It's simply really. Corporations are more efficient than government. This is why capitolism is stronger than communism. I for one hope the government stays out of the broadband business. The government trying to compete with private industry is like a snail racing a turbo equipped, supercharged, highly efficient sports car made by the hard working companies who are inspired by the incentive of potential success of their work.
I agree. Slashdot has turned into a cesspool of anti Bush haters. I used to read slashdot for its coverage of all things nerdy but now I'm more amused by the radical left-wing bomb throwers. It's a shame the slashdot community has become so bitter.
I sometimes wonder if Bush is clueless about what the public thinks, not because he's so unconnected or just plain stupid, but because he never sees anything indicating that there's actually an opinion other than his.
Didn't he win the last election? Doesn't that mean the majority of the public who voted agree with his views?
Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 10 years. I'm an electrical engineer. During my studies in sub-atomic physics, I learned that a particles velocity can be effected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetic field due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be contributed to this? I've been bouncing this idea in my head for a while now and I can't see why this MAY not be true.
Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 10 years. I'm an electrical engineer. During my studies in sub-atomic physics that a particle's velocity can be effected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetic field due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be contributed to this?
I've been bouncing this idea in my head for a while now and I can't see why this MAY not be true.
I agree with you. What you say is correct. When nearly 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock in the US, we have a problem. The secular/progressive movement is not good for the home. It's not good for children and I believe it's the root cause of many criminal and drug related problems to name just a COUPLE. I'm tired of Oprah Winfrey rooting on woman who are attempting to make it on there own. I applaud the woman who have the tenacity to try but I fear the outcome.
look, the guy gets his cut'n'pastes linked to slashdot on regular basis without providing anything extraordinary or even mediocre journalistic talent.
No, you're wrong. He's proven again and again that he has an eye for interesting articles. That's his talent. I'm arguing that it's okay to reward him for that.
what i don't enjoy is people who think that they shouldn't complain because magically if they complained about something they wouldnt be enjoying life
I am in no position to determine if you enjoy life or not. For that, I'm sorry. I see your posts as aggressive and angry. Personally, I've found that happiness comes from serenity. I choose to not be jealous about others such as Roland. I've found that I am more at peace with myself when I live my life without worrying about other people. Roland isn't hurting me. I don't care that he makes money for his talents. Neither should you.
I believe in rewarding others for their good work. Based on the history of Roland's submissions, I believe he has an eye for good tech articles and I believe he should be rewarded for that.
I believe in rewarding good work because that's how we as readers are better informed of the world and conentional technology.
You need to ask yourself why it's a problem for you to accept good work. You need to ask yourself why you're bitter about Roland? The sooner you figure out this problem in your head, the sooner you'll enjoy life.
Apparently Michael Crichton spent 3 years researching this issue. I'm just happy that there are people like Michael Crichton who are skeptical about the whole issue. I feel like many proponents of global warming convey they are certain they're right. I for one, simply don't know at this point. To be honest, I think that there isn't one person on this Earth that knows 100% for sure that it is or isn't an epidemic. In the face of countless politically motivated accusations regarding global warming, it's refreshing to me that someone such as Michael Crichton voices a moderate sensibility.
I'm sure I'll be moded down since I do not participate in the collective Slashdot bomb throwing on this issue but I thought I'd share my 0.02.
I have a lot of respect for Michael Crichton. With countless number one selling books not to mention a medical degree under his belt, I think the man is very smart.
Controlled experiments date back to 580 BC as indicated here:
The first theoretical mathematician is held to be Thales of Miletus (c. 580 BC) who is believed to have proposed the first theorems in plane geometry. His disciple Pythagoras established geometry as a recognized science among the Greeks. Pythagoras began to insist that mathematical statements must be proved using a logical chain of reasoning starting from acceptable assumptions. Undoubtedly the impetus for this demand for logical proof came from the discovery by this group of the surprising fact that the square root of 2 is a number which cannot be expressed as the ratio of two whole numbers. The use of logical reasoning, the methods of which were summarized by Aristotle, enabled Greek mathematicians to make general statements instead of merely solving individual problems as earlier mathematicians had done.
Science is both a process of gaining knowledge, and the organized body of knowledge gained by this process. The scientific process is the systematic acquisition of new knowledge about a system. This systematic acquisition is generally the scientific method, and the system is generally nature
One could argue, based on the current definition of science, that scientists existed as far back as 580 BC.
There wern't any scientists in 1500, not in the modern sense anyway. The scientific method dates from a century or two later.
