I got into computers 25 years ago so I wouldn't have to work under these types of conditions.
And haven't....
In todays day and age, why do you have to be on-site? Dust, heat and computers don't normally get along very well. And no coffee...??
Please, oh please put SAP out of our misery.
How this company got so big is beyond me.
You could build a custom system from scratch in shorter order than you can customize SAP.
No, we are just saying that your understanding of the science of forestry is pretty limited.
Yeah, I was only born in northern Ontario (the deep, dark bush), and currently live in the Pacific Northwest where I still live in the bush. I have spent a lifetime hunting, fishing and prospecting for recreation. I worked in sawmills and as a mineral surveyor as a teenager. I later worked for many years with the government on developing land-resource information systems where all my peers were foresters, biologists, technicians, and meant I had to liase with both US and Canadian Federal government land management professionals, mostly foresters. Trust me, to develop a decision-support system for forest management/integrated resource managemnt, you learn a lot about the science, especially as it means acquiring the data from real foresters.
My opinions are based on the science I learned from all these people, and surprisingly, they're all in agreement. And your credentials are what? You live on the 20th floor of some building and go to work on the 17th floor of some other building? And pass a tree on the route in between?
I didn't write any of these points to create an argument, to be called a moron or be told my knowledge of forestry is pretty limited, because it is not. I submitted because, as always, I had some facts I wanted to share. I didn't expect all these close-minded, emotional responses.
Multi-100 year-old trees were quite common in the Smokey Mts prior to the 1920s when the loggers came in and took them down. There are still a few to be found if you know where to look.
I'm not disputing there are can be multi-hundred year old trees, as I even offered an example of 1000 year old trees from the Niagara Escarpment. I should have said "commonly" live to 400 years. Most people don't live to be 100, but that doesn't mean they can't or that it's impossible. Look at a map of North America: the largest contiguous forests of the continent are the boreal forest of the north; jack pine, spruce, eastern red cedar, white birch, etc. Everything I stated in my previous submissions will apply to these trees, and most other trees commonly found throughout North America, not just some isolated watershed in your county. While no one has mentioned it yet, I'm open minded enough to accept that the Florida Everglades probably has some trees that are pretty wild and unique, but that doesn't mean it's common, and I admit I know nothing of them.
Here in the Pacific Northwest, we have a tree called Arbutus, that is really something unique, but I don't expect it's attributes to be considered common for a tree.
This is not just "my logic", forestry is a science. Are you saying fire is not Mother Nature's main mechanism for renewing a forest? Are you saying 100 years of playing God with forest fire has not screwed up any ecosystems anywhere? Please elaborate. The US, in the past - maybe even still, had "Let Burn" policies (ie. Yellowstone) recognizing that fire suppression does indeed create unnatural forests.
Some trees do require fire for their cones to release their seeds, but there are many that don't.
Many that don't?? Many?? Such as?
To be fair, he's right to a limited extent. A cone soaked in a puddle or pond for extended periods will eventually sprout. A cone crushed by some force will also release it's seed. You can probably come up with other methods even. But Mother Nature designed forests for fire to be the main source of mass renewal.
Uh... most old growth forests by definition are over a hundred and fifty years old
Most conifers don't even mature till about 100 years old, on average, and for most deciduous, it's more like 120-140 years, but it all depends on the species and their site conditions. Poplar, Aspen, etc. are considered hardwoods and yet can be mature after only 70-80 years. After reaching maturity, just like any other organism, you included, they begin to decay and it's all downhill after that.
With your logic you can't explain the existence of all those 400 year old trees unless you have Native American firefighters.
Again, its not just "my logic". Forestry is a science that's hundreds of years old. In North America, outside the unique ecosystem of the Pacific Northwest/Cascadia, where do trees live to 400 years? There's an area in the Niagara Escarpment where the acidic soils have created stunted, dwarf trees (eastern cedar, I believe)that can be 1000 years old, but this is certainly the exception and not the rule. Because they are not esthetically pleasing to the eye, no one except scientists really care.
