Controling this experiment would be hard and expensive. To get really solid results, it would be nice to have identical twin mothers, both impregnated with one half of a twin embryo (if that's the right word). They would have to eat and do the exact same thing with the exception of the sound therapy - keep them in a special living facility for the duration? And of course, you mention random chance, we'd need a lot of these twin mothers. You would also want to account for differences between the twin mothers acquired in their individual lives that may have an effect on the birth.
Anyway, the alternative therapies crowd likely doesn't have the money to do this, and even if they did have the money, it seems unlikely they would pursue actual research because the downside would destroy their business. Besides, it is easy enough to get customers with the right sales pitch and a sales pitch costs practically nothing to develop.
It's been a while since I read Asimov, but after watching the preview, it seems obvious that this will be typical Hollywood "sci-fear" rather than "sci-fi". At the end of the trailer, there is a comment by the actor that essentially says the point of the movie is uncovering the "deep dark secret truth" or something like that at US Robotics (what might that be, people don't like modems?). My Guess, this will be yet another Hollywood flick about how scary technology can be. The irony is of course, that in Asimov's world, on Earth robots were rejected as a frightening technology (safety/economic fears). I expect this movie will be a dissapointing abuse of Asimov's legacy.
Headphones are great when shopping. I've put on headphones before entering a store without even connecting them to anything. Just run the wire to my pocket. Cuts the annoying "can I help you?" from 1x/2min to nothing at all. Its funny to watch some retail droid start to open his/her mouth, then shut it and walk away.
As I understand the article, this is about some changes in protocols and the radio bands used by AT&T for its cell service. So even though you do own the affected phones, they won't work with the cell system. It would be like having a perfectly good car radio that wasn't designed to receive FM signals, only AM. Once upon a time, that sort of situation actually happened, difference being that AM stations stayed on the air. Imagine that scenario except that all the stations go FM. You get to keep the radio, and although it functions, it doesn't "work".
"Indemnify" implies that if the Linux user lost, and had to pay damages to SCO, Red Hat would pay the bill for the damages awarded by the court.
What the prior poster was saying is that if SCO sues, Rad Hat will pay for a defense (help you fight the lawsuit), but if you lose and the court orders you to pay damages to SCO, Red Hat won't pay that bill.
Personally, I have no idea what the scope of Red Hat's protections are nor can I comment on who is or is not correct. I'm just playing Websters.
I'd cure this if I hadn't already posted. For those who don't know, in Firefly, "Shiny" was sometimes used as slang for "good". So whoever modded this offtopic, is some kind of knucklehead who never saw the show.
I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'll be driving around and the theme song comes into my mind - "burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..." It's going to be great to hear this in a theater rather than from my TV or computer speakers. Still, I agree w/ posters below, a series would be much more satisfying.
Well, fortunately the US isn't all the world. Someone elsewhere will find the solution, and then we will be able to access that information. But this scenario isn't the only area in which the US is forcing science to happen outside its borders (stem cells, cloning, etc.). Eventually, none of the really interesting science will come from here because of increasingly intrusive government restrictions on obtaining knowledge.
As a karma whore wannabe, I'd post the caption to this story if I was worried that/. would be slashdotted. As I'm fairly sure that/. will survive itself, let me suggest you scroll up and read the caption for the answers you seek.
"chicken and egg" implies that it is hard to know which came first, not that both must exist. Present existence of both is presumed - historical precedence is the real question. However, here is a Tongue in cheek solution to that age old dilema.
You said it yourself.. good restaurants get your business often, but bad ones get it a single time. Yet here you are saying you don't even give the TV companies the single time.
Actually, I left out the part in which I could have explained that before 1990 I was a TV junkie, as in "wake up Sunday morning and sit around in my pajamas ALL day flipping channels feeling bored and frustrated" type of TV junkie. I gave TV a hell of a good chance to show me something good. It didn't and I decided not to waste my life.
Besides, if a sci-fi show comes out, I'll get reviews here on Slashdot. If it sounds compelling, I could watch at a friend's place. Doesn't happen often - I get in about less than 3 hrs of television per year (not counting DVDs of course).
Chicken and Egg problem. Why should I bother when there isn't anything but one or two shows I like (which will be cancled anyway). If there was a channel that played Trek/Farscape/Firefly quality shows all the time, I'd subscribe. I don't just mean reruns - I mean reruns plus new quality content. Till then, I'll spend my cash on DVDs of good series, rent the lesser ones, and save myself from wasting vast amounts of time watching garbage.
