I seem to remember back in 1987/8, working at VA Tech on a project where they were considering scalloped semicircles all around the edge of the cross section. It seems to me that the purpose was to get a more even burn (read, reduce some of the acoustic/shock wave artifacts of the combustion).
Of course, this was long ago, and I was at the bottom level of the work, and only worked a very short time on that.
Right now, I think the consensus on slashdot is that this website as described would not be worth a first visit. But maybe it could be made worthwhile.
Let me put forward my brother's idea, in conjunction to a reply to this post. First, the reply:
If liberal/conservative means bunk to you -- as it will to most slashdotters -- surely the same process could be applied to a different division that is important to you "high tech/low tech" "wicked/humble" or whatever you want.
You might not care about labeling something "left/right", but you might care about "true/false".
Surely the software that can handle lib/cons could handle other pairs as easily.
So you pick from a whole list of pairs, and if you don't see a pair you like, you create one. The rating from the pair then will also generate a definition straight from dictionary.com, so that anyone who rates based on that pair, will see what the definition is as they rate it.
Now, let me combine it with my brother's idea. You create your own ratings profile, rating articles as you see fit, and the site does its best to give you articles that you would like.
But you also tie into that ratings from friends of yours that you respect. So you can say "make my true/false rating reflect 40% from band_shark, 20% from the general pool, and 40% from slashdotters."
Considering the way patents are issued and cases pursued, if I had a lot of money it might make sense to patent respiration as a business process.
"lower chest diaphragm, expanding chest cavity...... additionally as a separate item, aids in business communications via sonic variable frequency energy transmission..."
But alas, I wouldn't have the assets to pursue the cases against the main violators, and they all are busy in their own court cases anyhow...
So, is sexual impropriety liberal (Clinton) or conservative (Gingerich)? How about economic activism (Greenspan)? What about pro-war? How about government hypervigilance against its own citizens? How about abortion? What about economic stimulus? How about WTO?
Honestly, with the way all the votes actually go when a liberal or conservative party has control of everything, I have to say that in each of these cases, the "liberal" and "conservative" positions are identical, and the opposite position has no coverage.
Now please explain the whole point behind Guantomino, or the Polish torture prison, or to expand to more of history... the Russian trials under Stalin and Lenin, or (going back a good deal farther) "Paul the Chain" under Constantius, 354 AD.
But I don't have a dimmer-lit circuit, and none of my CFLs were in such a circuit.
Typically, what it appears is happening is a capacitor blows (with accompanying noise, about half a day). But it is so common, that I have to think that there are real quality issues -- either power quality in the places I've lived (all of them?!?) or else quality issues with the CFL assembly plant.
Now, this is just anecdotal. Yet, in Lithuania and here in America (where we have a mobile home), and at my mother-in-law's (an older home), the typical lifetime that I get out of a CFL is about 2-6 months. After that, it either starts flickering, buzzing, and failing, or it just straight out fails.
Compare that to the claim of 7 years.
Now, considering the energy that goes into producing these things, I'd also argue that these things use more energy, not less.
If anyone knows a way to get a longer life out of them, please -- by all means -- point it out.
On the contrary, the mainstream category may well be easier to win, for several reasons:
(1) Prize goes to the most sales, from the article. Mainstream will probably sell better.
(2) Initial design is more difficult. Therefore, fewer entries will be made. That makes it easier to win.
(3) Prize is definitely possible. One obvious way to do it, is to place electric drive (with clutch) in the front wheels, and gas drive in the back wheels. That gives you better acceleration, better top speed, and much better fuel performance. Now stick stable Li-ion batteries in there, and you should be able to meet your performance specs.
Design your car to be based around a standard car frame (such as a mini pickup truck), and you should be able to make use of already-existing mass production (thus, cheap price). That is, you import the parts you want from a standard automaker, and rework the new parts.
Honestly, I hope this does result in some large fuel reduction. Wind/Nuclear/Hydroelectric-powered cars, here we come (I hope)!
Just a commentary here. Over and over I see people thinking that prophecy means forecasting the future.
It doesn't.
Prophecy is revelation of the mind/heart of God. And although a thing may be called correctly prophecy and not be (for example, from a false prophet), that is a whole different ball game from getting your definitions wrong.
For example, there is no such thing as scientific prophecy. That's a contradiction in terms. There is scientific forecasting. There is social prediction.
Yes, and this is slightly OT. But I get tired of seeing a term misused, and this is the second time I've seen an insightful-rated comment completely misuse the term.
