I saw a race (The Molson Indy in Toronto either 96 or 97) where two cars just touched wheels. The rear car was launched into the air, spun 90 degrees and elevated the nose a little. The rear tire (still on the car) struck two trackside workers, killing one. The car then hit a cement overhead bridge/walkway splitting the car into two parts at the cockpit. The driver was killed instantly. This danger exists simply as a result of the exposed wheels in open-wheel racing. Since then I have been reluctant to support it.
There may be an issue with self discipline at play. A person who doesn't take care of themself (and by that I don't just mean "fat" but also unclean, unkept, and otherwise unpleasant) displays two things, a lack of self discipline and a general disregard for others. Presentation of appearance is not just a "self" type thing, but also shows the level of respect one has for his company (in the vain of compainions not employer). If you will be visiting someone with whom you respect (whether that would be a President, King, Actor, Pastor, whatever) a person will be sure to put on his best appearance not only to impress, but as a sign of respect. In a modern society where it is relatively easy to maintain one's appearance, unkeptness either signals disrespect or abject poverty. The latter could be excused (and even corrected given the right circumstances), the former is utterly contemptable.
This all only is true for general uncleanliness. Being overweight alone does not stem from the same source. However, if you're overweight, with coke stains on your shirt and a mustard stain in the corner of your mouth, you signal that you just don't care.
That's like saying mothers breeds terrorism. Show me one terrorist that didn't have a mother. Maybe if we get rid of mothers we'll get rid of terrorism.
Religion, like mothers, is not a sufficient condition for terrorism. Mothers, unlike religion, is a necessary condition.
There have been plenty of "secular" terrorists throughout history.
the open source model doesn't lend itself to the CYA mentality. Its not that a manager doesn't necessarily trust his contractors, its that he doesn't trust his boss. If something bad happens, it won't be the contractor that gets ripped. However, if there is some "approved solution", then liability is shifted to that approving athority.
For the record, most govmnt managers are very tight with their program dollars. If there are more cost effective ways of doing something, that is cheaper to operate and maintain (which is a HUGE part of the cost of ownership), then that is an extremely attractive option. BTW, the folks in my shop use many open source tools to do their work, in combination with several proprietary packages. The os versions of the proprietary software is either 1) not mature enough to use, 2) too expensive to maintain in house on a rapidly evolving system with changing mission reqmnts, or 3) not supported by a 3rd party vendor with the right expertise. However, as os solutions mature, you can bet the govmnt will be moving towards that.
makes it seem like they are upset that MS puts all of these extra applications in there that are not part of the "core os". Things like e-mail clients, video players, browsers, etc. Obviously those things are not necessary to run a computer, but they make life easier. Its kindof like car stereo manufacturer suing Ford, Chrysler, and GM collectively because they put stereos in their car already. Another possible solution is for these 3rd party sofware manufacturer to partner up with MS so that MS includes those things in with XP. Another option is for all these 3rd party folks to get together to form their own OS, possibly using something open source, and bundle their stuff in with it. Unfortunatly this complaint comes from the european "government" (I use that term loosly) and not from the 3rd party vendors, which complicates possible solutions to the problem.
The ability to do these sorts of things exist. What I mean is any Windows functionality that a user likes can have a linux equivelant. All it really needs is some UI that the user is used to. The real issue is wether or not this functionality should be a part of the "core" system or should it be some sandalone application. Windows is so dominated by their explorer interface that it causes that one program to be a monster. The beauty of "unix like" os's is the modularity provided by either open standards or open software. This allows a programmer to create programs that modify the parameters of other programs or call them usefully or whatever.
Now, with that said, the only reason that linux may currently not have all the things that people who use Windows are used to is that it just hasn't been done...yet. The reason is easily explained through the way oss is created. Usually an open source developer tackles a problem that they or their company is interested in. As a result of their work, they share that with others, especially since they have likely benefitted from other's oss work. If they or their employer is not interested in solving a specific probem, a program for that is never created. Making linux more "Windows like" has not been a priority for most os developers. To do that would take a company that is interested in making money off of such a venture. This, I beleive, is what the article speaks to (enter Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, etc.)
Re:Unbelievably depressing?
on
Immortal Code
·
· Score: 1
I don't think they ever really coded anything. The article mentions a developer that changed companies with the code. Given their background, I bet they did a lot of the theoretical work and had someone else put it into code.
is in its 25th year, and still communicates daily. I'm sure the bus has been running the same code for the whole mission, although I'm sure the payload may have had some code revisions uploaded along the way.
Regulation really isn't the answer. I'm not all that jazzed up to have my tax dollars wasted to ensure that companies do the things that they should be doing in the first place.