I mean really, what has happened that we must subject ourselves to junk in the hopes that a gem or two will appear. It's like going to the same dive restaraunt everyday hoping that by being loyal, the food will get better. The way this ought to work, is that TV companies will get consumer loyalty when they make a good product consistently and frequently - this is the same reason that good restaraunts get my business often, and bad ones get my business a single time.
Re:I thought I would do this...
on
WB Cancels Angel
·
· Score: 1
Fair enough - the same is true w/ Season 1 of Farscape. I'll try a few season 3 disks.
Re:I thought I would do this...
on
WB Cancels Angel
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Under the current advertiser driven model that is true. But why does the current advertising driven model have to prevail? Why couldn't a production company make a show that is not even intended for broadcast at all. Instead, it could sell directly to the viewer. This works for movies and plays. Theater and Movie companies make money by directly selling the performance/content to the viewers. Just cut out the advertisers altogether and make things people will pay to watch. It's worked for Hollywood and Broadway for A LOT longer than TV has been around. I'd sign up for Firefly in a heartbeat.
Re:I thought I would do this...
on
WB Cancels Angel
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I just bought the Firefly set - $40, 13 shows, a bit over $3 per episode. Let's imagine it takes $3m to make an episode. You only need to sell 2m discs to double your money. And this is 2m discs worldwide - not just to Americans who prefer tripe. Truthfully, if I could "subscribe" to a show like firefly for even $5 an episode, I would (I would want to have a DVD to keep). 20 minutes of my time (commercial breaks) is worth a hell of a lot more than $5 so even at $5/ep. it would be a steal, and probably make the studio money.
Re:I thought I would do this...
on
WB Cancels Angel
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I don't have cable or reception and I like it that way. I watch good shows on DVD when they come out - I like it that way. What I can't understand is why great shows get cancled. Now, I don't know if Angel is a great show or not - someday I'll rent it and see. But the list of really good shows that get cancled is insane.
Farscape and Firefly - I can't fathom why these shows got cancled, except for the fact that they were intelligent, interesting, and compelling. About two weeks ago, I watched the last Firefly DVD and the next day I watched the first Babylon 5 DVD. I know lots of you think B5 is great, but honestly, the acting, the plots, the characters, the effects, litterally everything about B5 was "B" quality - right down to the hulking slow walking "creature from the black lagoon" type monster in the 4th episode. Firefly went 13 episodes - B5 goes on for years. Makes absolutely no sense.
While I was watching the Farscap discs, I tried to watch Andromeda. I got through 3 or 4 based solely on the fact that Andromeda was cute. Otherwise, everything but the special effects sucked. For real - one character's costume was purple makeup and a tail attached to a belt as if it was some Halloween party. The stories and most the characters were just lame. And even if there were two interesting characters (the tech kid and andromeda), the lousy acting of everyone else and the boring unoriginal stories just can't compennsate.
I don't know what it is with the networks. They have no understanding of what is good. And I can't understand what it is with viewers - are we so deprived of sci-fi that we will accept anything at all? I'm bitter. Sorry for the rant.
How about cutting a CD - most burners ship with some sort of burning software for Windows (e.g. Nero 5). Under Linux say hello to 'mkisofs', 'cdrecord' and another HOWTO. If you want to burn an audio CD of MP3's, you're in a world of pain.
Well, you haven't used K3b. I've used Nero before - truth is, K3b is easier. Literally a drag-drop-click-burn operation. For atypical data burns (or music), this is a great program.
At the same time, I made a script to do my backups, mkisofs and cdrecord based. Being able to use the command line for these tasks is sometimes more convenient, at least for the repetitive ones. I just click the icon that runs my backup script, and I'm done, thanks to that ugly CLI.
Pretty has its place. Function has its place. Linux gives you both.
My guess is you bailed on AOL early too... only lame if you stuck with it.
I remember getting geoworks and aol somehow and using it for a while, maybe 1991. It was pretty expensive after the first free three hours (was it three??). However, if you went to the customer service area, they didn't charge money. For a while, people carried on their "chatting" in there (I can't remember if it was actual chat, or more like a bulletin board). That is till AOL got wise to the scam. That's when I bailed - I know by 1992 I was using Delphi. No pretty graphics at all, but at least I got 20 hours per month for my $20.
And considering that the Wal-Mart, everyday person is the target market for Lindows, couldn't that suggest a certain amount of intent of confusion?
The usual standard in a lawsuit is the "reasonable person" standard. You don't have aim all your actions at what the stupidest person might do, just what a reasonable person would do. Now, I don't know for a fact that applies to trademark, but I'd bet it does. There is of course, significant wiggle room in who does or does not qualify as a "reasonable person".