In fact, most trees in the Pacific Northwest don't (at least on the west side of the Cascades) - forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Look at a map of North America. Look how puny the "west side of Cascadia" is compared with North America. Your rebuttal is based on your knowledge of a small, unique ecosystem.
forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Yeah, except I do live "on the west side of Cascadia" you speak of. I admit, it rains from November to March, but we couldn't light campfires all last summer as we could have caused a *gasp* forest fire, the bush was so dry. Thousands of people were evacuated from their homes "in Cascadia" last year, due to forest fires. Or don't you remember this? Care to wager it'll be the same again this summer?
Old growth forests around here are HUNDREDS of years old. Kind of hard to get that way due to 100 years of firefighting.
Old growth trees are rotten inside. They are quite often hollow, yet still standing and still producing needles. When a forest fire burns through, these trees are the least able to resist stress. A forest fire 100 years ago would have finished them off. By preventing fires, we've produced "museum" forests, that rob the understory of light, thus preventing new growth. Granted, they could already have 100-200 years old, but most conifers only mature at around 100 years, again, depending on soils and site conditions. Those same trees you speak of, probably would not be here today, if we didn't suppress forest fires.
Also, this wood is in great shape if it is under enough water. You go deep enough, and it's pretty lifeless
I agree, to some extent. Cut a plant, put its stem in water and it will still survive and even grow - provided there is adequate oxygen in the water, etc. But as anyone who has tried this knows, it's a short-lived, fragile existance. The tree can no longer absorb micro-nutrients through its roots. As I said, the Japanese bought lots of Canadian logs in the 90's, stored them underwater, and found them infested with bugs when they brought them up. Can't argue with facts.
While I suppose you mean well, "slow-growing lumber" is caused by improper soils and site conditions (ie. north slope of hills)among other factors, including species, of course. Trees that grow fast are in proper soils and on sunny, (southern) slopes.
Old growth lumber is a decadent, unnatural forest, that is caused by man supressing forest fires for the last 100 years, which is nature's only way of renewing a forest, believe-it-or-not. Cones won't open, releasing seeds, unless under extreme heat.
Old growth lumber, at the bottom of a lake, is going to rot, and is subject to parasites - ask the Japanese this. They tried to store logs underwater and found them infested with bugs when they brought them up.
XML, which is a subset of SGML, was conceived about 1996 and became a W3C standard on Feb. 10, 1998. No one owns the exclusive rights to XML. It is licence-free and platform independant (doesn't sound like M$, does it?)
For reasons too off-topic to get into here, suffice to say, there are different schema dialects of XML.
The W3C XML Schema Working Group received a dialect submission from M$ in January, 1998, even before XML 1.0 was complete: XML-Data schema language and XDR (the XML Data-Reduced Schema), a subset of the W3C's final recommendation. Needless to say, M$ (and some others) products offer full support for XDR.
There are other dialects and schemas of XML as well, such as the well known DTD, XSD, XPath, XLink, XPointer, XSL, SAX, XSLT, etc. and surely others I will offend someone by failing to mention.
So to answer your question, M$ cannot patent XML - no way - but they certainly do have prior art to XML-data and XDR. This isn't a big deal because there is no neccessity in using these schema; XML is a great, open-ended language with lots of alternatives - heck, invent your own!
Some references:
http://www.w3.org/XML/
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-XML-data-0105/
The wording and grammar are very good; very authoritative looking - almost too good for originating in Pakistan. This makes me wonder if this is an actual government form letter that perhaps was received by someone targeted by the Patriot Act, that has now been manipulated to serve their own needs. Does the FDIC actually do this to people? Is suspending account insurance part of an existing govn't process?
I'm not centering-out Pakistan for any discrimination here, but isn't this where Osama is thought to be holed up? It would seem terribly ironic if a process meant to disable terrorists' finances is being exploited for financial gain by the same terrorists.
I think some people are confusing Flash Player with the actual Flash application. I haven't seen any websites that truly utilize the full potential of Flash MX yet. Most are still designed to accomodate people with 6kb download speeds. I HATE websites whose index page is a Flash animation. I tolerate Flash ads as I do animated.gif's, but I see some really, really cool potential in Flash MX that I haven't seen translate yet into real world application.
