The trouble is that in order to search for life on Europa, you would need a submarine probe which can drill through several kilometers of ice. It would then have to send any data using a method other than radio, as radio waves don't propogate very well under water. No doubt a probe will be sent eventually (I believe there is one being planned), but it's technically a lot harder than sending probes to Mars.
It's simply ridiculous to jump to this conclusion -- if anything, you have to assume that Antivirus Software is a DEAD END in computer evolution, as it helps prevent the survival of the fittest.
Then you would also have to conclude that the human immune system is an evolutionary dead end for the same reasons. Not to mention the fact that the fitness function for computer evolution, if there is such a thing, is profit generated for the manufacturer, not robustness per se.
There is a difference between regulating something, and banning it outright. Would you also say that we shouldn't regulate the use of asbestos as a building material, because it might hinder the development of architecture? Would you have opposed research into the health hazards of asbestos? If there are safety issues, they should be investigated, and a sensible response taken to the results.
(Is there some kind of Slashdot mandate that to make a point you must actually insult whoever's comment you are addressing...?)
Apparently, yes;-) But I appologise.
The point is that being nice to the open source community in itself won't make a shred of difference to the IBM bottom line because they're potential customers are also just interested in the bottom line, not how nice IBM is. Not to mention that this SCO affair has put IBMs karma in the open source community through the roof. You seem to be assuming that it would be good for their image, and this would result in increased sales, but try putting figures to that.
Why do these people assume that scientists have no ethics?
Because they've grown up watching formulaic sci-fi shockers in which a brilliant, but (irresponsible/unethical) (scientist/engineer) creates something which could potentially be used for good, but (rages out of control/gets into the hands of terrorists/ is used for evil purposes) and threatens to kill (millions of people/the world/the universe) if the brave, handsome, street-smart hero doesn't save the day with the help of his love-interest.
Potatos, when propelled at high velocity, can be used as a deadly weapon. We must band together and stop these evil vegetables from reproducing before it's too late. Potato farmers must be eradicated.
Nanoscale particles can pass through the skin, and therefore can be dangerous if the particles in question contain toxic substances. It is important that this is studied proerly and the appropriate regulations put in place before manufacturers start selling us carcinogenic toothpaste. It's also refreshing that they're addressing real issues, rather than paranoid sci-fi nonsense like grey goo.
supporting the users who are currently being attacked by SCO would give IBM major karma points with the Open Source community
I hate to shatter your illusions, but IBM, like any profitable company, are interested in shareholder value, not karma. They are using and supporting open source because they see this approach as a good business model, not to usher in the age of aquarius. They won't provide legal support to linux users who are not their customers, because it will not increase shareholder value, either directly, or indirectly.
CMOS circuits are designed in a push/pull arrangement with one network of transistors to push the output high, and another to pull the output low. When high, the pull network has an extremely high impedance, and the push network an extremely low impedance. When the output is low, it is the other way around. In both cases, there is a high impedance between the power supply and ground, and the output is connected to the CMOS gates, which are insulated, so very little current flows, and very little power is dissipated. When switching, both networks are partially on, and therefore have a relatively low impedance, so significant current can flow from the power supply to ground.
Note that this is peculiar to CMOS as the gate in a CMOS device is insulated, thus preventing current from flowing. This is not the case in TTL circuits, which do dissipate power when the devices are not switching.
No. Microsoft Windows is the big hairy psycho who hangs around the prison showers waiting for you to pick up the soap. It's only real purpose is to fuck you over.
Ironically, being able to see again has meant Mr May has had to re-learn some activities, such as skiing or crossing the road, where he had become proficient when blind
...a problem which he could avoid by wrapping a towel around his head.
slashdotters should at least be interested in where the real benefit lies and who benefits from the lies
We all benefit from an excuse to drink lots of red wine on grounds that it's good for your health, so lets just keep those "lies" rolling in shall we. Thank you.
Employ weeble technology. As we have as much power as we like, within reason, simply use bigger actuators and attach large, round concrete blocks to the feet. As long as the curvature of the blocks is correct, it will be impossible for the elderly person to fall over.
"Weebles wobble, but they never fall down" - Lawnmowerdeth
Just pick people at random from the population. You'll end up with a government which is just as incompetent, but a lot less corrupt. Also, it will be a good incentive to have a real education system.
Certainly. I'm currently selling plots at $10/sq.m (earth view), or $8/sq.m on the far side. I'm prepared to negotiate a discount for lots of 1000sq.m and over. How much do you want?