Having said that, the best thing to do is to:
Publicize the issue
Identify the organizations (companies, charities, etc.) that have the problem
Let people react accordingly
Individuals that act responsibly concerning their personal information will tend towards the more secure companies. Those that don't, or don't care or know, will continue to be victims of fraud (from a point of view where an individual is ultimately responsible for himself). It might be profitable for a trusted accounting or security firm to perform audits on information protection such that the company can then advertise as being "SecuFirm Certified" or whatever.
Main point being, I would look towards governmental regulation as a last resort, and only after all other methods have failed.
Any new view which sees physical products as transient and temporary will be another blow to capitalism, (and materialism, for that matter) which is only kept honest by the transfer of 'real' commodities. What happens to the law of supply and demand when scarcity suddenly cannot possibly exist for a large class of consumer products? We may be facing the end of capitalism as we know it. The only way to keep it in it's current form is to engineer scarcity back into the model, which as the copyright wars show us, is only possible through totalitarian control of each consumer's tools. I don't think we want to go there.
Well since the purpose of an economy is the distribution of scarce resources, then if capitalism dies, so would any other economy. There would still, however, be scarce resources, after all the amound of matter that could be used as input for the printer is finite. The economy, through, yes, capitalistic forces, would put less emphasis on the objects that can be made by the printer and more on other things (designs, food, "polymer mines").
In fact, it's not too different than what happened in the last few centuries. Food became infinitely easier to produce (no pun intended) so the economy became less formed around agriculture and more around industry. Then industry became much more efficient (through automation), the economy became less formed around manufacturing and more service oriented.
The economic effects, free market style, would not fundamentally effect things. We would just have large shifts in (not along) the supply curves in the effected markets.
So then does "anti-mass" (ie anti-matter) experience anti-gravity? Would anti-matter repel other anti-matter or repel matter? Is this why we don't get much anti-matter casually passing by?
can be done by a computer. Although for the simple tasks that Yahoo is using it for it would work pretty well. However, the ability to do 2D transforms, convolutions, etc is a fairly straightforward thing to do, although not very simple. It still would require some processing power, and a vast library of images to compare against, but it could be done.
As long as it is done within a municipality. Presumably the people of a city could influence their council enough to provide this service. They would do so knowing that they would be taxed for it. As soon as it is passed to a larger body (and anything over ~10K people might be too large) then a simple majority might not justify taxing the minority for the majorities benefit. As a result it should never be universally expected, but we may get to the point where most municipalities offer it, like they do with roads, water, etc.
But I always knew that Tron was a revolutionary film, but everyone always just said I was crazy.
"What audiences will see on December 18 marks another step on the road to creating digital characters that feel so real that viewers can't tell them from their flesh-and-blood Hollywood co-actors, a journey that started two decades ago with Tron."
The whole "create more heat" thing would probably be the bad part, since a large asteroid would likely heat up a relatively significant portion of the atmosphere a non-trivial amount. Might take a while to ultimately dissipate all that excess heat.
One could argue that those businesses that really need a cluster will likely buy one preconfigured. Those that do the preconfiguration probably have an established technique (distro, tools, etc.) and won't likely go for something from Mandrake. The hobbiest who builds one to learn about clusters more than likely wants to do everything himself (like start with a strip down install of slackware and build it up from there). That really only leaves the hobbiest that wants to do parallel programming but doesn't want to build the cluster. Not a very large segment.
I'm sure Capcom makes games for other systems, so it's not really a monopoly. Additionally, Nintendo can license their product however they wish. If in their agreement Nintendo and Capcom agreed not to sell games under the Nintendo approved price then them's the breaks. It's not as if Nintendo is enforcing this through big guys name Carmine or Luigi (or Mario?). They likely enforce through the contracts they have with Capcom.
Doesn't Nintendo, or any business entity for that matter, have the right to sell their product to whomever they choose. If they don't want to sell it to a guy who will turn around and sell it for a higher price, they should be able to do that. Their (Nintendo's) motivation is obvious (to make money).
It seems like it has more to do with the open trade policies within the EU than it does with Nintendo.
The problem has really already been solved. The Tactical High Energy Laser (THEL) was designed to destroy Katyusha type rockets (the ones that the PLO and Syrians use to terrorize Israeli population centers) midflight. It has sucessfully demonstrated that capabality against multiple targets.
