How is this different than fields of wheat or corn?
Do they not have any process to prevent competition?
They don't damage the soil the same way... but yeah, they're pretty bad too.
For a smarter way, I'd suggest checking out Geoff Lawton's DVD "Establishing a Food Forest the Permaculture Way". You can view some decent excerpts searching Youtube for the term "Lawton's Guide To Permaculture Design and Strategy"
Food forests are complex and thus not friendly to automation, so it's not a profitable way for one man to establish himself as the gatekeeper to the cupboards of a million of his fellows.
However, they're less expensive in terms of materials, produce significantly more food in the same space, require no maintenance, and once they're built, they can and have lasted thousands of years.
I used his principles when designing a border of perennial food-bearing plants to protect our local urban garden society site from hungry homeless people. Now instead of raiding peoples personal plots, they feed themselves from the edge and go on their merry way. I'm determined to leave an oasis to my children when I die, and hope to be able to get the land and get started with the labour in the next couple of years.
Uh, at least in the US and Canada the trees used for making pulp come from forests owned by the paper companies and they sure as hell replant them when they harvest. Mead Westvaco (as an example) has a fairly long term view of things, they own 3M acres and process them in a fashion that minimizes the amount of land they have to purchase to meet demand. The only bad thing about timber harvesting is that there's no old growth forests, but those were cut down generations ago and have little to nothing to do with modern forestry practices.
Right... acres and acres of allelopathic monocrops... what harm could that do?
Around my neck of the woods, it's all about evergreens. They ship em around the world for Xmas trees, and the fact that they replant makes it seem like it's all ok.
Shame the soil is rendered so acidic you could put it under your tongue and take a trip to see lucy in the sky.
"Vehicles that can fly" is a pretty huge incremental step from "Vehicles that can't fly". It's a big leap like that which we tend to call "innovation". Little steps aren't innovation- even though they're often even more useful. The Wright Brother innovated when they managed to put together the first working aeroplane- but it wasn't all that useful. When someone took their plane and made minor incremental improvements to speed, durability, capacity, etc. they weren't innovating, but they did create something truly valuable. When Boeing made the Jumbo Jet it wasn't an "innovation" (it's just a bigger version of what they already built)- but it was damned clever and useful.
You, along with many others here, have confused Innovation with Invention. Invention is about creating something new, while innovation is about taking advantage of inventions. Inventors draw inspiration from the natural world, while innovators draw inspiration from inventors. In a certain sense, innovations are obvious by definition.
The patent system was never designed to protect creators or the public. It was designed to protect the people who exploited those parties. Patents protect the capitalist who owns the factory that manufactures the goods. Copyrights protect the capitalist who owns the factory that binds the books. The system isn't broken, it's doing what it was designed to do... preserve and increase the power of the few over the many and make that power completely arbitrary and unbound by the will of the people.
Tesla innovated just fine. He died crazy and poor while lesser men made themselves the gatekeepers to his creations and robbed the masses blind, sure... but he still innovated. Well, invented... innovation is the dumb-grunt work, really... but the principle is the same.
Just because you're a slave doesn't mean you can't work.
Where's the punishment? The research shows that there is no punishment. There's no loss of sensation -- in fact, men with adult circumcisions report that sex is BETTER afterwards. (RTFS). Its all upside and no real downside other than complications in the procedure itself, which are rare in infants.
You truly believe that taking skin that used to be protected at all times against friction except during the sexual act and having it rub continuously against the fabric of your clothes isn't going to reduce sensation?
They're sexually mutilating children. Children are incapable of giving consent.
I find it so ironic that when Arabs do it to little girls, they're evil monsters, but when Jews do it to little boys, it's considered perfectly acceptable.
It seems that we are where we are as a culture because of science and all those that followed it while the creationists have largely just hitched a ride. I also don't see that they actually have an evolutionary advantage.
Overall I am not very worried about this long term since I want to get a robot body and head out into space and explore and what you guys do on this planet will be your problem. I want to spend millions of years learning and understanding what is out there. I am sure there will be others interested in the same and they can come along.
I wonder how well this world would work if the engineers and scientists left and what kind of evolutionary advantage those remaining would have.
Ahhhh... so, you're an imbecile. Sorry, forget I asked.
I am working on a degree in Chemical and Biological engineering and we definitely use evolution. There are even computer models now based on adaptation speeds for things like resistance to drugs etc.
Evolution is critically important to modern biotech work.
How do you feel about the fact that Creationism conferred an evolutionary advantage to its adherents?