Maybe so but the common belief was that the world was flat. It is now well established that the Earth is sphere like. The point of the earlier post was that skeptisism with regard to advances in humananity have been overcome with success in the past.
Scientists said going to the Moon would never happen.
Which scientists? When? Names and dates please
Don't quote me on this but I do recall reading in, "How to make friends and influence people" by Dale Carnigie that a prominant scientist in the earlier 1920's was quoted as saying (paraphrasing), "I'd bet my life savings that humans will never reach the moon."
The point to take from this discussion is that pessimism is a waste of energy. With regard to the missile defense shield, I'm for it because as an Electrical Engineer I think it can work. It may not be easy and mistakes are bound to happen but the rest of the world isn't civilized enough yet. We must protect ourselves from faulty governments and radical terrorists until they can evolve to become stable.
I'm male. Personally, I don't find other men attractive in that way. It must be how I'm wired. I really can't see the attraction. When I have dreams, I dream of being with women. I wonder if gay guys dream of being with other men.
You make a good point. It is about money... The only solution that I see is to outright change the email system technically.
I have another idea... What's the difference between a spammer and John Doe? The answer is that the spammer sends out millions of emails per month while John Doe sends out only a few. If legislation were passed that required ISPs to charge their customers an enormous amount of money for exceeding the monthly "sent email quota" then that would hit the spammers in the wallet while the average Internet user wouldn't be hurt.
The only problem is then companies who have legit email lists would also have to pay to reach their customers. This is a tough one...
I agree that a company hosting such a campaign might look poor in the eyes of jurors in court. However, the majority of people do not like spam and therefore one could argue DOSing a spammer is no different than a spammer DOSing other ISP's in the form of spam. Despite the chaos that would ensue, I wouldn't mind seeing an open source screen saver such as the Lycos program that DOS attacked the spammers. The wonderful thing about open source is that it is developed and used by the will of the people. I see no better way of sending a message to the jurors in court than an open source DOS brought fourth by the people for the people.
I'm not saying it's right but I have to admit, I would be gleeful to give them a taste of their own medicine.
Ahh, you've nailed it my friend. The kids don't want to learn. That's the problem! In a cross national comparison of curriculum and learning the study found, "As in previous surveys, the results suggested that the typical U.S. student knows less math and science than do students in many other industrialized nations".
No amount of money injected into the school system could change that but incentive on the teachers part could fix the problem. In other words, a teacher whose school is on the verge of losing money unless that kid improves his/her test score will most definitely strive to enrich the student. Either the teacher lays out ultimatums to the children to learn or the school loses money. I believe, under those circumstances, the intensity in the class room will increase.
In light of the previous situation, the real problem lies in the home. The initial reason the student doesn't care is because he's not being encouraged/disciplined by the parents. That's where the real problem lies however fixing that is another debate entirely.
I respect your opinion but I refuse to do the same thing when its not working and other things can be tried. American schools aren't good enough. We've tried fixing the problem with money. It didn't work. Hopefully teachers and schools get the message when they have to make a decision between slapping little Joey around so he focuses or lose money by settling for mediocrity.
Time will tell. We'll just have to see how the Bush administration's no child left behind program will affect test scores and student improvement. I have a feeling that holding teachers accountable for student progress will fuel a change instead of spending large amounts of money and seeing no change. I'm a firm believer in competition through the market place. Competition yields efficiency. I don't see why it wouldn't work for teachers also.
You're entitled to your opinion with regarde to me being an idiot but the numbers speak for themselves. You need to seriously ask yourself if a 1.5% increase in SAT test scores is worth 25 billion in investment. I don't know about you but that sounds like a waste of money to me. The truth is that the American school system is inefficient and the Clinton administration proved that throwing money at the problem hasn't solved it.
18 points? I think SAT scores are from 0 to 1400. I think that's right. So 18 points divided by 1400 multiplied by 100 equals 1.28% increase. Damn, that's money well spent.
During the 90's, the Clinton Admin increased funding of public schools by 25 billion and there was no improvment in test scores. Throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it. There are many countries that haven't the resources nor the money that America has and they somehow out perform America on education. It's time both the democrats and the republicans stop spending so much money because it obviously isn't working...
Slashdot Mirror
*yawns*
It's simply really. Corporations are more efficient than government. This is why capitolism is stronger than communism. I for one hope the government stays out of the broadband business. The government trying to compete with private industry is like a snail racing a turbo equipped, supercharged, highly efficient sports car made by the hard working companies who are inspired by the incentive of potential success of their work.