But just out of wondering... why hasn't anyone mentioned Godwin's law? I'd love to point out that it does not apply in this case, for the simple reason that government spying on its citizens was one of the characteristic marks of the Nazis. Oh, and so was propaganda.
And the soviets, too. (Hayak, Road to Serfdom).
And the British, and now the Americans (also Hayak, but forecast).
Just what I'm aware of: the standard formulae for predicting the positions of planets are not very accurate.
This is due to the fact that the differential equation problem for an n-body problem is extremely difficult to get right. That said, there is another, newer method called the Parker-Sochacki solution to the Picard iteration(about 10 yrs old) that develops MacLauren series solutions to the N-body problems.
But if you plug the numbers into that solution, you still find that fairly significant error develops. That said, there error is a lot less. And what there is, problem comes from the many asteroids and planetoids that surround our Sun, as well as from nearby Oort clouds and whatnot.
Well, I wouldn't expect to find this type of an error -- velocity changes (as compared to what you expected) as you leave the equatorial plane -- coming from the nearby oort clouds. However, I would expect this kind of an error to result from both (1) using the older N-body approximations, and (2) the asteroids that are within the solar equatorial plane.
My guess -- if you look at the calculation methods used, they didn't use the PS method. And if you then use the error in planetary predictions under PS, to guess at the mass of in-plane asteroidal matter, you might find an additional reduction in error.
Keep away from banks that have paper clips! Actually, be careful about banks with staples, too!
Oh, and one other thing to look for. Look for the authors of this paper in a maximum security prison, after complaints by the banking industry. We've seen this before with ATMs in france.
Ummm... how bout an electric generator powered by a small gasoline engine? I'd say the energy density is comparable.
More realistically, isn't the solar power already solved? As I understood it, they have plants that involve a small steam/electric turbine in the middle, and then acres of mirrors around it that reflect the sunlight to the turbine.
The cost of mirrors is relatively low. The efficiency of moderately large turbines is relatively high.
When I look at Wikipedia, a relatively small (10 MW) experimental solar plant, Solar One, was slightly more expensive than wind power. That said, larger size can give higher efficiency.
You don't really have to actually hide the satellite. Rather, you have to employ a technology that attempts to hide it. At that point, if a satellite spotter spots the satellite, he must pretend he didn't, or he will be in violation of the DMCA.
Once a spotter is in violation of the DMCA, he can be arrested and charged with code breaking. You then have to consider whether it is a military satellite. If this is code breaking of US military secrets, it would also have to be considered whether he only used this information for himself -- in which case it would be hacking -- or whether he handed this information to one of our adversaries, in which case it would also be treason.
Godwin's law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions. It does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi regime.
In this particular case, the root poster had brought in a genocide issue, and also one that makes use of pseudoscience, which was a mainstay of the Nazi regime. Therefore, Godwin's Law does not apply here.
However, if we dig deep enough, I suspect that intentionally and falsely claiming Godwin's law is probably an extension of Godwin's law. Fortunately, I'm pretty sure you weren't doing that, since you chose to continue the discussion.
I hate to say this, but what does science have to do with the abortion debate?
Is there any way that you can scientifically say that "Bill is a human; Mary is not, and her death is of no consequence"? I know the Nazis tried, but I didn't think their science stood the test of repeatability. Though heaven knows that there are enough crazed people to have tried.
Which does draw me to another point... that Naziism tried to justify extermination of humans based upon pseudo scientific and pseudo economic values, and the abortion industry does the same. So arguably abortion should be a prime topic if ever there is a "Nazi debate", but I doubt that you'd get any respondants for such an offered debate either. Those who favored Nazi principles still would not want to be associated with the name.
So... I just don't get it. How would it be a topic in a scientific debate?
Okay, let's suppose that he is getting free energy, but it's not perpetual motion.
For example, suppose that he is somehow drawing energy off the rotation of the earth through the Sun's magnetic field?
Of course, the Sun's magnetic field is so small, I'd be surprised if he could get enough energy to counter the drag, but I could see it happening.
Let me assume you're right, regarding this keyboard.
I'm not sure you are.
Quite simply, since the keyboard is also a touchpad, there is no need for you to actually depress the button to record a keystroke. A simple touch will do it. The depressing of the keypad is good for other functions, such as:
(1) Mouse button. No different than a mouse.
(2) Function keys/shift. Hit your key lightly, and it's a key. Hit it and depress, and it's a function key.