So, this bacteria is sitting in this petri dish that's been sitting on a lab bench evolving increased toxin resistance for many generations, and he says to another bacteria "You know, someone created all this. His name is Bill Nye, and he hates the weaklings among us who can't tolerate the presence of XYZ. That's why he created all this, so he could weed out the weak, and someday, he'll pluck us from this place and bring us to Heaven, to serve his purpose."
So, they fired him from his engineering job because he was clearly crazy.
> One of the best ways to learn how bad your UI is, is to give it to someone who does not have the same preconceived ideas that you automatically *assume* all your clients and other programmers have.
Another thing I have suggested for ANYONE writing software -- whether FOSS or proprietary -- is to hand your software package to an end user. Then go sit in another room and watch them through a window. You can't help them or give them tips. Watch whether they struggle with it.
I've done this myself and 15 minutes watching a real, live, end user is more profitable than anything I can think of. Speaking from experience, the first thing you'll likely discover is that there are libraries on your development machine that aren't on the end user's, and you forgot to include them in the package (even if only as listed dependencies for the package manager). But once you get it installed, you sit back and watch. Look at their frustration as they try to figure out which menu items to click to do what they want.
More often than not (I've seen this, too, unfortunately) is they'll just give up and go back to what they're used to. If they can't easily navigate around your Brand New Thing(tm), they're going to blow it off.
I think that if everyone who developed software would do this simple bit of research, it would be a much happier world.:)
Exactly... they're just like power tools... you should be able to pick them up and use them with no training whatsoever and expect everything to go well.
Oh wait...
You want to build toys, that's fine... but tools have different standards, and I'm not interested in building toys.
Yep... I remember back when I worked in the fireworks factory, and we did 12 hour days 4 days a week... the 3 day weekends every week were nice, and we churned out a lot of fireworks, but still, I'm glad I had a new job before the building got blown to pieces...
Writing software is not "art". It's not there to be appealing. Writing software is about building tools, and when you're dealing with tools, the "right way" exists.
I've written a ton of commercial software, and if you're going to do it right, the first step is convincing the customer that they don't know what they need, and that your very first task will be interviewing them so you can give them a document that tells them what they need.
If you can't convince the customer of this truth, you're usually better off firing the customer. Not only do they usually take more time to deal with than the money justifies, but they actually train you to become shortsighted and less effective and leave you slightly crippled moving forward.
None of which means I like Gnome 3... but this stupid desire to abandon the WIMP metaphor and transform the powerful tools we know and love into crippled and useless entertainment devices seems to be industry wide, and neither a Gnome specific problem nor an open source problem.
The screwball thing about it all is, Windows 8 is coming down the pipe, it looks to be just as fucked up as Gnome 3 is... and the open source community no longer has a decent and well supported WIMP desktop available to capitalize on the opportunity.
The technical discussions are rendered irrelevant by the simple fact that, if such an event occurred as to damage his operation, it would also damage the computers his market needs to run his software. Source code for a game would be worthless in the event of such a calamity so who cares if it's saved?
As far as I'm concerned, Firefox has a one-two punch that still makes it the best browser despite a series of dumb changes, like that "awesomebar" crap. But Firebug and its family of extensions are better than anything else for testing your web development, and AdBlock for Firefox has no equal, and those two pieces of functionality mean an awful lot.
As long as these things remai true, the sites I build will always work and look best in Firefox.
Joke aside, that's because your fellow slashdotters can destroy your comment reputation *anonymously*. You'd be surprised how ordinary, polite folks can turn into nasty, mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces. TFA was dealing with people who know and see each other, and go out of their way to avoid social confrontation.
This said, you deserve your comment reputation ruined:)
How do you know they're only nasty mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces? I'm a nasty mean sonofabitch to talk to all the time, and if anyone discovers they have a problem with that, I'm happy to knock their teeth out and fuck their sister.
Just because one uses Apple, does not mean they are gay. They are predominately metrosexual. There's a difference.
Yes, the difference is that there is no such thing as a metrosexual. You're either gay or bi.. One or the other.
That's a stupid way of looking at it... I'd say, either you think sex is for reproduction, and have kids, or you think it's for fun, and don't. If you don't have a spouse and kids, you're gay, and God hates you.
It's more likely that the engineer will one day make the political scientist obsolete than the other way around, but until that day comes, we have to suffer with them.
Slashdot Mirror
How is this different than fields of wheat or corn?
Do they not have any process to prevent competition?
They don't damage the soil the same way... but yeah, they're pretty bad too.
For a smarter way, I'd suggest checking out Geoff Lawton's DVD "Establishing a Food Forest the Permaculture Way". You can view some decent excerpts searching Youtube for the term "Lawton's Guide To Permaculture Design and Strategy"
Food forests are complex and thus not friendly to automation, so it's not a profitable way for one man to establish himself as the gatekeeper to the cupboards of a million of his fellows.