I agree. Slashdot has turned into a cesspool of anti Bush haters. I used to read slashdot for its coverage of all things nerdy but now I'm more amused by the radical left-wing bomb throwers. It's a shame the slashdot community has become so bitter.
I sometimes wonder if Bush is clueless about what the public thinks, not because he's so unconnected or just plain stupid, but because he never sees anything indicating that there's actually an opinion other than his.
Didn't he win the last election? Doesn't that mean the majority of the public who voted agree with his views?
Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 10 years. I'm an electrical engineer. During my studies in sub-atomic physics, I learned that a particles velocity can be effected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetic field due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be contributed to this? I've been bouncing this idea in my head for a while now and I can't see why this MAY not be true.
Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 10 years. I'm an electrical engineer. During my studies in sub-atomic physics that a particle's velocity can be effected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetic field due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be contributed to this? I've been bouncing this idea in my head for a while now and I can't see why this MAY not be true.
I agree with you. What you say is correct. When nearly 70% of black babies are born out of wedlock in the US, we have a problem. The secular/progressive movement is not good for the home. It's not good for children and I believe it's the root cause of many criminal and drug related problems to name just a COUPLE. I'm tired of Oprah Winfrey rooting on woman who are attempting to make it on there own. I applaud the woman who have the tenacity to try but I fear the outcome.
So, am I not allowed to tell layer jokes now?
look, the guy gets his cut'n'pastes linked to slashdot on regular basis without providing anything extraordinary or even mediocre journalistic talent.
No, you're wrong. He's proven again and again that he has an eye for interesting articles. That's his talent. I'm arguing that it's okay to reward him for that.
what i don't enjoy is people who think that they shouldn't complain because magically if they complained about something they wouldnt be enjoying life
I am in no position to determine if you enjoy life or not. For that, I'm sorry. I see your posts as aggressive and angry. Personally, I've found that happiness comes from serenity. I choose to not be jealous about others such as Roland. I've found that I am more at peace with myself when I live my life without worrying about other people. Roland isn't hurting me. I don't care that he makes money for his talents. Neither should you.
I believe in rewarding others for their good work. Based on the history of Roland's submissions, I believe he has an eye for good tech articles and I believe he should be rewarded for that.
I believe in rewarding good work because that's how we as readers are better informed of the world and conentional technology.
You need to ask yourself why it's a problem for you to accept good work. You need to ask yourself why you're bitter about Roland? The sooner you figure out this problem in your head, the sooner you'll enjoy life.
Apparently Michael Crichton spent 3 years researching this issue. I'm just happy that there are people like Michael Crichton who are skeptical about the whole issue. I feel like many proponents of global warming convey they are certain they're right. I for one, simply don't know at this point. To be honest, I think that there isn't one person on this Earth that knows 100% for sure that it is or isn't an epidemic. In the face of countless politically motivated accusations regarding global warming, it's refreshing to me that someone such as Michael Crichton voices a moderate sensibility.
I'm sure I'll be moded down since I do not participate in the collective Slashdot bomb throwing on this issue but I thought I'd share my 0.02.
I like what Michael Crichton says in his recent book that will soon be published:
Michael Crichton Article
I have a lot of respect for Michael Crichton. With countless number one selling books not to mention a medical degree under his belt, I think the man is very smart.
Controlled experiments date back to 580 BC as indicated here:
The first theoretical mathematician is held to be Thales of Miletus (c. 580 BC) who is believed to have proposed the first theorems in plane geometry. His disciple Pythagoras established geometry as a recognized science among the Greeks. Pythagoras began to insist that mathematical statements must be proved using a logical chain of reasoning starting from acceptable assumptions. Undoubtedly the impetus for this demand for logical proof came from the discovery by this group of the surprising fact that the square root of 2 is a number which cannot be expressed as the ratio of two whole numbers. The use of logical reasoning, the methods of which were summarized by Aristotle, enabled Greek mathematicians to make general statements instead of merely solving individual problems as earlier mathematicians had done.
Also, according to Wikipedia the definition of science says:
Science is both a process of gaining knowledge, and the organized body of knowledge gained by this process. The scientific process is the systematic acquisition of new knowledge about a system. This systematic acquisition is generally the scientific method, and the system is generally nature
One could argue, based on the current definition of science, that scientists existed as far back as 580 BC.
There wern't any scientists in 1500, not in the modern sense anyway. The scientific method dates from a century or two later.
