Not just in third world, in first worlds you get ostracized all the time from these little factions or even jailed for voicing the wrong thing. People love their fucking little beliefs and love even more making sure that you believe the same thing they do or at the least you STFU if you don't. Hell, it happens at places like /. or Digg if you go against groupthink - it's one of the fundamental truths about humanity.
From the summary:
And you know why this is? Because there is nothing to be gain and a lot to be lost in actively opposing religion. Just go to someplace relatively mainstream like the Hannity forum and look at some of the extreme nutters on there. There are people in this country that will kill you because you think abortion is okay, fundamentalism isn't a purely middle east thing. Maybe the repercussions aren't as bad, but a scientist who actively opposes religion in this country where the money still says "In God We Trust" and after every speech the President has to say "God Bless America" still has some balls.
It's not at a level of going "**** Allah" in Afghanistan to be sure, but I'm sure real obstacles would be put in that person's path by someone with both faith and power.
Then you had jackshit for bandwidth. My math might be off, but 250GB 24/7 per month is like a constant 100 kb/s.
Your "essential" features != Broken Crap.
If you're developing for the Mac OS... you should be working on a Mac. Not that it will be even close to your greatest cost, but just saying. Especially with UI considerations and knowing what your customer is used to and all that.
Losing an election does not mean you deserve punishment or are a bad person. Winning an election does not mean you are a good person.
I would like an appeal of the 17th amendment. Senate was supposed to be the voice of the states. People are already represented by the House.
I would like ballots to contain only a Name, DOB, and Residency and not political party. I hate parties, can't outlaw them, but at least we can stifle their effectiveness. If you don't know who you are voting for besides party, you don't deserve to vote. If you would like a single checkmark to vote down the line, you should be severely disappointed that you are made to think.
I would like the apt-tax to replace all national taxes. I would like in times of peace (no declared war, and no war on terror doesn't count) there be a balanced budget amendment.
I would like the electoral college either strengthen so that the electorate actually can vote something different as representatives... or cast out entirely and have a democratic vote. I would like the president to have lots of powers yanked away in either case.
The congress too should stop abusing the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses to turn a limited government into an unlimited one.
I think you're both wrong. It's a might makes right world. Whoever wins the fight often are right in many people's eyes.
There are exceptions but between 2 guys, that's how it is with many people.
It mostly does what people want. Shiny is just a bonus.
Plenty of kids and neighborhoods are all the worse because of negligent/never_there fathers. No one grew up harmed because someone wasn't a good water polo player.
I don't think it's devolving. To me, many of these developments are closer to shorthand. People always sought to abbreviate their communications somehow, although I don't think this iConji will catch on too much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foxconn
You're the end customer. Put your money where you mouth is. Stop buying all these products or were you trying for a cheap bashfest on Apple alone?
Tesla, to me, seems to be the same old inefficient car bodies with a bunch of batteries squeezed into it. Batteries where the elements come from strip mining and other nasty things, so the environmental impact is just shifted and reduced a bit, but not a lot.
OTOH, Aptera, to me, represents a new way of thinking.
Based on what? Having more android phones sold (how many models on how many carriers)?
They're probably suing because they thought they had an edge with multitouch, having bought fingerworks around 2006ish and having implemented it in their laptops, magic mouse, iPad, and iPhone.
Now sure they're correct on this, but I don't think it's because they've been eclipsed yet.
Your entire argument is retarded. First, you're using language (accessory) to a criminal offense, not a civil one -- which AFAIK, copyright infringement is.
Second, going by your argument, if you were responsible for downloads, every time you open a webpage, you would open yourself up to liability. Who owns that font? Who owns that clipart? Or those jpegs? Haven't you ever heard of websites using other website author's templates, either knowingly or unknowingly. Should you the browser be liable then? Browsing is downloading, although we have been conditioned to associated so-called "illegal downloading" with music/movies -- in fact copyright would protect everything down to the lowly font, jpeg, and animated gif.
