His belief that the world was ordered came from his deeper belief that there is a sentient creator. Regardless, he was still stumped by the belief that physics should be aesthetic. Putting aesthetics (his beliefs) ahead of physics, for whatever reason, limited his usefulness. It is probably true to say that his later contributions were mainly destructive - being a very influential person, his views trashed many new lines of research. Although the flipside is that by being a nay-sayer quantum mechanics was thoroughly tested.
Quantum mechanics and other seemingly irrational physics is very messy.
Hardly an impartial physisist. Some things he retracted, but he had quite a few blind spots (particularly wrt quantum physics) because his beliefs formed a barrier to his acceptance of what the theories said.
Even Einstein cooked his own theories because they did not fit his religious beliefs. After a while he came around and retracted his cooked theories.
In the 1960s, tectonic plate theory was poo-pooed as being bulshit. The PhDs of the day would ridicule tectonics and instead forwrd their own highly implausable theories. These same learned people later withdrew their claims as anti-tectonic claims became unsustainable..
Folks, science advances and so does knowledge. Material, particularly that based on opinion rather than experiment, is subject to change.
Anyone that relies on old theories may as well sign up as life members of the flat earth society.
NASA is an Admininstration, filled with administrators. It says so right in their name. They should not be doing actual engineering (they are not called NASE). Instead they should be providing an administrative service that supports aerospace development.
Trying the X-prize model might be just the right way to tackle this.
These statistical correlations are a complete crock. There are a million things that have changed over the last few years that could also be attributed.
Personally, I think the most likely cause is one of:
* Reduction in the use of slide rules. With calculators it's easier to get a job as a clerk.
* Increase in CPU speed. Too much time playing games == less time being bad.
* Global warming. It's getting too hot to commit crime.
It made people aware that there are environmental impacts associated with buying new gizzmos.
Alarmism gets media attention. The later extraction of the truth is boring and not newsworthy. You just need to see how many people still believe in WMD and that Sadddam is an Al Qaeda leader to see that people don't see the truth.
I don't think it correct to say that Greenpeace specifically targets Apple because they are Apple.
What Greenpeace does is to ride the hype wave and nobody but Apple has recently released any majorly hyped, or hype-worthy, electronic products.
Greenpeace rides the hype wave in other areas too (ie. not just electronics). This is a very effective way of operating since it relies on the fact that people are already tuned in to the subject and Greenpeace can tack on an environmental angle with far less resources.
With no points of reference in the sky it is very hard to tell where things are. This is particularly true when you are trying to place a big plane (747) and a commuter plane. My drive to town takes me on a road that is just below the appraoch for an international airport. The 747s fill the sky and you'd swear they are going to clip the top of the trees, but in reality they're many hundred feet up.
I hunch the guys on the ground with radar etc have a far better perspective of what is really going on than any "eye witness".
If everyone is in their right airspace, even when packed closely, that is not a close call. How far was that jet away? A thousand ft or so? With no landmarks it is very hard to judge how far something is away.
A few years back I was on a flight from Seattle to LAX and with a very chatty pilot. He said something like "In a minute we'll be having a very close look at a Cessna xxx. You won't have much time to see it because it is going at aaa mph and they're going at bbb mph so the closing speed is... Don't worry folks, they are in their lane and we're in ours" and shortly later this plane came whipping past at what seemed like touching distance. Now that was clearly not a close call, but if the pilot had not talked about it we'd probably have thought it was.
Since Bush had already fingered various folks and effectively stated "you agree with me or you're our enemy" and the spotlight was shining on the FBI and CIA as to how they were incompetent to let terrorists through, the FBI were under immense pressure to deliver something... anything and it is hardly suprising that they were coercive in their information gathering exercise.
Does Bush really know how to manuipulate people? Surely his staff are really the brains and he's just the puppet.
... for those in the system and those with the ability to change the system.
Patents are a nice little money spinner for Uncle Sam: get paid for a patent application. If it is a bad one, get paid for a reexamination. A few hours of a patent clerk's time get charged as thousands.
They work fine for patent lawyers too. Lots of money to set up a patent application, but the real pay comes when a bad patent gets contested.
