There are only a small amount of applications this effects and it's very easy to overcome, although I unfortunately can't go into much more depth than that.
I don't think you meant anything controversial but there's just something about that line that makes me grumpy. It sort of implies that the inner machinations of the patent system aren't meant for regular people to understand. It plays to the feeling, common around here, that the only thing that regular people, the kind that might start small software shops, need to know about software patents is that they can kill your business if your competitors are big.
I know that's not what you meant, it's probably your job that prevents you from commenting further.
Still, how many little guys have not tried to pursue a really good idea that might attract attention from MegaSoftware Inc. because they fear getting a registered letter with scary legal documents that say "patent infringement" because some rich guy on his yacht called his $500/hr lawyers and said "that guy is good...kill him?"
Anyway, I kind of launched into a screed there. My fingers just typed it I don't know why.
Maximum likelihood phylogram constructed from analysis of up to 421 nucleotide sites of b-fibrinogen introns 5 and 7 combined. At nodes are Bayesian posterior probabilities and ML bootstrap values (100 repetitions).
There are two kind of people in the world...the kind that thinks the new Day the Earth Stood Still is science fiction, and the kind that thinks it would have been if Klaatu had said to Barnhardt something like that.
1. An 89 watt-hour high-speed dash to blow the dust off. By my calculations they should be able to go 6 feet at 4 mph so ok forget that.
2. Launch a nuclear powered feather dusting support rover. No that's stupid.
3. Fire a kazillajoule laser at Mars to energize the solar panels. This is actually the least worst idea so far which is depressing.
4. Spend the remaining energy teaching the rover to do the Hammer Dance with it's eight independently swiveling wheels. If you got to go down, go down doing the Hammer Dance that's what I always say which is maybe why nobody sits with me in the cafeteria.
The Arrow was worse than a total loss. Dief had them cut into scrap and melted down. He had the blueprints shredded and burned. Canadian aerospace never recovered.
American fighter technology benefited from the crowds of designers and engineers that were turfed out onto the street by AV Roe and Orenda at Eisenhower's command and who the Americans picked up cheap.
So we spent all that money then literally burned the results and forced the people to leave the country to find jobs. I'd rather name a ship after Peewee Herman than Diefenbaker.
You rag on John Diefenbaker (Progressive Conservative) for cancelling a very expensive program and you whine that Stephen Harper (Conservative) is not spending enough on exploring the arctic.
You're either a troll or a disgruntled liberal will find any excuse to bash the conservatives. Frankly, I don't know how you got moderated up.
There's a difference between liberal and Liberal, which one did you mean? Are you another Canadian who takes his lessons on political discourse from from American talk radio and don't know the difference?
Diefenbaker toadied up to Eisenhower and destroyed the Canadian aerospace industry, airframe and engine at the behest of the Americans who didn't want the competition. (Ironically ever since then Americans have ragged on Canada for not pulling our weight, which makes me choke).
Harper is either lying or delusional about the cost of icebreakers.
What exactly is your problem with these statements? Factually incorrect or just inconvenient for those Canadians who would rather be Americans?
Canada doesn't have a major navy. There have been plans in the past to at least buy a polar-class ice breaker to patrol the north but that keeps getting canceled. Maybe it's back on (named, ironically enough, after Diefenbaker, he who murdered the Arrow. Harper has such a low opinion of Canadians he doesn't think we'll remember. Him and McKay, minister in charge of using his position to pick up chicks and lying through his pointy little teeth to the Progressive Conservatives, God Rest Their Souls.
At any rate, the Conservatives can be counted on to tool around with idiotic hardware to prove that Alberta is just as good as Texas. "Can we be Texas, please? Pleeeeeease?"
The first editor I can remember using was some thing I found on the VAX 11 780, I think it was called YALOE (Yet Another Line Oriented Editor). My favorite was the Panvalet editor, it had code folding and all sorts of (for those days) advanced things. Maybe YALOE was on the PDP 11. Good times, good times.
You know, it's funny. I'm from the opposite end of the political spectrum from you but what you are talking about is a big problem today.
It's the King syndrome. Maybe a lot of teenagers stumble upon the thought that, if only everyone in the world was like me everything would be so great. That's an understandable adolescent reaction to a chaotic world.
The problem is, some people don't grow out of it. The NDP here in Canada is the worst for that but it seems to be becoming pervasive.
Godel proved that you can never have a complete and recursive list of axioms for arithmetic.
