I have read quite a number of layman's Physics books, and I think that John Gribbin's are amongst the most accessible. He writes clearly and consicely, but also has some color to his style. He is also quite the polymath, and has written books on a broad range of Physics sub-categories and some other topics too.
If you're interested in cosmology at all, then I would highly recommend Hyperspace by Michio Kaku. The middle of the book is a quite meaty, but as a whole the book is a good read.
And since you mentioned cheapskates, there's abebooks.com, which is a site just for those of us that don't particularly want new books, and would rather support some independet retailers.
Do you not find it strange that a 2-hour DVD, with commentary, subtitles, and extra scenes, can be sold for less than $10, while few audio CDs are that low priced?
Not to beat a dead quote, but I challenge you to find quality movies with the features you described for $10. If we're talking about lesser quality flicks, then I guarantee that you can find lesser quality music for just as much.
Or maybe, since he knew that he was going to be meeting up with NBC, he had already successfully tried to enter their site. I know that he has some Jedi, Rainman thing going with his intuition, but five minutes from launching IE to getting in is pretty damn quick.
I'm afraid you missed the gist of my post. I am all for open source. I wish that governments would use open source because therein lies the solution to a lot of their problems.
What I don't like is the fact that there are people that want to force governments to use open source. Give governments the choice of using whatever they want to use as long as they use formats that are open standards and thus accessible to everyone.
If you actually read the proposal, in cases where there might be some sort of privacy issues, it is repeatedly stated that the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms should be upheld. There are some scary statements in the proposal, but these are for the most part worst-case hypothetical cases.
The main issue that seems to be brought up is the preservation of data. According to the proposal, what this means is that an ISP will have to maintain data on a specified customer once it has been brought to their attention by law enforcement that an investigation is underway. This applies to the specified customer only and only once the ISP has been informed that one of their customers is being investigated, so there's no need for the Big Brother fear-mongering just yet.
Anyone interested can find the entire proposal here.
I don't give a hoot if a company uses software from the Beast or from an open source developer. What I do see as an issue is when governments, which are, afterall, there for the people, become locked in the quagmire of proprietary standards.
I don't like the idea of governments having their balls in Redmond's vice. It is much more important that citizens and government officials be able to communicate in open ways than whether the software was paid for or not.
Forcing governments to use open source is a Bad Thing. This is an indirect means of accomplishing the goal of making open standards ubiquitous in government.
Lately there has been a lot of mainstream press coverage of open source software, but more often than not price is mentioned as one of the principal advantages. While I like the fact that I can download Slackware isos for free, I am much more thrilled with the fact that I can make it do whatever the hell I want it to do,
This is completely off-topic (well, except for the CNN bashing that is), but is anyone besides me getting sick and tired of hearing about the Terror on Tape spiel they have going right now? I mean come on, what's the point?
They get hold of tapes that are over a year old and then want to try and extrapolate what they see so that they can guess what they're up to right now. Unless I missed an installment or two, they haven't even shown a direct link between the tapes and the attacks last September, so how can it possibly indicate to them what Al Queda are up to right now?
But, I'll take the ToT instead of my morning briefing on missing kids/scientists of "interest" any day.
Damn you CNN, you used to be good. Now you just want to be a regular network station. For shame.
By now, you've read numerous people say that the grass is--as usual--not nearly as green in the scientific world. I am currently nearing the end of a research contract that was supposed to result in a PhD, but instead, I am more than likely going to be walking away with some valuable lessons and not much else.
In science, if you want to enter a research position, you better be damn certain that it is something that you love. You will be expected to put in long hours and really dedicate yourself to your subject. Research is not something that is to be entered into lightly.
This is closely tied with the fact that academia is rife with intense competition, back-stabbing and loads of other fun politics. In business, the bottom line is all that matters. In science, publishing your research is paramount, and you'll do what you have to to do that. And don't forget, at any one time, there are many other groups that are working on the exact same thing as you, so it's a race to see who can submit to the most prestigious journal first.
One thing they never tell you in school is how repetitive research is. I work in molecular biology, and I can honestly say that the mental process is a very small part of my day. Research is basically coming up with an idea, then repeating your experiments over and over again until you get the one result that supports your hypothesis. I have literally spent months getting a result that will take about 30 seconds to present to someone.
As far as long term employment is concerned, well, there isn't any. Unless you get tenure at a university--which isn't all that easy--you'll be living from grant to grant. If you advance to a lab head position, you'll spend most of your first couple years writing to people to get funding to do what you want to do.
I could go on for days, but I don't want to wallow in my bitterness too much. Suffice it to say, academia is rife with problems of its own. Enter with caution.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, accoring to this one documentary I saw, TCP/IP is already in use on at least one other planet.