And, oh yeah, Microsoft is a threat to Macromedia with their Sparkle like they were with FrontPage to Dreamweaver. Most people I know, never open FrontPage, let alone a vector-graphics designing tool.
I think one reason that UFO sightings are more prevalent in Scotland has to do with visibility of the night sky. In large urban areas, you can't see the stars because of the glare/haze caused by cities, and therefore can't see possible UFO's. More people live in New York City than live in all Scotland.
The bottom line in all this is that Americans (the Consumer) will pay more for: high speed internet (self-explanatory to this crowd), steel (y'know, computer cases/parts, things like that), softwood lumber (new homes/renovations - your new sundeck, etc.), farm produce (hey, the Farmers are getting paid even if they grow nothing...), etc.,...and that's after the Republicans first year in office. Who knows how many more votes will have to be bought before the elections in November and how many more favors will have will have to be paid off in the next three years. Or seven years, if they "maybe" win another term...
You probably don't need to be some sort of insider to tell that the bigger and more powerful corporations are the ones who are behind The Republican Party (of which Bush is only a mere figurehead...it's not like he's the mastermind behind the policies being implemented or anything). Microsoft gets a slap on the wrist from the new administration's DOJ - consumers suffer. Enron falls apart just after the Republican's win (and their largest financial contributor...hmmmm)- consumers suffer...
Figure out who the absolute biggest corporations are in America, and bet that it'll somehow cost you more for their goods/services in the next three years and their practices will be cloaked in invincibilty.
Slashdot Mirror
I worked for EDS for two years. I still wake up screaming...
I see the heat caused you to hallucinate...
I got into computers 25 years ago so I wouldn't have to work under these types of conditions. And haven't.... In todays day and age, why do you have to be on-site? Dust, heat and computers don't normally get along very well. And no coffee...??
Please, oh please put SAP out of our misery. How this company got so big is beyond me. You could build a custom system from scratch in shorter order than you can customize SAP.
There is no future - drink all the beer you can now!!
No, we are just saying that your understanding of the science of forestry is pretty limited.
Yeah, I was only born in northern Ontario (the deep, dark bush), and currently live in the Pacific Northwest where I still live in the bush. I have spent a lifetime hunting, fishing and prospecting for recreation. I worked in sawmills and as a mineral surveyor as a teenager. I later worked for many years with the government on developing land-resource information systems where all my peers were foresters, biologists, technicians, and meant I had to liase with both US and Canadian Federal government land management professionals, mostly foresters. Trust me, to develop a decision-support system for forest management/integrated resource managemnt, you learn a lot about the science, especially as it means acquiring the data from real foresters.
My opinions are based on the science I learned from all these people, and surprisingly, they're all in agreement. And your credentials are what? You live on the 20th floor of some building and go to work on the 17th floor of some other building? And pass a tree on the route in between?I didn't write any of these points to create an argument, to be called a moron or be told my knowledge of forestry is pretty limited, because it is not. I submitted because, as always, I had some facts I wanted to share. I didn't expect all these close-minded, emotional responses.
Multi-100 year-old trees were quite common in the Smokey Mts prior to the 1920s when the loggers came in and took them down. There are still a few to be found if you know where to look.
I'm not disputing there are can be multi-hundred year old trees, as I even offered an example of 1000 year old trees from the Niagara Escarpment. I should have said "commonly" live to 400 years. Most people don't live to be 100, but that doesn't mean they can't or that it's impossible. Look at a map of North America: the largest contiguous forests of the continent are the boreal forest of the north; jack pine, spruce, eastern red cedar, white birch, etc. Everything I stated in my previous submissions will apply to these trees, and most other trees commonly found throughout North America, not just some isolated watershed in your county. While no one has mentioned it yet, I'm open minded enough to accept that the Florida Everglades probably has some trees that are pretty wild and unique, but that doesn't mean it's common, and I admit I know nothing of them.
Here in the Pacific Northwest, we have a tree called Arbutus, that is really something unique, but I don't expect it's attributes to be considered common for a tree.