I'm prepared to bet that the person who wrote the cleanup worm was more interested in writing a clever worm than cleaning up peoples computers. If this were the case, the fact that he chose to do something constructive with his skills has to be a good thing, in a lesser-of-two-evils sense.
The fact that he posted a budget of $100 and failed to mention which country he is in should be enough to deduce that the poster is , in fact, an american;-)
Slashdot Mirror
No wonder they can't find any life on Mars :O)
The trouble is that in order to search for life on Europa, you would need a submarine probe which can drill through several kilometers of ice. It would then have to send any data using a method other than radio, as radio waves don't propogate very well under water. No doubt a probe will be sent eventually (I believe there is one being planned), but it's technically a lot harder than sending probes to Mars.
I find that the annoying robot which blows itself up is more in line with the windows look and feel
Hofepully we cna fnid a ruce for tihs tebbirle codnition
Then you would also have to conclude that the human immune system is an evolutionary dead end for the same reasons. Not to mention the fact that the fitness function for computer evolution, if there is such a thing, is profit generated for the manufacturer, not robustness per se.
With their penchant for user friendliness, I'm surprised they didn't choose mudsh
There is a difference between regulating something, and banning it outright. Would you also say that we shouldn't regulate the use of asbestos as a building material, because it might hinder the development of architecture? Would you have opposed research into the health hazards of asbestos? If there are safety issues, they should be investigated, and a sensible response taken to the results.
Apparently, yes ;-) But I appologise.
The point is that being nice to the open source community in itself won't make a shred of difference to the IBM bottom line because they're potential customers are also just interested in the bottom line, not how nice IBM is. Not to mention that this SCO affair has put IBMs karma in the open source community through the roof. You seem to be assuming that it would be good for their image, and this would result in increased sales, but try putting figures to that.
Because they've grown up watching formulaic sci-fi shockers in which a brilliant, but (irresponsible/unethical) (scientist/engineer) creates something which could potentially be used for good, but (rages out of control/gets into the hands of terrorists/ is used for evil purposes) and threatens to kill (millions of people/the world/the universe) if the brave, handsome, street-smart hero doesn't save the day with the help of his love-interest.
Potatos, when propelled at high velocity, can be used as a deadly weapon. We must band together and stop these evil vegetables from reproducing before it's too late. Potato farmers must be eradicated.
Nanoscale particles can pass through the skin, and therefore can be dangerous if the particles in question contain toxic substances. It is important that this is studied proerly and the appropriate regulations put in place before manufacturers start selling us carcinogenic toothpaste. It's also refreshing that they're addressing real issues, rather than paranoid sci-fi nonsense like grey goo.
I hate to shatter your illusions, but IBM, like any profitable company, are interested in shareholder value, not karma. They are using and supporting open source because they see this approach as a good business model, not to usher in the age of aquarius. They won't provide legal support to linux users who are not their customers, because it will not increase shareholder value, either directly, or indirectly.
Note that this is peculiar to CMOS as the gate in a CMOS device is insulated, thus preventing current from flowing. This is not the case in TTL circuits, which do dissipate power when the devices are not switching.
No. Microsoft Windows is the big hairy psycho who hangs around the prison showers waiting for you to pick up the soap. It's only real purpose is to fuck you over.
...a problem which he could avoid by wrapping a towel around his head.
We all benefit from an excuse to drink lots of red wine on grounds that it's good for your health, so lets just keep those "lies" rolling in shall we. Thank you.
"Weebles wobble, but they never fall down" - Lawnmowerdeth
Just pick people at random from the population. You'll end up with a government which is just as incompetent, but a lot less corrupt. Also, it will be a good incentive to have a real education system.
Certainly. I'm currently selling plots at $10/sq.m (earth view), or $8/sq.m on the far side. I'm prepared to negotiate a discount for lots of 1000sq.m and over. How much do you want?
You mean your PC was so overloaded that it got blown through the roof at mach 2? Totally heinous, dude.
But the whole point is not to have a fan.
* This is an educated guess
It looks really evil
I'm prepared to bet that the person who wrote the cleanup worm was more interested in writing a clever worm than cleaning up peoples computers. If this were the case, the fact that he chose to do something constructive with his skills has to be a good thing, in a lesser-of-two-evils sense.
The fact that he posted a budget of $100 and failed to mention which country he is in should be enough to deduce that the poster is , in fact, an american ;-)