Sorry this is not true. It is true on the subset of KNOWN matter that we deal with on a day to day basis. However you can get rather strange states of matter or collections of unique particles that do not, like a room full of neutrinos isn't going to radiate anything other than neutrinos.
Of course people were/are not stupid. However your explanation is not correct, while you can measure the spin down rate of a pulsar and correlate it with its energy loss thus giving you a good idea how the spin down evolves with time, you can also measure WHEN the neutron star was created by observing the super nova remnant or looking in history to find some observation of the event, this gives you a starting date. Before this explanation you could not have spun down the neutron star in the alotted time via the observed rate.
You seem to think that because some group doesn't believe in god that they are then associated with all those who do not. Religion, which generally refers to organized religion, is a group that chooses to define itself, that is not the case with atheism. There is no atheist convention, no weekly meetings, no book that all atheists follow. Trying to say that because some group of people were also atheist thus atheism is to blame does not make sense. There were many more reasons why soviet communism was so violent and oppressive, not letting people believe in a god was only a symptom not the cause.
I do not believe any system that lets someone track a single vote will stand up against the provisions in the constitution which protect anonymous voting. There are very good reasons that it is not a good idea to have confirmation of a vote that can be check outside the polling station. Mainly you do not want to allow the buying of votes.
While I understand the desire to know exactly how your vote was counted I think that having a paper trail that can be counted by humans would make it a lot harder to have widespread voter fraud. Even if you are given a encrypted key that only you know there is no reason that you should expect that what the computer tells you is what it counts in the tally. The ONLY way to be sure is to have two distinct methods for getting a count then comparing the statistical corroelations. You being able to check how you think you voted online doesn't tell you how the machine acutally tallied the votes.
So why again is it reasonable for M$ to have a say in your situation? If I am a reporter and trying to give developers a good idea of the performance benefits/costs associated with "widgets," why should the maker of one "widget" have a say in how I do that? Even if I am not a reporter per se but just some guy who wants to know how.net works on a 386 compared to java on a dual core? Why should M$ have a say at all?
You need the laser to be coherent across the entire path so that the particles are able to "surf" the wave fronts. Simply adding mirrors does not accomplish this and even if you had a coherents length of 30 m; you can't get the acceration to occur in higher energy density any faster. Basically you need to experience the full slope of the wave front to get maximal acceleration.
So your argument is, if I may paraphrase:
We don't know exactly what causes global warming nor what increased CO2 levels do thus we should do whatever is easiest?
I know there are some out there who claim that CO2 directly causes global warming; but regardless of the correctness of that assertion it seems very naive to go on adding CO2 to the atomosphere when the levels are higher than we have any record of and we don't know what effect it might have.
The major problem with this type of voting is that it does not easliy allow for handicaped voters to vote without help thus making their vote not private. While I think it is much more important for society to trust the voting system then to have easy or perfect voting for everyone, the courts, rightfully following the laws, have ruled this is a major problem.
While the article you point to may, in the end be true, there is at least one very significant problem with they did: used gcc to compile the test code. As far as I know there are problems with gcc and vectorized code, a fact that is even mentioned in the article you linked to but not further discussed. If that is the case then what the g5 was designed to do and run as was not being properly tested.
I would also expect things like this to change a lot when you change architechtures as Apple recently did.
The above is not ment to say that Apple is great just that the article the parent linked to might not be up to date or ever a reasonable comparison.
As for Anandtech being trustworthy I would suggested looking around the web a bit, they have been having problems lately although I don't think this article would be one of those.
So you are able to buy a Macrovision free tv at best buy? Everything you buy has been built using some personal connections, this is life. You need someone to make a part for you and you have a friend who can do it and you trust them so you go with them. I was under the impression that you were pointing out that it would not happen in a "free market" scenario, to which I ask why do you think this?
In what world do you live in where the "free market" isn't also only about connections? Since when was there a place where the company that made the better widget won out and not the company that marketed their widget most effectivly? "Free Market" is an illusion that people bring out when they think the grass will be greener if we don't have a government. They seem to forget that companies have run over the citizen countless times in history and it will happen again, and will only occur more often if there are not consequences for their actions.