I imagine that you could even select a function key with one hand, temporarily redirecting the other hand to an alternate usage. For example, select "c" on the bottom row, and you immediately put the other hand into greek (or hebrew, or math) characters. Select "Z" on the bottom row, and the other hand is shifted. Select "B" on the bottom row, and the other hand is mouse.
For a greater extension, imagine that you have the same four "function" keys across the bottom of either keyboard. Then you essentially have four full keyboards of functions.
In other words, even if this laptop were in Windows and completely unusable, it would be great to get this little gadget into Linux, and rewrite the interface.
Now, my only other concerns are (1) uploading/downloading ease (does it have USB for a USB drive?) (2) expandable usability (printers, cams, etc: USB would be fine) (3) Power concerns (how long does the battery last? Does the battery feature pyrotechnic surprises?) (4) Durability.
I'd like to see the keyboard driver put open to redevelopment, because two touchpads is more than enough for almost any typing. But if you're going to go to a smaller layout, you'll have to relearn the keypad anyways. So at that point, it makes sense to get rid of the qwerty mode.
I'd like to see some interesting new drivers, such as (1) quick-select typing (the one where the most probable letters and letter combinations fly from right to left at different heights, and you select which ones you want) (2) probablistic combo-keys (similar to quickselect, but memorized and still typed, with left-right key combos, and "pre-select" function keys, and preselected app-specific keyboards) (3) finger-writing (4) standard numeric/symbol/alpha keys (5) standard qwerty, as shown
or as is on the palm computers, a selectable set of all of the above.
I'd think it also would have to do with some loss of spatial memory or intelligence, because I remember reading that one of the early warning Alzhimer's tests was to give the patient a series of circles, with a time written underneath. Then let the patient draw the appropriate clock faces. Alzhimer's patients -- even those otherwise undetectable -- would mess the clocks up extrememly badly.
I'd say you are correct on both counts -- but in practical terms, once something winds up in a library with FDL, any copies or copies of copies would also be FDL. So at that point, it would no longer have an effective total copyright. Anyone who really wanted a FDL copy could get one.
But as I pointed out, there is a limit to the damage done by such an instance, so that the effect on profits won't be all that great. In the end, it really isn't worth all the effort to get an FDL copy, in most instances.
More to the point would be Michael Chrichton's "Swarm". That might have something to do with this news article.
Also, on the lines of another thread up here... the Republicans.
I don't think this says so much about the republican party, as it says something about the validity of democracy as a basis for government. Not that I think a tyrant is any more valid -- I just sometimes don't see a difference between a tyrant who rules by force, and a tyrant who persuades tons of people to vote for him (via swarm behavior) and then rules by force.
However, I for one will be the first to recognize our new democratic republic overlords...
I know you are asking how Wikipedia will claim losses -- but I could as easily turn it around to the publisher.
How will the publisher claim losses, when (by the GNU FDL) they are now going to have to give away their work?
Quite simply, the answer is that the publisher won't have to give away their work. Rather, the work of the publisher is specifically in making a text available in the form of a book, along with referencable ISBN. They *will* at this point have to include a GNU FDL with the book, *even if they remove the offending pages from future copies*, since the entire book is now contaminated.
But honestly, the amount of photocopying and such that will happen is not going to significantly increase. In the end, the fair price that a publisher can charge is defined by the utility that the publisher adds. Aside from that, the price that a publisher can *get* is more defined by the current accepted fair price for other books than for this book. So if a FDL goes in the book, then the reader will just look at it, say "oh, nice." And go on.
Now, how can Wikipedia claim damages? There are more damages possible than cash value. There are damages to the reputation of the actual authors, damages to frequency of customer visits, and these do have an inherent value to which a lawyer will assign a cash value. Yes, it will be slightly arbitrary. But, on the other hand I think that a jury will find that the value of damages is (1) relatively large, and (2) at least proportional to the increased value recieved by John Wiley Publishing and the author. Typically, when theft occurs value is destroyed (they steal my car, but bust up the key mechanism). Therefore, you might expect damages to total 1.5-3 times the expected sales of the book, scaled down by the proportion of pages that were plagiarized. So for a 120-pg book, 2 pages copied, damages could total 1/40 to 1/20 of total expected sales.
Slashdot Mirror
I seem to remember back in 1987/8, working at VA Tech on a project where they were considering scalloped semicircles all around the edge of the cross section. It seems to me that the purpose was to get a more even burn (read, reduce some of the acoustic/shock wave artifacts of the combustion).