I have read quite a number of layman's Physics books, and I think that John Gribbin's are amongst the most accessible. He writes clearly and consicely, but also has some color to his style. He is also quite the polymath, and has written books on a broad range of Physics sub-categories and some other topics too.
If you're interested in cosmology at all, then I would highly recommend Hyperspace by Michio Kaku. The middle of the book is a quite meaty, but as a whole the book is a good read.
And since you mentioned cheapskates, there's abebooks.com, which is a site just for those of us that don't particularly want new books, and would rather support some independet retailers.
Do you not find it strange that a 2-hour DVD, with commentary, subtitles, and extra scenes, can be sold for less than $10, while few audio CDs are that low priced?
Not to beat a dead quote, but I challenge you to find quality movies with the features you described for $10. If we're talking about lesser quality flicks, then I guarantee that you can find lesser quality music for just as much.
Wait, so you're saying that we live in an age where it's not the wealthy that make all the decisions? Someone needs a reality check.
Or maybe, since he knew that he was going to be meeting up with NBC, he had already successfully tried to enter their site. I know that he has some Jedi, Rainman thing going with his intuition, but five minutes from launching IE to getting in is pretty damn quick.
I'm afraid you missed the gist of my post. I am all for open source. I wish that governments would use open source because therein lies the solution to a lot of their problems.
What I don't like is the fact that there are people that want to force governments to use open source. Give governments the choice of using whatever they want to use as long as they use formats that are open standards and thus accessible to everyone.
If you actually read the proposal, in cases where there might be some sort of privacy issues, it is repeatedly stated that the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms should be upheld. There are some scary statements in the proposal, but these are for the most part worst-case hypothetical cases.
The main issue that seems to be brought up is the preservation of data. According to the proposal, what this means is that an ISP will have to maintain data on a specified customer once it has been brought to their attention by law enforcement that an investigation is underway. This applies to the specified customer only and only once the ISP has been informed that one of their customers is being investigated, so there's no need for the Big Brother fear-mongering just yet.
Anyone interested can find the entire proposal here.
I don't give a hoot if a company uses software from the Beast or from an open source developer. What I do see as an issue is when governments, which are, afterall, there for the people, become locked in the quagmire of proprietary standards.
I don't like the idea of governments having their balls in Redmond's vice. It is much more important that citizens and government officials be able to communicate in open ways than whether the software was paid for or not.
Forcing governments to use open source is a Bad Thing. This is an indirect means of accomplishing the goal of making open standards ubiquitous in government.
Lately there has been a lot of mainstream press coverage of open source software, but more often than not price is mentioned as one of the principal advantages. While I like the fact that I can download Slackware isos for free, I am much more thrilled with the fact that I can make it do whatever the hell I want it to do,
This is completely off-topic (well, except for the CNN bashing that is), but is anyone besides me getting sick and tired of hearing about the Terror on Tape spiel they have going right now? I mean come on, what's the point?
They get hold of tapes that are over a year old and then want to try and extrapolate what they see so that they can guess what they're up to right now. Unless I missed an installment or two, they haven't even shown a direct link between the tapes and the attacks last September, so how can it possibly indicate to them what Al Queda are up to right now?
But, I'll take the ToT instead of my morning briefing on missing kids/scientists of "interest" any day.
Damn you CNN, you used to be good. Now you just want to be a regular network station. For shame.
By now, you've read numerous people say that the grass is--as usual--not nearly as green in the scientific world. I am currently nearing the end of a research contract that was supposed to result in a PhD, but instead, I am more than likely going to be walking away with some valuable lessons and not much else.
In science, if you want to enter a research position, you better be damn certain that it is something that you love. You will be expected to put in long hours and really dedicate yourself to your subject. Research is not something that is to be entered into lightly.
This is closely tied with the fact that academia is rife with intense competition, back-stabbing and loads of other fun politics. In business, the bottom line is all that matters. In science, publishing your research is paramount, and you'll do what you have to to do that. And don't forget, at any one time, there are many other groups that are working on the exact same thing as you, so it's a race to see who can submit to the most prestigious journal first.
One thing they never tell you in school is how repetitive research is. I work in molecular biology, and I can honestly say that the mental process is a very small part of my day. Research is basically coming up with an idea, then repeating your experiments over and over again until you get the one result that supports your hypothesis. I have literally spent months getting a result that will take about 30 seconds to present to someone.
As far as long term employment is concerned, well, there isn't any. Unless you get tenure at a university--which isn't all that easy--you'll be living from grant to grant. If you advance to a lab head position, you'll spend most of your first couple years writing to people to get funding to do what you want to do.
I could go on for days, but I don't want to wallow in my bitterness too much. Suffice it to say, academia is rife with problems of its own. Enter with caution.