The reason it proves that there is dark matter and not a change in the force law is that the potential create by the observed matter has one form and the one needed to explain the behaviour of the observable matter has a different form. In this case the new force would need to provide a force orthogonal to the center of mass to explain the motion of the observable material. Since this is outside of all known laws of physics we discount it and surmise that the true center of mass is determined by the dynamics of the system and not just the matter we directly observe.
It is also not true to refer to dark matter and MOND as counter arguments. Both could be true. Specifically MOND is unable to explain the dynamics we observe on all length scales and thus, if correct, must not be the full picture; thus allowing for dark matter.
Fortunatly for the contractors they have already taken care of your suggestion by making it manditory for the government to choose the LOWEST bid. The people making all the money here take a small portion of that and spend it on lobbyists to change the laws making it easier for them to screw over the government.
The problem with your idea of 1.6e60 people in the past is that you are over counting. Sure I have that many possible combinations but in the end there is only one line that made me. I find it is easier to think of it in the future instead of the past, i.e.: if I have 2 kids and all my later relatives have 2 kids then my genetic input to the species will grow by powers of 2 per generation. However at each point someone else is also inputing genetic info so at each point I have to take out a factor of two for the total of the planet, which is why, if we all only had 2 kids we would never have a growing population and everyone would be related to everyone else rather quickly, which is what they found. Now I am babbling. . . .
The Macbook does not cost so much that my, nor anyone's, expectations should be higher than those for other vendors. I am working on a $3000 Dell Latitude that has had more problems that I care to discuss but suffice it to say I have replaced the whole unit twice. I have decided I will never buy Dell again. Now if I had bought a Macbook for $1000 and it had a bad feeling to the trackpad buttons I would assume that I hadn't checked out the product before buying and that I just didn't like their buttons. My friend hates Macbook keyboards because of their spacing, I don't like the old ones because of their motion, but those are not quality problems. They are things we don't like.
So if fraud was involved shouldn't this have been resolved by the courts NOT the FTC? I understand your point that Rockstar agreed to have their products rated by the ESRB but I don't see how this involves the FTC since it appears as though, if anything, it is fraud but that is resolved in our court system.
Perhaps you didn't RTFA but as another reader pointed out: the advertisements will not stream unless the user click on it. So they will not be wasteing bandwidth nor will they be putting annoying video everywhere. If the user wants to click on an ad for something then they get a "better" experience. Seems like the same old Google to me: give the people only what they want. So you and I won't see the ads and someone who might actually buy what is being advertised will.
Your reply assumes a two body stable orbit. This is almost certainly not the case. As soon as there is more than two bodies then we cannot make long term analytic predictions. Even if it is a two body system there are many orbits which appear to be stable for long periods then slowly decay. The orbit of the moon about the Earth is a case where the tidal forces that act between the two closely orbiting bodies allows for the bleeding off of angular momentum and the change in the orbit of the moon and the rotation of the Earth.
That really depends on what they are selling, I suspect they will advertise this as "Unlimited Internet" as so many other's do. Then I would have a problem with your thinking, they should not be able to make a statement that you get internet access if they block ports. Packet filtering I can kind of understand but port blocking means I can't go to my website running on 323. End rant.
But hey, at $0.10 per SMS, if I ran a cell company, I'd sure as hell want to discourage my customers from using an ultra-low-bandwidth (and free) alternative as well!
I prefer the term "Already paid for." Free this is not, you just are paying for the bandwidth instead of the specific service. With SMS you pay for the service AND the bandwidth.
No it is not wrong. Nor is it correct to say that someone's life is worth an ammount related to their ablity to pay. Value has many meanings NOT just monetary and there are times when the money pushs a solution that is not the most valueable to society.
All of your points are valid but do nothing to excuse giving a non-living entity, with indefinate lifespan, and the power of many people, the same rights as a real citizen. While I don't think that most of your points should be allowed, those should be taken care of by a different set of laws. Companies are social and governmental constructs they should not be able to hide behind privacy as a normal citizen.
I think you are being a little short sighted here. When you are a business you need to make your contact information available to your customers and those that are interested in becoming customers. While businesses certainly do want you to contact them if you are interested in becoming a customer they most certainly don't want to have a similar ammount of faxes on the floor in the morning as they find spam in the email boxes. Keeping a number unpublished is not an option for what most fax numbers are used for: business corrospondance.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry this is not true. It is true on the subset of KNOWN matter that we deal with on a day to day basis. However you can get rather strange states of matter or collections of unique particles that do not, like a room full of neutrinos isn't going to radiate anything other than neutrinos.