However, they're less expensive in terms of materials, produce significantly more food in the same space, require no maintenance, and once they're built, they can and have lasted thousands of years.
Example: 300 year old food forest in Vietnam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5ZgzwoQ-ao
Example: 2000 year old food forest in Morocco
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hftgWcD-1Nw
I used his principles when designing a border of perennial food-bearing plants to protect our local urban garden society site from hungry homeless people. Now instead of raiding peoples personal plots, they feed themselves from the edge and go on their merry way. I'm determined to leave an oasis to my children when I die, and hope to be able to get the land and get started with the labour in the next couple of years.
Uh, at least in the US and Canada the trees used for making pulp come from forests owned by the paper companies and they sure as hell replant them when they harvest. Mead Westvaco (as an example) has a fairly long term view of things, they own 3M acres and process them in a fashion that minimizes the amount of land they have to purchase to meet demand. The only bad thing about timber harvesting is that there's no old growth forests, but those were cut down generations ago and have little to nothing to do with modern forestry practices.
Right... acres and acres of allelopathic monocrops... what harm could that do?
Around my neck of the woods, it's all about evergreens. They ship em around the world for Xmas trees, and the fact that they replant makes it seem like it's all ok.
Shame the soil is rendered so acidic you could put it under your tongue and take a trip to see lucy in the sky.
Police have called out the Royal Syrup Police
As is the tradition.
What the hell are you on about?
This is definitely a job for the "Royal Canadian Kilted Yaksman".
I'm talking about the acts of desperate men.
I disagree. Everyone should get welfare. Donald Trump should get a welfare cheque each month, the same size as anyone else.
Why? People who are unsafe make me unsafe.
I don't maintain a project used by millions of people (eg: jQuery).
Overall I find the term "Rock star developer" to be demeaning to a very professional field as a whole.
I do, and you can call me a Rock Star if you want... I don't mind :P
Bullshit. The definition of a "Rock Star" developer is that they have a history of producing hits. It's not relative.
"Vehicles that can fly" is a pretty huge incremental step from "Vehicles that can't fly". It's a big leap like that which we tend to call "innovation". Little steps aren't innovation- even though they're often even more useful. The Wright Brother innovated when they managed to put together the first working aeroplane- but it wasn't all that useful. When someone took their plane and made minor incremental improvements to speed, durability, capacity, etc. they weren't innovating, but they did create something truly valuable. When Boeing made the Jumbo Jet it wasn't an "innovation" (it's just a bigger version of what they already built)- but it was damned clever and useful.
You, along with many others here, have confused Innovation with Invention. Invention is about creating something new, while innovation is about taking advantage of inventions. Inventors draw inspiration from the natural world, while innovators draw inspiration from inventors. In a certain sense, innovations are obvious by definition.
The patent system was never designed to protect creators or the public. It was designed to protect the people who exploited those parties. Patents protect the capitalist who owns the factory that manufactures the goods. Copyrights protect the capitalist who owns the factory that binds the books. The system isn't broken, it's doing what it was designed to do... preserve and increase the power of the few over the many and make that power completely arbitrary and unbound by the will of the people.
Tesla innovated just fine. He died crazy and poor while lesser men made themselves the gatekeepers to his creations and robbed the masses blind, sure... but he still innovated. Well, invented... innovation is the dumb-grunt work, really... but the principle is the same.
Just because you're a slave doesn't mean you can't work.
I'll take that for a "yes". You're probably a filthy Jew.
Where's the punishment? The research shows that there is no punishment. There's no loss of sensation -- in fact, men with adult circumcisions report that sex is BETTER afterwards. (RTFS). Its all upside and no real downside other than complications in the procedure itself, which are rare in infants.
You truly believe that taking skin that used to be protected at all times against friction except during the sexual act and having it rub continuously against the fabric of your clothes isn't going to reduce sensation?
Are you retarded?
They're sexually mutilating children. Children are incapable of giving consent.
I find it so ironic that when Arabs do it to little girls, they're evil monsters, but when Jews do it to little boys, it's considered perfectly acceptable.
Sick, sick people.
It seems that we are where we are as a culture because of science and all those that followed it while the creationists have largely just hitched a ride. I also don't see that they actually have an evolutionary advantage.
Overall I am not very worried about this long term since I want to get a robot body and head out into space and explore and what you guys do on this planet will be your problem. I want to spend millions of years learning and understanding what is out there. I am sure there will be others interested in the same and they can come along.
I wonder how well this world would work if the engineers and scientists left and what kind of evolutionary advantage those remaining would have.
Ahhhh... so, you're an imbecile. Sorry, forget I asked.