The Incompleteness Theorem:
For any consistent formal theory that proves basic arithmetical truths, an arithmetical statement that is true but not provable in the theory can be constructed. That is, any theory capable of expressing elementary arithmetic cannot be both consistent and complete.
The MPAA's Attaway, who calls himself the lobbying group's "old man" for his 33 years of service, recalls that the DMCA was a compromise from the start.
"The ISPs wanted safe harbor provisions in return for their support for the anti-circumvention provisions, which was one of the major and most important compromises in this legislation," he says. "It's not perfect. But it's better than nothing."
This MPAA lawyer speaks of a compromise between themselves and ISPs. As if they are the only parties involved.
What about the 300 million actual human bodies that the politicians are supposed to represent? Attaway knows what the MPAA and the ISPs wanted. Does he have a clue what the actual human beings wanted? Did congress?
Evidently the MPAA has successfully convinced Washington that those humans should be considered as "customers" and not "voters".
I respectfully disagree that the window parable applies, since there is no destruction of property involved in making a product for someone to buy. The fact that the customer is unusually wealthy doesn't make a difference, does it? I think that is capitalism working, to the extent that it does.
There are problems with inequity when the wealthy use their privilege to frustrate the ambitions of other not so wealthy people. But that's more about politics.
Is it simplistic to think that economics is all about supplying what people want? I think that's exactly what it is about. Whether it's a hamburger or a Gulfstream V, what's the difference, other than scale.
History has shown that, even if capitalism isn't perfect at allocating resources, people are much much worse. Ref. the Soviet Union. So while it might be "better" in some way if the prince doesn't get his jet, who decides? Those people who decide, can they be trusted with that power?
Which might sound like a position against taxation and government, which it isn't. Like all things human, politics and economics are not black and white. Fettered capitalism and effective democratic government (which is best represented by Western Europe these days) just seem to be the things that lead to people being the happiest. Isn't that what it's all about?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Saudi princes deserve to be rich and powerful. They are just wankers like the rest of us, only they happen to come from families that had land situated over a lake of oil. That's sort of typical, most wealth in the world is inherited. Bill Gate's mom got him that contract with IBM.
Given that the world is unfair, though, it's nice to be able to take some of their money back from them.
Also, nobody that I know of has come up with a way that's any better than capitalism at redistributing wealth. Of course, figuring out exactly how to regulate capitalism (laissez fair doesn't work any better then facism) is the big question.
The construction and maintenance of a fighter jet is one of the more labour intensive things you can buy. So I look at this as a large transfer of money from the rich guys to working people.
Our little company has done engineering work for the Canadian Forces Alpha Jets but mostly we convert super expensive large business jets. We charge a lot.
Flying toys are one of the worlds best wealth re-distributors. Small numbers of ridiculously wealthy middle eastern princes and other "principles" keep our team of engineers and techies employed, not to mention a whole raft of suppliers. And then you have to include all the people who work for airframe OEMs.
After they buy something from us they are quite a bit less wealthy than they were before.
Intuition tells me there must be advantages to landing a smaller weight. Perhaps it is because some of the touchdown precision can be achieved by winch control instead of flight control. That is, you need a less accurate and lighter flight control system, and, the landing gear can be less robust. Those strike me as second order effects but weight to Mars must be ridiculously expensive.
I say "oh yeah?" What about RAID? Bike gangs have lots of raids. Also I think they beat someone with a model M keyboard so that's good credentials right there.
You can see the pedigree of the concept. The airbag system used a brutal retro-rocket on the teather milliseconds before impact to slow the airbag-lander from smush speed to bounce speed.
This is similar. The retro rocket is far more gentle and precise but basically we have a last-second retro rocket on a tether dropping the lander onto the surface.
I presume tradeoff studies were done to find the optimum balance between the amount of crane hover precision and winch control precision for a giving touchdown speed tolerance at min weight.
As noted, there are a lot of things deploying in rapid sequence, and a winch. Winch bad. Winch have many fiddly bits. I wonder if they also did a tradeoff study of reliability vs capacity of this concept and a brute-force lander.
Why would a language/platform designed for writing networked applications be used to write device drivers?
Is the JVM supposed to only for enterprise plumbing or is it supposed to be a general purpose VM? If not the latter then why did Sun bother with Swing and the like?
Slashdot Mirror
There are only a small amount of applications this effects and it's very easy to overcome, although I unfortunately can't go into much more depth than that.