This is true perhaps in how the screen looks and such, but in many ways, things stay very much the same. For example, my first word processor (aside from the one I had for a TRS-80 CoCo) was... gasp... MS Works for DOS. From the menu, I'm sure you would select "file" "save" to save a document. This is exactly true in Open Office. Or Word. Or Lotus Write. Maybe not Word Perfect (DOS versions) unless you think of the F keys as the menu bar.
For some reason, even smart people tend to become automatons and lose the ability to apply concepts to computers. For example, you and I could probably find the place to go to configure program options w/ in 30 seconds of starting up a never used piece of software. The reason: we will look for a place to go which suggests that configuration is its purpose - it could be called, "setup", "preferences", "configuration" or any other like term. So while the actual button pushing might change from program to program or from year to year, the concepts sure don't. It's just that people are afraid to apply what they know about program X to program Y. That's pretty hard to understand.
I've used OOo in my office and for personal reasons for more than 1.5 years. I really like the product a lot. But I have noticed a few things - I have a 230 page document, no pictures/graphics, but numerous footnotes, which I cannot print in one go. I've never really tried to trace down where the problem is though, and it may not be an OOo problem. The alternative solution was too easy to warrant looking for a fix - I just make 3 70+ page postscript files, and then lpr those.
Now, most things I write are 1-2 pages, occaisionally 10-20 pages. This is the one and only document in excess of 30 pages that I've written in my entire life (and I never intend to do another). Having to break up this file and do what I did to print is hardly the type of problem that would make MSOffice worth looking at.
Sadly, the page seems to be pretty dumbed down for school kids
Agreed. I've had plenty of trouble locating even that though - seems a shame that there isn't a route to a that goes into serious depth which is easily locatable from the JPL page.
The only power producer is the Solar Panels. I wonder if NASA has considered adding an SRG (more efficient than the RTGs of the 60's) to these rovers so that they have more power available to them?
What I'd like to see would be a small nuclear generator, though I have no idea whether they can actually be made small and light enough to be useful. Even if there are ones suitable for the mission, I'm sure it would be political suicide for JPL or NASA to send "nukular" devices to mars. Sad in that if it would work technically, we could have these things running around for a long time.
The rover has a top speed on flat hard ground of 5 centimeters (2 inches) per second. However, in order to ensure a safe drive, the rover is equipped with hazard avoidance software that causes the rover to stop and reassess its location every few seconds. So, over time, the vehicle achieves an average speed of 1 centimeter per second. The rover is programmed to drive for roughly 10 seconds, then stop to observe and understand the terrain it has driven into for 20 seconds, before moving safely onward for another 10 seconds.
Slashdot Mirror
Controling this experiment would be hard and expensive. To get really solid results, it would be nice to have identical twin mothers, both impregnated with one half of a twin embryo (if that's the right word). They would have to eat and do the exact same thing with the exception of the sound therapy - keep them in a special living facility for the duration? And of course, you mention random chance, we'd need a lot of these twin mothers. You would also want to account for differences between the twin mothers acquired in their individual lives that may have an effect on the birth.
Anyway, the alternative therapies crowd likely doesn't have the money to do this, and even if they did have the money, it seems unlikely they would pursue actual research because the downside would destroy their business. Besides, it is easy enough to get customers with the right sales pitch and a sales pitch costs practically nothing to develop.
It's been a while since I read Asimov, but after watching the preview, it seems obvious that this will be typical Hollywood "sci-fear" rather than "sci-fi". At the end of the trailer, there is a comment by the actor that essentially says the point of the movie is uncovering the "deep dark secret truth" or something like that at US Robotics (what might that be, people don't like modems?). My Guess, this will be yet another Hollywood flick about how scary technology can be. The irony is of course, that in Asimov's world, on Earth robots were rejected as a frightening technology (safety/economic fears). I expect this movie will be a dissapointing abuse of Asimov's legacy.
Headphones are great when shopping. I've put on headphones before entering a store without even connecting them to anything. Just run the wire to my pocket. Cuts the annoying "can I help you?" from 1x/2min to nothing at all. Its funny to watch some retail droid start to open his/her mouth, then shut it and walk away.
As I understand the article, this is about some changes in protocols and the radio bands used by AT&T for its cell service. So even though you do own the affected phones, they won't work with the cell system. It would be like having a perfectly good car radio that wasn't designed to receive FM signals, only AM. Once upon a time, that sort of situation actually happened, difference being that AM stations stayed on the air. Imagine that scenario except that all the stations go FM. You get to keep the radio, and although it functions, it doesn't "work".