Some references:
Boreal Forest: http://www.radford.edu/~swoodwar/CLASSES/GEOG235/b iomes/taiga/taiga.html
http://www.sierraclub.org/ecoregions/boreal.asp
Forest Renewal: http://www.birchbrook.com/fire.html http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/is bnInquiry.asp?sourceid=00395996645644787198&btob=Y &endeca=1&isbn=1559638834&itm=1
Arbutus: http://www.gulfislands.com/foxglove/barn082801.htm
http://web.mala.bc.ca/firstnations/doris/treemala. htm
...and these are vallid links
I sure do.
None of your links are valid.
This is not just "my logic", forestry is a science. Are you saying fire is not Mother Nature's main mechanism for renewing a forest? Are you saying 100 years of playing God with forest fire has not screwed up any ecosystems anywhere? Please elaborate. The US, in the past - maybe even still, had "Let Burn" policies (ie. Yellowstone) recognizing that fire suppression does indeed create unnatural forests.
Some trees do require fire for their cones to release their seeds, but there are many that don't.
Many that don't?? Many?? Such as?
To be fair, he's right to a limited extent. A cone soaked in a puddle or pond for extended periods will eventually sprout. A cone crushed by some force will also release it's seed. You can probably come up with other methods even. But Mother Nature designed forests for fire to be the main source of mass renewal.
Uh ... most old growth forests by definition are over a hundred and fifty years old
Most conifers don't even mature till about 100 years old, on average, and for most deciduous, it's more like 120-140 years, but it all depends on the species and their site conditions. Poplar, Aspen, etc. are considered hardwoods and yet can be mature after only 70-80 years. After reaching maturity, just like any other organism, you included, they begin to decay and it's all downhill after that.
With your logic you can't explain the existence of all those 400 year old trees unless you have Native American firefighters.
Again, its not just "my logic". Forestry is a science that's hundreds of years old. In North America, outside the unique ecosystem of the Pacific Northwest/Cascadia, where do trees live to 400 years? There's an area in the Niagara Escarpment where the acidic soils have created stunted, dwarf trees (eastern cedar, I believe)that can be 1000 years old, but this is certainly the exception and not the rule. Because they are not esthetically pleasing to the eye, no one except scientists really care.
In fact, most trees in the Pacific Northwest don't (at least on the west side of the Cascades) - forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Look at a map of North America. Look how puny the "west side of Cascadia" is compared with North America. Your rebuttal is based on your knowledge of a small, unique ecosystem.
forest fires are extremely uncommon due to the wet climate.
Yeah, except I do live "on the west side of Cascadia" you speak of. I admit, it rains from November to March, but we couldn't light campfires all last summer as we could have caused a *gasp* forest fire, the bush was so dry. Thousands of people were evacuated from their homes "in Cascadia" last year, due to forest fires. Or don't you remember this? Care to wager it'll be the same again this summer?
Old growth forests around here are HUNDREDS of years old. Kind of hard to get that way due to 100 years of firefighting. Old growth trees are rotten inside. They are quite often hollow, yet still standing and still producing needles. When a forest fire burns through, these trees are the least able to resist stress. A forest fire 100 years ago would have finished them off. By preventing fires, we've produced "museum" forests, that rob the understory of light, thus preventing new growth. Granted, they could already have 100-200 years old, but most conifers only mature at around 100 years, again, depending on soils and site conditions. Those same trees you speak of, probably would not be here today, if we didn't suppress forest fires. Also, this wood is in great shape if it is under enough water. You go deep enough, and it's pretty lifeless I agree, to some extent. Cut a plant, put its stem in water and it will still survive and even grow - provided there is adequate oxygen in the water, etc. But as anyone who has tried this knows, it's a short-lived, fragile existance. The tree can no longer absorb micro-nutrients through its roots. As I said, the Japanese bought lots of Canadian logs in the 90's, stored them underwater, and found them infested with bugs when they brought them up. Can't argue with facts.
While I suppose you mean well, "slow-growing lumber" is caused by improper soils and site conditions (ie. north slope of hills)among other factors, including species, of course. Trees that grow fast are in proper soils and on sunny, (southern) slopes.