Of course, this was long ago, and I was at the bottom level of the work, and only worked a very short time on that.
Right now, I think the consensus on slashdot is that this website as described would not be worth a first visit. But maybe it could be made worthwhile.
Let me put forward my brother's idea, in conjunction to a reply to this post. First, the reply:
If liberal/conservative means bunk to you -- as it will to most slashdotters -- surely the same process could be applied to a different division that is important to you "high tech/low tech" "wicked/humble" or whatever you want.
You might not care about labeling something "left/right", but you might care about "true/false".
Surely the software that can handle lib/cons could handle other pairs as easily.
So you pick from a whole list of pairs, and if you don't see a pair you like, you create one. The rating from the pair then will also generate a definition straight from dictionary.com, so that anyone who rates based on that pair, will see what the definition is as they rate it.
Now, let me combine it with my brother's idea. You create your own ratings profile, rating articles as you see fit, and the site does its best to give you articles that you would like.
But you also tie into that ratings from friends of yours that you respect. So you can say "make my true/false rating reflect 40% from band_shark, 20% from the general pool, and 40% from slashdotters."
Considering the way patents are issued and cases pursued, if I had a lot of money it might make sense to patent respiration as a business process.
... additionally as a separate item, aids in business communications via sonic variable frequency energy transmission..."
"lower chest diaphragm, expanding chest cavity...
But alas, I wouldn't have the assets to pursue the cases against the main violators, and they all are busy in their own court cases anyhow...
So, is sexual impropriety liberal (Clinton) or conservative (Gingerich)?
How about economic activism (Greenspan)?
What about pro-war?
How about government hypervigilance against its own citizens?
How about abortion?
What about economic stimulus?
How about WTO?
Honestly, with the way all the votes actually go when a liberal or conservative party has control of everything, I have to say that in each of these cases, the "liberal" and "conservative" positions are identical, and the opposite position has no coverage.
Now please explain the whole point behind Guantomino, or the Polish torture prison, or to expand to more of history... the Russian trials under Stalin and Lenin, or (going back a good deal farther) "Paul the Chain" under Constantius, 354 AD.
But I don't have a dimmer-lit circuit, and none of my CFLs were in such a circuit. Typically, what it appears is happening is a capacitor blows (with accompanying noise, about half a day). But it is so common, that I have to think that there are real quality issues -- either power quality in the places I've lived (all of them?!?) or else quality issues with the CFL assembly plant.
Now, this is just anecdotal. Yet, in Lithuania and here in America (where we have a mobile home), and at my mother-in-law's (an older home), the typical lifetime that I get out of a CFL is about 2-6 months. After that, it either starts flickering, buzzing, and failing, or it just straight out fails.
Compare that to the claim of 7 years.
Now, considering the energy that goes into producing these things, I'd also argue that these things use more energy, not less.
If anyone knows a way to get a longer life out of them, please -- by all means -- point it out.
On the contrary, the mainstream category may well be easier to win, for several reasons:
(1) Prize goes to the most sales, from the article. Mainstream will probably sell better.
(2) Initial design is more difficult. Therefore, fewer entries will be made. That makes it easier to win.
(3) Prize is definitely possible. One obvious way to do it, is to place electric drive (with clutch) in the front wheels, and gas drive in the back wheels. That gives you better acceleration, better top speed, and much better fuel performance. Now stick stable Li-ion batteries in there, and you should be able to meet your performance specs.
Design your car to be based around a standard car frame (such as a mini pickup truck), and you should be able to make use of already-existing mass production (thus, cheap price). That is, you import the parts you want from a standard automaker, and rework the new parts.
Honestly, I hope this does result in some large fuel reduction. Wind/Nuclear/Hydroelectric-powered cars, here we come (I hope)!
Just a commentary here. Over and over I see people thinking that prophecy means forecasting the future.
It doesn't.
Prophecy is revelation of the mind/heart of God. And although a thing may be called correctly prophecy and not be (for example, from a false prophet), that is a whole different ball game from getting your definitions wrong.
For example, there is no such thing as scientific prophecy. That's a contradiction in terms. There is scientific forecasting. There is social prediction.
Yes, and this is slightly OT. But I get tired of seeing a term misused, and this is the second time I've seen an insightful-rated comment completely misuse the term.
Well! Thank goodness I'm not Martin Niemöller.
But just out of wondering... why hasn't anyone mentioned Godwin's law? I'd love to point out that it does not apply in this case, for the simple reason that government spying on its citizens was one of the characteristic marks of the Nazis. Oh, and so was propaganda.