"Indemnify" implies that if the Linux user lost, and had to pay damages to SCO, Red Hat would pay the bill for the damages awarded by the court.
What the prior poster was saying is that if SCO sues, Rad Hat will pay for a defense (help you fight the lawsuit), but if you lose and the court orders you to pay damages to SCO, Red Hat won't pay that bill.
Personally, I have no idea what the scope of Red Hat's protections are nor can I comment on who is or is not correct. I'm just playing Websters.
I'd cure this if I hadn't already posted. For those who don't know, in Firefly, "Shiny" was sometimes used as slang for "good". So whoever modded this offtopic, is some kind of knucklehead who never saw the show.
I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'll be driving around and the theme song comes into my mind - "burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me
Farscape
I don't what network it was on (DVD watcher myself), but it is also an unfair F cut.
Well, fortunately the US isn't all the world. Someone elsewhere will find the solution, and then we will be able to access that information. But this scenario isn't the only area in which the US is forcing science to happen outside its borders (stem cells, cloning, etc.). Eventually, none of the really interesting science will come from here because of increasingly intrusive government restrictions on obtaining knowledge.
As a karma whore wannabe, I'd post the caption to this story if I was worried that
"chicken and egg" implies that it is hard to know which came first, not that both must exist. Present existence of both is presumed - historical precedence is the real question. However, here is a Tongue in cheek solution to that age old dilema.
Actually, I left out the part in which I could have explained that before 1990 I was a TV junkie, as in "wake up Sunday morning and sit around in my pajamas ALL day flipping channels feeling bored and frustrated" type of TV junkie. I gave TV a hell of a good chance to show me something good. It didn't and I decided not to waste my life.
Besides, if a sci-fi show comes out, I'll get reviews here on Slashdot. If it sounds compelling, I could watch at a friend's place. Doesn't happen often - I get in about less than 3 hrs of television per year (not counting DVDs of course).
Chicken and Egg problem. Why should I bother when there isn't anything but one or two shows I like (which will be cancled anyway). If there was a channel that played Trek/Farscape/Firefly quality shows all the time, I'd subscribe. I don't just mean reruns - I mean reruns plus new quality content. Till then, I'll spend my cash on DVDs of good series, rent the lesser ones, and save myself from wasting vast amounts of time watching garbage.
I mean really, what has happened that we must subject ourselves to junk in the hopes that a gem or two will appear. It's like going to the same dive restaraunt everyday hoping that by being loyal, the food will get better. The way this ought to work, is that TV companies will get consumer loyalty when they make a good product consistently and frequently - this is the same reason that good restaraunts get my business often, and bad ones get my business a single time.
Fair enough - the same is true w/ Season 1 of Farscape. I'll try a few season 3 disks.
Under the current advertiser driven model that is true. But why does the current advertising driven model have to prevail? Why couldn't a production company make a show that is not even intended for broadcast at all. Instead, it could sell directly to the viewer. This works for movies and plays. Theater and Movie companies make money by directly selling the performance/content to the viewers. Just cut out the advertisers altogether and make things people will pay to watch. It's worked for Hollywood and Broadway for A LOT longer than TV has been around. I'd sign up for Firefly in a heartbeat.
I just bought the Firefly set - $40, 13 shows, a bit over $3 per episode. Let's imagine it takes $3m to make an episode. You only need to sell 2m discs to double your money. And this is 2m discs worldwide - not just to Americans who prefer tripe. Truthfully, if I could "subscribe" to a show like firefly for even $5 an episode, I would (I would want to have a DVD to keep). 20 minutes of my time (commercial breaks) is worth a hell of a lot more than $5 so even at $5/ep. it would be a steal, and probably make the studio money.
I don't have cable or reception and I like it that way. I watch good shows on DVD when they come out - I like it that way. What I can't understand is why great shows get cancled. Now, I don't know if Angel is a great show or not - someday I'll rent it and see. But the list of really good shows that get cancled is insane.
Farscape and Firefly - I can't fathom why these shows got cancled, except for the fact that they were intelligent, interesting, and compelling. About two weeks ago, I watched the last Firefly DVD and the next day I watched the first Babylon 5 DVD. I know lots of you think B5 is great, but honestly, the acting, the plots, the characters, the effects, litterally everything about B5 was "B" quality - right down to the hulking slow walking "creature from the black lagoon" type monster in the 4th episode. Firefly went 13 episodes - B5 goes on for years. Makes absolutely no sense.