I am working on a degree in Chemical and Biological engineering and we definitely use evolution. There are even computer models now based on adaptation speeds for things like resistance to drugs etc.
Evolution is critically important to modern biotech work.
How do you feel about the fact that Creationism conferred an evolutionary advantage to its adherents?
So, this bacteria is sitting in this petri dish that's been sitting on a lab bench evolving increased toxin resistance for many generations, and he says to another bacteria "You know, someone created all this. His name is Bill Nye, and he hates the weaklings among us who can't tolerate the presence of XYZ. That's why he created all this, so he could weed out the weak, and someday, he'll pluck us from this place and bring us to Heaven, to serve his purpose."
So, they fired him from his engineering job because he was clearly crazy.
> One of the best ways to learn how bad your UI is, is to give it to someone who does not have the same preconceived ideas that you automatically *assume* all your clients and other programmers have.
Another thing I have suggested for ANYONE writing software -- whether FOSS or proprietary -- is to hand your software package to an end user. Then go sit in another room and watch them through a window. You can't help them or give them tips. Watch whether they struggle with it.
I've done this myself and 15 minutes watching a real, live, end user is more profitable than anything I can think of. Speaking from experience, the first thing you'll likely discover is that there are libraries on your development machine that aren't on the end user's, and you forgot to include them in the package (even if only as listed dependencies for the package manager). But once you get it installed, you sit back and watch. Look at their frustration as they try to figure out which menu items to click to do what they want.
More often than not (I've seen this, too, unfortunately) is they'll just give up and go back to what they're used to. If they can't easily navigate around your Brand New Thing(tm), they're going to blow it off.
I think that if everyone who developed software would do this simple bit of research, it would be a much happier world. :)
Exactly... they're just like power tools... you should be able to pick them up and use them with no training whatsoever and expect everything to go well.
Oh wait...
You want to build toys, that's fine... but tools have different standards, and I'm not interested in building toys.
Yep... I remember back when I worked in the fireworks factory, and we did 12 hour days 4 days a week... the 3 day weekends every week were nice, and we churned out a lot of fireworks, but still, I'm glad I had a new job before the building got blown to pieces...
Writing software is not "art". It's not there to be appealing. Writing software is about building tools, and when you're dealing with tools, the "right way" exists.
I've written a ton of commercial software, and if you're going to do it right, the first step is convincing the customer that they don't know what they need, and that your very first task will be interviewing them so you can give them a document that tells them what they need.
If you can't convince the customer of this truth, you're usually better off firing the customer. Not only do they usually take more time to deal with than the money justifies, but they actually train you to become shortsighted and less effective and leave you slightly crippled moving forward.
None of which means I like Gnome 3... but this stupid desire to abandon the WIMP metaphor and transform the powerful tools we know and love into crippled and useless entertainment devices seems to be industry wide, and neither a Gnome specific problem nor an open source problem.
The screwball thing about it all is, Windows 8 is coming down the pipe, it looks to be just as fucked up as Gnome 3 is... and the open source community no longer has a decent and well supported WIMP desktop available to capitalize on the opportunity.
The technical discussions are rendered irrelevant by the simple fact that, if such an event occurred as to damage his operation, it would also damage the computers his market needs to run his software. Source code for a game would be worthless in the event of such a calamity so who cares if it's saved?
If code like this works better than human judgement does, doesn't that mean we've made rich people obsolete?
As far as I'm concerned, Firefox has a one-two punch that still makes it the best browser despite a series of dumb changes, like that "awesomebar" crap. But Firebug and its family of extensions are better than anything else for testing your web development, and AdBlock for Firefox has no equal, and those two pieces of functionality mean an awful lot.
As long as these things remai true, the sites I build will always work and look best in Firefox.
Joke aside, that's because your fellow slashdotters can destroy your comment reputation *anonymously*. You'd be surprised how ordinary, polite folks can turn into nasty, mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces. TFA was dealing with people who know and see each other, and go out of their way to avoid social confrontation.
This said, you deserve your comment reputation ruined :)
How do you know they're only nasty mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces? I'm a nasty mean sonofabitch to talk to all the time, and if anyone discovers they have a problem with that, I'm happy to knock their teeth out and fuck their sister.
Just because one uses Apple, does not mean they are gay. They are predominately metrosexual. There's a difference.
Yes, the difference is that there is no such thing as a metrosexual. You're either gay or bi.. One or the other.
That's a stupid way of looking at it... I'd say, either you think sex is for reproduction, and have kids, or you think it's for fun, and don't. If you don't have a spouse and kids, you're gay, and God hates you.
You can tell because he invented evolution. :D
It's more likely that the engineer will one day make the political scientist obsolete than the other way around, but until that day comes, we have to suffer with them.