I don't think you meant anything controversial but there's just something about that line that makes me grumpy. It sort of implies that the inner machinations of the patent system aren't meant for regular people to understand. It plays to the feeling, common around here, that the only thing that regular people, the kind that might start small software shops, need to know about software patents is that they can kill your business if your competitors are big.
I know that's not what you meant, it's probably your job that prevents you from commenting further.
Still, how many little guys have not tried to pursue a really good idea that might attract attention from MegaSoftware Inc. because they fear getting a registered letter with scary legal documents that say "patent infringement" because some rich guy on his yacht called his $500/hr lawyers and said "that guy is good...kill him?"
Anyway, I kind of launched into a screed there. My fingers just typed it I don't know why.
Maximum likelihood phylogram constructed from analysis of up to 421 nucleotide sites of b-fibrinogen introns 5 and 7 combined. At nodes are Bayesian posterior probabilities and ML bootstrap values (100 repetitions).
There are two kind of people in the world...the kind that thinks the new Day the Earth Stood Still is science fiction, and the kind that thinks it would have been if Klaatu had said to Barnhardt something like that.
...former Microsoft employees Gabe Newell and Mike Harrington, instrumental minds behind nearly three generations of the Windows operating system.
And I have nearly three eyes.
It is not a stupid idea!
It's four stupid ideas.
1. An 89 watt-hour high-speed dash to blow the dust off. By my calculations they should be able to go 6 feet at 4 mph so ok forget that.
2. Launch a nuclear powered feather dusting support rover. No that's stupid.
3. Fire a kazillajoule laser at Mars to energize the solar panels. This is actually the least worst idea so far which is depressing.
4. Spend the remaining energy teaching the rover to do the Hammer Dance with it's eight independently swiveling wheels. If you got to go down, go down doing the Hammer Dance that's what I always say which is maybe why nobody sits with me in the cafeteria.
The Arrow was worse than a total loss. Dief had them cut into scrap and melted down. He had the blueprints shredded and burned. Canadian aerospace never recovered.
American fighter technology benefited from the crowds of designers and engineers that were turfed out onto the street by AV Roe and Orenda at Eisenhower's command and who the Americans picked up cheap.
So we spent all that money then literally burned the results and forced the people to leave the country to find jobs. I'd rather name a ship after Peewee Herman than Diefenbaker.
You rag on John Diefenbaker (Progressive Conservative) for cancelling a very expensive program and you whine that Stephen Harper (Conservative) is not spending enough on exploring the arctic.
You're either a troll or a disgruntled liberal will find any excuse to bash the conservatives. Frankly, I don't know how you got moderated up.
There's a difference between liberal and Liberal, which one did you mean? Are you another Canadian who takes his lessons on political discourse from from American talk radio and don't know the difference?
Diefenbaker toadied up to Eisenhower and destroyed the Canadian aerospace industry, airframe and engine at the behest of the Americans who didn't want the competition. (Ironically ever since then Americans have ragged on Canada for not pulling our weight, which makes me choke).
Harper is either lying or delusional about the cost of icebreakers.
What exactly is your problem with these statements? Factually incorrect or just inconvenient for those Canadians who would rather be Americans?
Canada doesn't have a major navy. There have been plans in the past to at least buy a polar-class ice breaker to patrol the north but that keeps getting canceled. Maybe it's back on (named, ironically enough, after Diefenbaker, he who murdered the Arrow. Harper has such a low opinion of Canadians he doesn't think we'll remember. Him and McKay, minister in charge of using his position to pick up chicks and lying through his pointy little teeth to the Progressive Conservatives, God Rest Their Souls.
Chances are, though, Harper is lying again.
At any rate, the Conservatives can be counted on to tool around with idiotic hardware to prove that Alberta is just as good as Texas. "Can we be Texas, please? Pleeeeeease?"
The first editor I can remember using was some thing I found on the VAX 11 780, I think it was called YALOE (Yet Another Line Oriented Editor). My favorite was the Panvalet editor, it had code folding and all sorts of (for those days) advanced things. Maybe YALOE was on the PDP 11. Good times, good times.
Forget where I read this...
EMACS: Equine Mammals are Considerably Smaller
You know, it's funny. I'm from the opposite end of the political spectrum from you but what you are talking about is a big problem today.
It's the King syndrome. Maybe a lot of teenagers stumble upon the thought that, if only everyone in the world was like me everything would be so great. That's an understandable adolescent reaction to a chaotic world.
The problem is, some people don't grow out of it. The NDP here in Canada is the worst for that but it seems to be becoming pervasive.
fuck this police state
Get politically active.