While I was watching the Farscap discs, I tried to watch Andromeda. I got through 3 or 4 based solely on the fact that Andromeda was cute. Otherwise, everything but the special effects sucked. For real - one character's costume was purple makeup and a tail attached to a belt as if it was some Halloween party. The stories and most the characters were just lame. And even if there were two interesting characters (the tech kid and andromeda), the lousy acting of everyone else and the boring unoriginal stories just can't compennsate.
I don't know what it is with the networks. They have no understanding of what is good. And I can't understand what it is with viewers - are we so deprived of sci-fi that we will accept anything at all? I'm bitter. Sorry for the rant.
- How about cutting a CD - most burners ship with some sort of burning software for Windows (e.g. Nero 5). Under Linux say hello to 'mkisofs', 'cdrecord' and another HOWTO. If you want to burn an audio CD of MP3's, you're in a world of pain.
Well, you haven't used K3b. I've used Nero before - truth is, K3b is easier. Literally a drag-drop-click-burn operation. For atypical data burns (or music), this is a great program.At the same time, I made a script to do my backups, mkisofs and cdrecord based. Being able to use the command line for these tasks is sometimes more convenient, at least for the repetitive ones. I just click the icon that runs my backup script, and I'm done, thanks to that ugly CLI.
Pretty has its place. Function has its place. Linux gives you both.
My guess is you bailed on AOL early too ... only lame if you stuck with it.
I remember getting geoworks and aol somehow and using it for a while, maybe 1991. It was pretty expensive after the first free three hours (was it three??). However, if you went to the customer service area, they didn't charge money. For a while, people carried on their "chatting" in there (I can't remember if it was actual chat, or more like a bulletin board). That is till AOL got wise to the scam. That's when I bailed - I know by 1992 I was using Delphi. No pretty graphics at all, but at least I got 20 hours per month for my $20.
- And considering that the Wal-Mart, everyday person is the target market for Lindows, couldn't that suggest a certain amount of intent of confusion?
The usual standard in a lawsuit is the "reasonable person" standard. You don't have aim all your actions at what the stupidest person might do, just what a reasonable person would do. Now, I don't know for a fact that applies to trademark, but I'd bet it does. There is of course, significant wiggle room in who does or does not qualify as a "reasonable person".Or light. What restaraunt or coffee joint charges extra for light?
I've never seen numerology applied so adroitly.
This is true perhaps in how the screen looks and such, but in many ways, things stay very much the same. For example, my first word processor (aside from the one I had for a TRS-80 CoCo) was ... gasp ... MS Works for DOS. From the menu, I'm sure you would select "file" "save" to save a document. This is exactly true in Open Office. Or Word. Or Lotus Write. Maybe not Word Perfect (DOS versions) unless you think of the F keys as the menu bar.
For some reason, even smart people tend to become automatons and lose the ability to apply concepts to computers. For example, you and I could probably find the place to go to configure program options w/ in 30 seconds of starting up a never used piece of software. The reason: we will look for a place to go which suggests that configuration is its purpose - it could be called, "setup", "preferences", "configuration" or any other like term. So while the actual button pushing might change from program to program or from year to year, the concepts sure don't. It's just that people are afraid to apply what they know about program X to program Y. That's pretty hard to understand.
I've used OOo in my office and for personal reasons for more than 1.5 years. I really like the product a lot. But I have noticed a few things - I have a 230 page document, no pictures/graphics, but numerous footnotes, which I cannot print in one go. I've never really tried to trace down where the problem is though, and it may not be an OOo problem. The alternative solution was too easy to warrant looking for a fix - I just make 3 70+ page postscript files, and then lpr those.
Now, most things I write are 1-2 pages, occaisionally 10-20 pages. This is the one and only document in excess of 30 pages that I've written in my entire life (and I never intend to do another). Having to break up this file and do what I did to print is hardly the type of problem that would make MSOffice worth looking at.
Agreed. I've had plenty of trouble locating even that though - seems a shame that there isn't a route to a that goes into serious depth which is easily locatable from the JPL page.
What I'd like to see would be a small nuclear generator, though I have no idea whether they can actually be made small and light enough to be useful. Even if there are ones suitable for the mission, I'm sure it would be political suicide for JPL or NASA to send "nukular" devices to mars. Sad in that if it would work technically, we could have these things running around for a long time.
From the JPL website:
The rover has a top speed on flat hard ground of 5 centimeters (2 inches) per second. However, in order to ensure a safe drive, the rover is equipped with hazard avoidance software that causes the rover to stop and reassess its location every few seconds. So, over time, the vehicle achieves an average speed of 1 centimeter per second. The rover is programmed to drive for roughly 10 seconds, then stop to observe and understand the terrain it has driven into for 20 seconds, before moving safely onward for another 10 seconds.
Just click on the Technology button.