The system does not reward high quality work, so how is it going to come about? The USPTO and lawyers are very happy where thay are right now and will actively resist any efforts to change the status quo.
The only way to improve patent quality is to improve the feedback by linking it to dollars. Make the USPTO accountable for damages due to bad patents. But there's not much chance of that happening.
MS Windows often cannot edit OO.docs properly, particularly the embedded pictures. I used to store OO in.doc, but I am now tending towards.odt. I send out pdfs most of the time.
If a Windows user wants to edit my.odt files they can just load OO: no big ask!
I probably edit two entries a month (mainly corrections, sometimes minor additions). I'm not registered and I cannot see any real benefiit in doing so. Perhaps being registered allows you to add pages or modify GW Bush's entry or something but I have not been motivated enough to find out what the benefits are.
Slashdot Mirror
Energy efficiency is not at all arbitrary if it is coming out of a battery.
They'll include every thing they can to pump up the numbers.
Then I'll be impressed!
I believe!
Quantum mechanics and other seemingly irrational physics is very messy.
Hardly an impartial physisist. Some things he retracted, but he had quite a few blind spots (particularly wrt quantum physics) because his beliefs formed a barrier to his acceptance of what the theories said.
grep :-)
In the 1960s, tectonic plate theory was poo-pooed as being bulshit. The PhDs of the day would ridicule tectonics and instead forwrd their own highly implausable theories. These same learned people later withdrew their claims as anti-tectonic claims became unsustainable..
Folks, science advances and so does knowledge. Material, particularly that based on opinion rather than experiment, is subject to change.
Anyone that relies on old theories may as well sign up as life members of the flat earth society.
Are you smiling? [Yes] [No]
Trying the X-prize model might be just the right way to tackle this.
Hydrocarbons are really also just an energy storage system.
Anyway you should only trust Humans V1.0 after SP1 has been released.
... riiiight!
Personally, I think the most likely cause is one of:
* Reduction in the use of slide rules. With calculators it's easier to get a job as a clerk.
* Increase in CPU speed. Too much time playing games == less time being bad.
* Global warming. It's getting too hot to commit crime.
... and no undo/save.
Alarmism gets media attention. The later extraction of the truth is boring and not newsworthy. You just need to see how many people still believe in WMD and that Sadddam is an Al Qaeda leader to see that people don't see the truth.
What Greenpeace does is to ride the hype wave and nobody but Apple has recently released any majorly hyped, or hype-worthy, electronic products.
Greenpeace rides the hype wave in other areas too (ie. not just electronics). This is a very effective way of operating since it relies on the fact that people are already tuned in to the subject and Greenpeace can tack on an environmental angle with far less resources.
I hunch the guys on the ground with radar etc have a far better perspective of what is really going on than any "eye witness".
A few years back I was on a flight from Seattle to LAX and with a very chatty pilot. He said something like "In a minute we'll be having a very close look at a Cessna xxx. You won't have much time to see it because it is going at aaa mph and they're going at bbb mph so the closing speed is... Don't worry folks, they are in their lane and we're in ours" and shortly later this plane came whipping past at what seemed like touching distance. Now that was clearly not a close call, but if the pilot had not talked about it we'd probably have thought it was.
Does Bush really know how to manuipulate people? Surely his staff are really the brains and he's just the puppet.
with Slashdot.
Patents are a nice little money spinner for Uncle Sam: get paid for a patent application. If it is a bad one, get paid for a reexamination. A few hours of a patent clerk's time get charged as thousands.
They work fine for patent lawyers too. Lots of money to set up a patent application, but the real pay comes when a bad patent gets contested.
The system does not reward high quality work, so how is it going to come about? The USPTO and lawyers are very happy where thay are right now and will actively resist any efforts to change the status quo.
The only way to improve patent quality is to improve the feedback by linking it to dollars. Make the USPTO accountable for damages due to bad patents. But there's not much chance of that happening.
Let's see all her skin tone!
If a Windows user wants to edit my .odt files they can just load OO: no big ask!
I probably edit two entries a month (mainly corrections, sometimes minor additions). I'm not registered and I cannot see any real benefiit in doing so. Perhaps being registered allows you to add pages or modify GW Bush's entry or something but I have not been motivated enough to find out what the benefits are.