Maybe so but the common belief was that the world was flat. It is now well established that the Earth is sphere like. The point of the earlier post was that skeptisism with regard to advances in humananity have been overcome with success in the past.
Scientists said going to the Moon would never happen. Which scientists? When? Names and dates please
Don't quote me on this but I do recall reading in, "How to make friends and influence people" by Dale Carnigie that a prominant scientist in the earlier 1920's was quoted as saying (paraphrasing), "I'd bet my life savings that humans will never reach the moon."
The point to take from this discussion is that pessimism is a waste of energy. With regard to the missile defense shield, I'm for it because as an Electrical Engineer I think it can work. It may not be easy and mistakes are bound to happen but the rest of the world isn't civilized enough yet. We must protect ourselves from faulty governments and radical terrorists until they can evolve to become stable.
I'm male. Personally, I don't find other men attractive in that way. It must be how I'm wired. I really can't see the attraction. When I have dreams, I dream of being with women. I wonder if gay guys dream of being with other men.
Lieberman is a conservative, so you can't really say that the PTC appeals across the board
I think you're wrong. He's listed as a Democratic senator on the United States Senate website.
Didn't Data save the day after Wesley was subdued? I think he used a strobe light to fix everyone. lol
You make a good point. It is about money... The only solution that I see is to outright change the email system technically.
I have another idea... What's the difference between a spammer and John Doe? The answer is that the spammer sends out millions of emails per month while John Doe sends out only a few. If legislation were passed that required ISPs to charge their customers an enormous amount of money for exceeding the monthly "sent email quota" then that would hit the spammers in the wallet while the average Internet user wouldn't be hurt.
The only problem is then companies who have legit email lists would also have to pay to reach their customers. This is a tough one...
I agree that a company hosting such a campaign might look poor in the eyes of jurors in court. However, the majority of people do not like spam and therefore one could argue DOSing a spammer is no different than a spammer DOSing other ISP's in the form of spam. Despite the chaos that would ensue, I wouldn't mind seeing an open source screen saver such as the Lycos program that DOS attacked the spammers. The wonderful thing about open source is that it is developed and used by the will of the people. I see no better way of sending a message to the jurors in court than an open source DOS brought fourth by the people for the people.
I'm not saying it's right but I have to admit, I would be gleeful to give them a taste of their own medicine.
Ahh, you've nailed it my friend. The kids don't want to learn. That's the problem! In a cross national comparison of curriculum and learning the study found, "As in previous surveys, the results suggested that the typical U.S. student knows less math and science than do students in many other industrialized nations".
No amount of money injected into the school system could change that but incentive on the teachers part could fix the problem. In other words, a teacher whose school is on the verge of losing money unless that kid improves his/her test score will most definitely strive to enrich the student. Either the teacher lays out ultimatums to the children to learn or the school loses money. I believe, under those circumstances, the intensity in the class room will increase.
In light of the previous situation, the real problem lies in the home. The initial reason the student doesn't care is because he's not being encouraged/disciplined by the parents. That's where the real problem lies however fixing that is another debate entirely.
I respect your opinion but I refuse to do the same thing when its not working and other things can be tried. American schools aren't good enough. We've tried fixing the problem with money. It didn't work. Hopefully teachers and schools get the message when they have to make a decision between slapping little Joey around so he focuses or lose money by settling for mediocrity.
Time will tell. We'll just have to see how the Bush administration's no child left behind program will affect test scores and student improvement. I have a feeling that holding teachers accountable for student progress will fuel a change instead of spending large amounts of money and seeing no change. I'm a firm believer in competition through the market place. Competition yields efficiency. I don't see why it wouldn't work for teachers also.
You're entitled to your opinion with regarde to me being an idiot but the numbers speak for themselves. You need to seriously ask yourself if a 1.5% increase in SAT test scores is worth 25 billion in investment. I don't know about you but that sounds like a waste of money to me. The truth is that the American school system is inefficient and the Clinton administration proved that throwing money at the problem hasn't solved it.
18 points? I think SAT scores are from 0 to 1400. I think that's right. So 18 points divided by 1400 multiplied by 100 equals 1.28% increase. Damn, that's money well spent.
During the 90's, the Clinton Admin increased funding of public schools by 25 billion and there was no improvment in test scores. Throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it. There are many countries that haven't the resources nor the money that America has and they somehow out perform America on education. It's time both the democrats and the republicans stop spending so much money because it obviously isn't working...
America is wonderful. We are number one for a reason. If America was so bad, why are so many people trying to become American?