Godel proved that you can never have a complete and recursive list of axioms for arithmetic.
The Incompleteness Theorem:
What's this about recursive?
Axioms.
aren't already proven? Principia Mathematica did the basics and I always assumed more advanced theorems became proven as required.
Maybe someone just wants to do Principia Mathematica volumes II through L but doesn't that already in effect exist?
The MPAA's Attaway, who calls himself the lobbying group's "old man" for his 33 years of service, recalls that the DMCA was a compromise from the start. "The ISPs wanted safe harbor provisions in return for their support for the anti-circumvention provisions, which was one of the major and most important compromises in this legislation," he says. "It's not perfect. But it's better than nothing."
This MPAA lawyer speaks of a compromise between themselves and ISPs. As if they are the only parties involved.
What about the 300 million actual human bodies that the politicians are supposed to represent? Attaway knows what the MPAA and the ISPs wanted. Does he have a clue what the actual human beings wanted? Did congress?
Evidently the MPAA has successfully convinced Washington that those humans should be considered as "customers" and not "voters".
I respectfully disagree that the window parable applies, since there is no destruction of property involved in making a product for someone to buy. The fact that the customer is unusually wealthy doesn't make a difference, does it? I think that is capitalism working, to the extent that it does.
There are problems with inequity when the wealthy use their privilege to frustrate the ambitions of other not so wealthy people. But that's more about politics.
Is it simplistic to think that economics is all about supplying what people want? I think that's exactly what it is about. Whether it's a hamburger or a Gulfstream V, what's the difference, other than scale.
History has shown that, even if capitalism isn't perfect at allocating resources, people are much much worse. Ref. the Soviet Union. So while it might be "better" in some way if the prince doesn't get his jet, who decides? Those people who decide, can they be trusted with that power?
Which might sound like a position against taxation and government, which it isn't. Like all things human, politics and economics are not black and white. Fettered capitalism and effective democratic government (which is best represented by Western Europe these days) just seem to be the things that lead to people being the happiest. Isn't that what it's all about?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Saudi princes deserve to be rich and powerful. They are just wankers like the rest of us, only they happen to come from families that had land situated over a lake of oil. That's sort of typical, most wealth in the world is inherited. Bill Gate's mom got him that contract with IBM.
Given that the world is unfair, though, it's nice to be able to take some of their money back from them.
Also, nobody that I know of has come up with a way that's any better than capitalism at redistributing wealth. Of course, figuring out exactly how to regulate capitalism (laissez fair doesn't work any better then facism) is the big question.
The construction and maintenance of a fighter jet is one of the more labour intensive things you can buy. So I look at this as a large transfer of money from the rich guys to working people.
Our little company has done engineering work for the Canadian Forces Alpha Jets but mostly we convert super expensive large business jets. We charge a lot.
Flying toys are one of the worlds best wealth re-distributors. Small numbers of ridiculously wealthy middle eastern princes and other "principles" keep our team of engineers and techies employed, not to mention a whole raft of suppliers. And then you have to include all the people who work for airframe OEMs.
After they buy something from us they are quite a bit less wealthy than they were before.
Intuition tells me there must be advantages to landing a smaller weight. Perhaps it is because some of the touchdown precision can be achieved by winch control instead of flight control. That is, you need a less accurate and lighter flight control system, and, the landing gear can be less robust. Those strike me as second order effects but weight to Mars must be ridiculously expensive.
I say "oh yeah?" What about RAID? Bike gangs have lots of raids. Also I think they beat someone with a model M keyboard so that's good credentials right there.
You can see the pedigree of the concept. The airbag system used a brutal retro-rocket on the teather milliseconds before impact to slow the airbag-lander from smush speed to bounce speed.
This is similar. The retro rocket is far more gentle and precise but basically we have a last-second retro rocket on a tether dropping the lander onto the surface.
I presume tradeoff studies were done to find the optimum balance between the amount of crane hover precision and winch control precision for a giving touchdown speed tolerance at min weight.
As noted, there are a lot of things deploying in rapid sequence, and a winch. Winch bad. Winch have many fiddly bits. I wonder if they also did a tradeoff study of reliability vs capacity of this concept and a brute-force lander.
All you need to do (apparently) is listen to the clicks:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/05/13/0238204
At least you got my name right.
Why would a language/platform designed for writing networked applications be used to write device drivers?
Is the JVM supposed to only for enterprise plumbing or is it supposed to be a general purpose VM? If not the latter then why did Sun bother with Swing and the like?