Old growth lumber is a decadent, unnatural forest, that is caused by man supressing forest fires for the last 100 years, which is nature's only way of renewing a forest, believe-it-or-not. Cones won't open, releasing seeds, unless under extreme heat.
Old growth lumber, at the bottom of a lake, is going to rot, and is subject to parasites - ask the Japanese this. They tried to store logs underwater and found them infested with bugs when they brought them up.
XML, which is a subset of SGML, was conceived about 1996 and became a W3C standard on Feb. 10, 1998. No one owns the exclusive rights to XML. It is licence-free and platform independant (doesn't sound like M$, does it?) For reasons too off-topic to get into here, suffice to say, there are different schema dialects of XML. The W3C XML Schema Working Group received a dialect submission from M$ in January, 1998, even before XML 1.0 was complete: XML-Data schema language and XDR (the XML Data-Reduced Schema), a subset of the W3C's final recommendation. Needless to say, M$ (and some others) products offer full support for XDR. There are other dialects and schemas of XML as well, such as the well known DTD, XSD, XPath, XLink, XPointer, XSL, SAX, XSLT, etc. and surely others I will offend someone by failing to mention. So to answer your question, M$ cannot patent XML - no way - but they certainly do have prior art to XML-data and XDR. This isn't a big deal because there is no neccessity in using these schema; XML is a great, open-ended language with lots of alternatives - heck, invent your own! Some references: http://www.w3.org/XML/ http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/NOTE-XML-data-0105/
The wording and grammar are very good; very authoritative looking - almost too good for originating in Pakistan. This makes me wonder if this is an actual government form letter that perhaps was received by someone targeted by the Patriot Act, that has now been manipulated to serve their own needs. Does the FDIC actually do this to people? Is suspending account insurance part of an existing govn't process?
I'm not centering-out Pakistan for any discrimination here, but isn't this where Osama is thought to be holed up? It would seem terribly ironic if a process meant to disable terrorists' finances is being exploited for financial gain by the same terrorists.
Better yet, check out what Flash MX can do yourself:
e _a pps.html
.gif's, but I see some really, really cool potential in Flash MX that I haven't seen translate yet into real world application.
http://www.macromedia.com/devnet/mx/flash/sampl
I think some people are confusing Flash Player with the actual Flash application. I haven't seen any websites that truly utilize the full potential of Flash MX yet. Most are still designed to accomodate people with 6kb download speeds. I HATE websites whose index page is a Flash animation. I tolerate Flash ads as I do animated
And, oh yeah, Microsoft is a threat to Macromedia with their Sparkle like they were with FrontPage to Dreamweaver. Most people I know, never open FrontPage, let alone a vector-graphics designing tool.
I think one reason that UFO sightings are more prevalent in Scotland has to do with visibility of the night sky. In large urban areas, you can't see the stars because of the glare/haze caused by cities, and therefore can't see possible UFO's. More people live in New York City than live in all Scotland.
I hope you read The Fountainhead first? It's the first part. Read Anthem, too...the album 2112 by the rock group Rush, is based on it.
The bottom line in all this is that Americans (the Consumer) will pay more for: high speed internet (self-explanatory to this crowd), steel (y'know, computer cases/parts, things like that), softwood lumber (new homes/renovations - your new sundeck, etc.), farm produce (hey, the Farmers are getting paid even if they grow nothing...), etc., ...and that's after the Republicans first year in office. Who knows how many more votes will have to be bought before the elections in November and how many more favors will have will have to be paid off in the next three years. Or seven years, if they "maybe" win another term...
You probably don't need to be some sort of insider to tell that the bigger and more powerful corporations are the ones who are behind The Republican Party (of which Bush is only a mere figurehead...it's not like he's the mastermind behind the policies being implemented or anything). Microsoft gets a slap on the wrist from the new administration's DOJ - consumers suffer. Enron falls apart just after the Republican's win (and their largest financial contributor...hmmmm)- consumers suffer...
Figure out who the absolute biggest corporations are in America, and bet that it'll somehow cost you more for their goods/services in the next three years and their practices will be cloaked in invincibilty.
I figure my cigarette ashes kill all the germs when they accidently fall in my keyboard