A downloader is not responsible to know whether the place he is downloading from owns/licensed proper copyright. Moralely perhaps, but legally he should not, if for nothing else because it would be impossible to ascertain all the elements are owned by said parties and in many cases impossible to know beforehand.
Jump in early and get burned? I hope it's not literally in this case... somehow I'd wait and have the rockets perfected by experience first...
This isn't an OS war. Microsoft got/gets paid for each and every computer that gets shipped out. I'm not sure Google is in such a position to demand/get such a royalty. OTOH, Apple gets $$$ for ever iPhone shipped.
Also, desktop is upgradeable (generally) and you want to want multiple parts from multiple companies in multiple variations playing with each other nicely, perhaps with a driver install.
A phone, otoh, is an appliance. No added ram, nothing. It gets upgraded every 2 years by most people. The experience of the hardware/software will be pinned on the maker. Apple offering the iPhone OS to other makers will give away Apple's edge for little added benefit and lots of aggravation ensuring backwards compatibility and that apps work on a slew of phones.
This is not the PC war. The best things Apple can do is wholly outside of licensing out iPhone OS and that is offering the phone unlocked and on multiple carriers. This other shit is irrelevant.
Wouldn't that circumvent all this? There are other standards...
That doesn't make sense on several levels.
-Apple said that it was still breaking even on music in the Itunes store. (Not sure if to take their word for it, but still.)
-There are plenty of free games in the app store
-pushing HTML5 is opposite of the walled garden people argue. There is a hulu, Netflix, pandora and Rhapsody apps where people can get videos and music outside of Apple's itunes.
I don't think this is about making money directly. My guess is that Apple's real money will come from selling them new and shiny iPhones every 2 years that perform better and better and have that perpetual upgrade path.
I think the whole flash thing is because is for the reasons Apple says, basically on a 3 inch screen without mouse, you can't offer a satisfactory flash experience and having to rely on Adobe and flash developers to consider mobile devices in their coding -- basically a losing gamble.
So any /.ers want to volunteer to jump into the volcano?
That's because cramming can stick things in your mind for the midterm but not longterm. I learned this the hard way in several classes, most recently when I crammed for a test (not final), got a 97%, and despite that, going towards the final exam, I could literally remember next to nothing about that section on the review sheet handed out and wouldn't have been able to do the problems if asked. Granted, this was a math class, not my most favorite subject.
I think it has to do with the amount of times you retrieve it (once during exam) vs steady learning with homework and the like where you are constantly recalling the information. Like a marathon runner, it's always best to challenge yourself but pace things out.
It will largely take care of the pedophile problem and the dwindling number willing to be priests in one shot.
Priests marrying wasn't disallowed all throughout church history anyway, it was political nonsense to do away with questions of inheritance.
Citation please.
Wow, obviously two great and consumer friendly examples.
Except Jobs isn't offering "freedom". He never really argued that in the essay.
Job's argument was that with open web standards, if he/Apple/or_it's_customers are unhappy with the browsing experience, Apple can throw money at it and make a better browser. But if they hate flash on the iPhone, there is NOTHING apple can do to improve it. In essence, Apple has been selling a seamless user experience. It has never been selling freedom and often times you trade in some freedom for convenience. That is Apple's market and his argument.
I own one of the last generation of PPC notebooks Apple made. It's true, it has a slow 1.67GHz G4 processor. But at it's speed it should offer somewhat decent flash, but nearly all video's are choppy for it. I never got a satisfactory answer. Apple points to Adobe saying they code a crappy implementation. Adobe points to Apple talking about not having accent to libraries they need. All I know is flash is ultra slow.
Frankly, while I think Apple is crummy on things sometimes, I know the Internet is also one giant waambulance too. If Apple wanted a super closed off garden, it's not going to get that with HTML5 anyway. I also think flash sucks, so I'd rather have it die as well.