Of course people were/are not stupid. However your explanation is not correct, while you can measure the spin down rate of a pulsar and correlate it with its energy loss thus giving you a good idea how the spin down evolves with time, you can also measure WHEN the neutron star was created by observing the super nova remnant or looking in history to find some observation of the event, this gives you a starting date. Before this explanation you could not have spun down the neutron star in the alotted time via the observed rate.
You seem to think that because some group doesn't believe in god that they are then associated with all those who do not. Religion, which generally refers to organized religion, is a group that chooses to define itself, that is not the case with atheism. There is no atheist convention, no weekly meetings, no book that all atheists follow. Trying to say that because some group of people were also atheist thus atheism is to blame does not make sense. There were many more reasons why soviet communism was so violent and oppressive, not letting people believe in a god was only a symptom not the cause.
I do not believe any system that lets someone track a single vote will stand up against the provisions in the constitution which protect anonymous voting. There are very good reasons that it is not a good idea to have confirmation of a vote that can be check outside the polling station. Mainly you do not want to allow the buying of votes.
While I understand the desire to know exactly how your vote was counted I think that having a paper trail that can be counted by humans would make it a lot harder to have widespread voter fraud. Even if you are given a encrypted key that only you know there is no reason that you should expect that what the computer tells you is what it counts in the tally. The ONLY way to be sure is to have two distinct methods for getting a count then comparing the statistical corroelations. You being able to check how you think you voted online doesn't tell you how the machine acutally tallied the votes.
So why again is it reasonable for M$ to have a say in your situation? If I am a reporter and trying to give developers a good idea of the performance benefits/costs associated with "widgets," why should the maker of one "widget" have a say in how I do that? Even if I am not a reporter per se but just some guy who wants to know how .net works on a 386 compared to java on a dual core? Why should M$ have a say at all?
You need the laser to be coherent across the entire path so that the particles are able to "surf" the wave fronts. Simply adding mirrors does not accomplish this and even if you had a coherents length of 30 m; you can't get the acceration to occur in higher energy density any faster. Basically you need to experience the full slope of the wave front to get maximal acceleration.
So your argument is, if I may paraphrase:
We don't know exactly what causes global warming nor what increased CO2 levels do thus we should do whatever is easiest?
I know there are some out there who claim that CO2 directly causes global warming; but regardless of the correctness of that assertion it seems very naive to go on adding CO2 to the atomosphere when the levels are higher than we have any record of and we don't know what effect it might have.
The major problem with this type of voting is that it does not easliy allow for handicaped voters to vote without help thus making their vote not private. While I think it is much more important for society to trust the voting system then to have easy or perfect voting for everyone, the courts, rightfully following the laws, have ruled this is a major problem.
While the article you point to may, in the end be true, there is at least one very significant problem with they did: used gcc to compile the test code. As far as I know there are problems with gcc and vectorized code, a fact that is even mentioned in the article you linked to but not further discussed. If that is the case then what the g5 was designed to do and run as was not being properly tested.
I would also expect things like this to change a lot when you change architechtures as Apple recently did.
The above is not ment to say that Apple is great just that the article the parent linked to might not be up to date or ever a reasonable comparison.
As for Anandtech being trustworthy I would suggested looking around the web a bit, they have been having problems lately although I don't think this article would be one of those.
So you are able to buy a Macrovision free tv at best buy? Everything you buy has been built using some personal connections, this is life. You need someone to make a part for you and you have a friend who can do it and you trust them so you go with them. I was under the impression that you were pointing out that it would not happen in a "free market" scenario, to which I ask why do you think this?
In what world do you live in where the "free market" isn't also only about connections? Since when was there a place where the company that made the better widget won out and not the company that marketed their widget most effectivly? "Free Market" is an illusion that people bring out when they think the grass will be greener if we don't have a government. They seem to forget that companies have run over the citizen countless times in history and it will happen again, and will only occur more often if there are not consequences for their actions.