And the soviets, too. (Hayak, Road to Serfdom).
And the British, and now the Americans (also Hayak, but forecast).
Just what I'm aware of: the standard formulae for predicting the positions of planets are not very accurate.
This is due to the fact that the differential equation problem for an n-body problem is extremely difficult to get right. That said, there is another, newer method called the Parker-Sochacki solution to the Picard iteration(about 10 yrs old) that develops MacLauren series solutions to the N-body problems.
But if you plug the numbers into that solution, you still find that fairly significant error develops. That said, there error is a lot less. And what there is, problem comes from the many asteroids and planetoids that surround our Sun, as well as from nearby Oort clouds and whatnot.
Well, I wouldn't expect to find this type of an error -- velocity changes (as compared to what you expected) as you leave the equatorial plane -- coming from the nearby oort clouds. However, I would expect this kind of an error to result from both (1) using the older N-body approximations, and (2) the asteroids that are within the solar equatorial plane.
My guess -- if you look at the calculation methods used, they didn't use the PS method. And if you then use the error in planetary predictions under PS, to guess at the mass of in-plane asteroidal matter, you might find an additional reduction in error.
Keep away from banks that have paper clips! Actually, be careful about banks with staples, too!
Oh, and one other thing to look for. Look for the authors of this paper in a maximum security prison, after complaints by the banking industry. We've seen this before with ATMs in france.
Ummm... how bout an electric generator powered by a small gasoline engine? I'd say the energy density is comparable.
More realistically, isn't the solar power already solved? As I understood it, they have plants that involve a small steam/electric turbine in the middle, and then acres of mirrors around it that reflect the sunlight to the turbine.
The cost of mirrors is relatively low.
The efficiency of moderately large turbines is relatively high.
When I look at Wikipedia, a relatively small (10 MW) experimental solar plant, Solar One, was slightly more expensive than wind power. That said, larger size can give higher efficiency.
You don't really have to actually hide the satellite. Rather, you have to employ a technology that attempts to hide it. At that point, if a satellite spotter spots the satellite, he must pretend he didn't, or he will be in violation of the DMCA.
Once a spotter is in violation of the DMCA, he can be arrested and charged with code breaking. You then have to consider whether it is a military satellite. If this is code breaking of US military secrets, it would also have to be considered whether he only used this information for himself -- in which case it would be hacking -- or whether he handed this information to one of our adversaries, in which case it would also be treason.
I'm sorry. Our way is no longer straight.
If you go to wikipedia, you will see that
Godwin's law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions. It does not apply to discussions directly addressing genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi regime.
In this particular case, the root poster had brought in a genocide issue, and also one that makes use of pseudoscience, which was a mainstay of the Nazi regime. Therefore, Godwin's Law does not apply here.
However, if we dig deep enough, I suspect that intentionally and falsely claiming Godwin's law is probably an extension of Godwin's law. Fortunately, I'm pretty sure you weren't doing that, since you chose to continue the discussion.
It occurs to me that you might just be able to make the Sarbanes-Oxley law apply here.
I hate to say this, but what does science have to do with the abortion debate?
Is there any way that you can scientifically say that "Bill is a human; Mary is not, and her death is of no consequence"? I know the Nazis tried, but I didn't think their science stood the test of repeatability. Though heaven knows that there are enough crazed people to have tried.
Which does draw me to another point... that Naziism tried to justify extermination of humans based upon pseudo scientific and pseudo economic values, and the abortion industry does the same. So arguably abortion should be a prime topic if ever there is a "Nazi debate", but I doubt that you'd get any respondants for such an offered debate either. Those who favored Nazi principles still would not want to be associated with the name.
So... I just don't get it. How would it be a topic in a scientific debate?
Okay, let's suppose that he is getting free energy, but it's not perpetual motion. For example, suppose that he is somehow drawing energy off the rotation of the earth through the Sun's magnetic field? Of course, the Sun's magnetic field is so small, I'd be surprised if he could get enough energy to counter the drag, but I could see it happening.
Here's the product spec http://www.noahpad.com/product-umpc-spec.php It has usb, bluetooth, and an external backup battery. In other words, it'll handle whatever I need.
Let me assume you're right, regarding this keyboard.
I'm not sure you are.
Quite simply, since the keyboard is also a touchpad, there is no need for you to actually depress the button to record a keystroke. A simple touch will do it. The depressing of the keypad is good for other functions, such as:
(1) Mouse button. No different than a mouse.