The reason it proves that there is dark matter and not a change in the force law is that the potential create by the observed matter has one form and the one needed to explain the behaviour of the observable matter has a different form. In this case the new force would need to provide a force orthogonal to the center of mass to explain the motion of the observable material. Since this is outside of all known laws of physics we discount it and surmise that the true center of mass is determined by the dynamics of the system and not just the matter we directly observe.
It is also not true to refer to dark matter and MOND as counter arguments. Both could be true. Specifically MOND is unable to explain the dynamics we observe on all length scales and thus, if correct, must not be the full picture; thus allowing for dark matter.
Fortunatly for the contractors they have already taken care of your suggestion by making it manditory for the government to choose the LOWEST bid. The people making all the money here take a small portion of that and spend it on lobbyists to change the laws making it easier for them to screw over the government.
The problem with your idea of 1.6e60 people in the past is that you are over counting. Sure I have that many possible combinations but in the end there is only one line that made me. I find it is easier to think of it in the future instead of the past, i.e.: if I have 2 kids and all my later relatives have 2 kids then my genetic input to the species will grow by powers of 2 per generation. However at each point someone else is also inputing genetic info so at each point I have to take out a factor of two for the total of the planet, which is why, if we all only had 2 kids we would never have a growing population and everyone would be related to everyone else rather quickly, which is what they found. Now I am babbling. . . .
The Macbook does not cost so much that my, nor anyone's, expectations should be higher than those for other vendors. I am working on a $3000 Dell Latitude that has had more problems that I care to discuss but suffice it to say I have replaced the whole unit twice. I have decided I will never buy Dell again. Now if I had bought a Macbook for $1000 and it had a bad feeling to the trackpad buttons I would assume that I hadn't checked out the product before buying and that I just didn't like their buttons. My friend hates Macbook keyboards because of their spacing, I don't like the old ones because of their motion, but those are not quality problems. They are things we don't like.
So if fraud was involved shouldn't this have been resolved by the courts NOT the FTC? I understand your point that Rockstar agreed to have their products rated by the ESRB but I don't see how this involves the FTC since it appears as though, if anything, it is fraud but that is resolved in our court system.
Doesn't a single check accomplish the same effect?
Perhaps you didn't RTFA but as another reader pointed out: the advertisements will not stream unless the user click on it. So they will not be wasteing bandwidth nor will they be putting annoying video everywhere. If the user wants to click on an ad for something then they get a "better" experience. Seems like the same old Google to me: give the people only what they want. So you and I won't see the ads and someone who might actually buy what is being advertised will.
Mr. Zimmermann, the registration page that is being refered to only asks for you email address, thus your argument is invalid in this case.s tration.html
http://www.philzimmermann.com/EN/zfone/index-regi
So why do you require registration?
Your reply assumes a two body stable orbit. This is almost certainly not the case. As soon as there is more than two bodies then we cannot make long term analytic predictions. Even if it is a two body system there are many orbits which appear to be stable for long periods then slowly decay. The orbit of the moon about the Earth is a case where the tidal forces that act between the two closely orbiting bodies allows for the bleeding off of angular momentum and the change in the orbit of the moon and the rotation of the Earth.
That really depends on what they are selling, I suspect they will advertise this as "Unlimited Internet" as so many other's do. Then I would have a problem with your thinking, they should not be able to make a statement that you get internet access if they block ports. Packet filtering I can kind of understand but port blocking means I can't go to my website running on 323. End rant.
No it is not wrong. Nor is it correct to say that someone's life is worth an ammount related to their ablity to pay. Value has many meanings NOT just monetary and there are times when the money pushs a solution that is not the most valueable to society.
All of your points are valid but do nothing to excuse giving a non-living entity, with indefinate lifespan, and the power of many people, the same rights as a real citizen. While I don't think that most of your points should be allowed, those should be taken care of by a different set of laws. Companies are social and governmental constructs they should not be able to hide behind privacy as a normal citizen.
I think you are being a little short sighted here. When you are a business you need to make your contact information available to your customers and those that are interested in becoming customers. While businesses certainly do want you to contact them if you are interested in becoming a customer they most certainly don't want to have a similar ammount of faxes on the floor in the morning as they find spam in the email boxes. Keeping a number unpublished is not an option for what most fax numbers are used for: business corrospondance.