(2) Function keys/shift. Hit your key lightly, and it's a key. Hit it and depress, and it's a function key.
I imagine that you could even select a function key with one hand, temporarily redirecting the other hand to an alternate usage. For example, select "c" on the bottom row, and you immediately put the other hand into greek (or hebrew, or math) characters. Select "Z" on the bottom row, and the other hand is shifted. Select "B" on the bottom row, and the other hand is mouse.
For a greater extension, imagine that you have the same four "function" keys across the bottom of either keyboard. Then you essentially have four full keyboards of functions.
In other words, even if this laptop were in Windows and completely unusable, it would be great to get this little gadget into Linux, and rewrite the interface.
Now, my only other concerns are (1) uploading/downloading ease (does it have USB for a USB drive?) (2) expandable usability (printers, cams, etc: USB would be fine) (3) Power concerns (how long does the battery last? Does the battery feature pyrotechnic surprises?) (4) Durability.
This is all a software issue, though.
I'd like to see the keyboard driver put open to redevelopment, because two touchpads is more than enough for almost any typing. But if you're going to go to a smaller layout, you'll have to relearn the keypad anyways. So at that point, it makes sense to get rid of the qwerty mode.
I'd like to see some interesting new drivers, such as
(1) quick-select typing (the one where the most probable letters and letter combinations fly from right to left at different heights, and you select which ones you want)
(2) probablistic combo-keys (similar to quickselect, but memorized and still typed, with left-right key combos, and "pre-select" function keys, and preselected app-specific keyboards)
(3) finger-writing
(4) standard numeric/symbol/alpha keys
(5) standard qwerty, as shown
or as is on the palm computers, a selectable set of all of the above.
I'd think it also would have to do with some loss of spatial memory or intelligence, because I remember reading that one of the early warning Alzhimer's tests was to give the patient a series of circles, with a time written underneath. Then let the patient draw the appropriate clock faces. Alzhimer's patients -- even those otherwise undetectable -- would mess the clocks up extrememly badly.
I'd say you are correct on both counts -- but in practical terms, once something winds up in a library with FDL, any copies or copies of copies would also be FDL. So at that point, it would no longer have an effective total copyright. Anyone who really wanted a FDL copy could get one. But as I pointed out, there is a limit to the damage done by such an instance, so that the effect on profits won't be all that great. In the end, it really isn't worth all the effort to get an FDL copy, in most instances.
More to the point would be Michael Chrichton's "Swarm". That might have something to do with this news article.
Also, on the lines of another thread up here... the Republicans.
I don't think this says so much about the republican party, as it says something about the validity of democracy as a basis for government. Not that I think a tyrant is any more valid -- I just sometimes don't see a difference between a tyrant who rules by force, and a tyrant who persuades tons of people to vote for him (via swarm behavior) and then rules by force.
However, I for one will be the first to recognize our new democratic republic overlords...
I know you are asking how Wikipedia will claim losses -- but I could as easily turn it around to the publisher.
How will the publisher claim losses, when (by the GNU FDL) they are now going to have to give away their work?
Quite simply, the answer is that the publisher won't have to give away their work. Rather, the work of the publisher is specifically in making a text available in the form of a book, along with referencable ISBN. They *will* at this point have to include a GNU FDL with the book, *even if they remove the offending pages from future copies*, since the entire book is now contaminated.
But honestly, the amount of photocopying and such that will happen is not going to significantly increase.
In the end, the fair price that a publisher can charge is defined by the utility that the publisher adds. Aside from that, the price that a publisher can *get* is more defined by the current accepted fair price for other books than for this book. So if a FDL goes in the book, then the reader will just look at it, say "oh, nice." And go on.
Now, how can Wikipedia claim damages? There are more damages possible than cash value. There are damages to the reputation of the actual authors, damages to frequency of customer visits, and these do have an inherent value to which a lawyer will assign a cash value. Yes, it will be slightly arbitrary. But, on the other hand I think that a jury will find that the value of damages is (1) relatively large, and (2) at least proportional to the increased value recieved by John Wiley Publishing and the author. Typically, when theft occurs value is destroyed (they steal my car, but bust up the key mechanism). Therefore, you might expect damages to total 1.5-3 times the expected sales of the book, scaled down by the proportion of pages that were plagiarized. So for a 120-pg book, 2 pages copied, damages could total 1/40 to 1/20 of total expected sales.