Now, how does it do it. (I've been involved with Airborne Laser advanced tracking research for several years, so I do know what I'm talking about.) Basically, if you can see it, you can hit it with a laser. Usually coarse aquisition of the target occurs through the use of some sort of radar. Based on this information, some sort of optical tracking device is aimed in the general direction of the target (think of it as a gimballed telescope that turns quickly and accurately). A camera behind the main aperture then picks up the image. At this point the target is probably less than 1 pixel big, but distinct enought to track. It then uses a fast steering mirror (FSM) to center the image on the camera. Next, it hands off image tracing to a fine track camera that can see more details of the image, which then controls the mirror to center the image even better. The laser, having been boresighted with the cameras during calibration, bounces off the same mirrors used to track and goes straight back at the target.
The obvious problem is that the target will have moved a little bit, approx 2vr/c. Here v is the relative tangential (ooh big words, but should be unambiguius(sp?)) velocity, r is the distance to the target, and c is the speed of light. Using the appropriate algorithms (usually some sort of extended Kalman filter) you can predict pretty accurately where the target will be so that you can hit the part of it you want.
There's a lot of other stuff going on (adaptive optics, stabalization, etc.) but that about sums it up.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw a race (The Molson Indy in Toronto either 96 or 97) where two cars just touched wheels. The rear car was launched into the air, spun 90 degrees and elevated the nose a little. The rear tire (still on the car) struck two trackside workers, killing one. The car then hit a cement overhead bridge/walkway splitting the car into two parts at the cockpit. The driver was killed instantly. This danger exists simply as a result of the exposed wheels in open-wheel racing. Since then I have been reluctant to support it.
The plan that was implemented wan't Powell's. Another one was.
Look at this and this you frappen idiot.
I think you mean dieing.
This all only is true for general uncleanliness. Being overweight alone does not stem from the same source. However, if you're overweight, with coke stains on your shirt and a mustard stain in the corner of your mouth, you signal that you just don't care.
That's like saying mothers breeds terrorism. Show me one terrorist that didn't have a mother. Maybe if we get rid of mothers we'll get rid of terrorism. Religion, like mothers, is not a sufficient condition for terrorism. Mothers, unlike religion, is a necessary condition. There have been plenty of "secular" terrorists throughout history.
For the record, most govmnt managers are very tight with their program dollars. If there are more cost effective ways of doing something, that is cheaper to operate and maintain (which is a HUGE part of the cost of ownership), then that is an extremely attractive option. BTW, the folks in my shop use many open source tools to do their work, in combination with several proprietary packages. The os versions of the proprietary software is either 1) not mature enough to use, 2) too expensive to maintain in house on a rapidly evolving system with changing mission reqmnts, or 3) not supported by a 3rd party vendor with the right expertise. However, as os solutions mature, you can bet the govmnt will be moving towards that.
makes it seem like they are upset that MS puts all of these extra applications in there that are not part of the "core os". Things like e-mail clients, video players, browsers, etc. Obviously those things are not necessary to run a computer, but they make life easier. Its kindof like car stereo manufacturer suing Ford, Chrysler, and GM collectively because they put stereos in their car already. Another possible solution is for these 3rd party sofware manufacturer to partner up with MS so that MS includes those things in with XP. Another option is for all these 3rd party folks to get together to form their own OS, possibly using something open source, and bundle their stuff in with it. Unfortunatly this complaint comes from the european "government" (I use that term loosly) and not from the 3rd party vendors, which complicates possible solutions to the problem.
The ability to do these sorts of things exist. What I mean is any Windows functionality that a user likes can have a linux equivelant. All it really needs is some UI that the user is used to. The real issue is wether or not this functionality should be a part of the "core" system or should it be some sandalone application. Windows is so dominated by their explorer interface that it causes that one program to be a monster. The beauty of "unix like" os's is the modularity provided by either open standards or open software. This allows a programmer to create programs that modify the parameters of other programs or call them usefully or whatever. Now, with that said, the only reason that linux may currently not have all the things that people who use Windows are used to is that it just hasn't been done...yet. The reason is easily explained through the way oss is created. Usually an open source developer tackles a problem that they or their company is interested in. As a result of their work, they share that with others, especially since they have likely benefitted from other's oss work. If they or their employer is not interested in solving a specific probem, a program for that is never created. Making linux more "Windows like" has not been a priority for most os developers. To do that would take a company that is interested in making money off of such a venture. This, I beleive, is what the article speaks to (enter Red Hat, SuSE, Mandrake, etc.)
I don't think they ever really coded anything. The article mentions a developer that changed companies with the code. Given their background, I bet they did a lot of the theoretical work and had someone else put it into code.
is in its 25th year, and still communicates daily. I'm sure the bus has been running the same code for the whole mission, although I'm sure the payload may have had some code revisions uploaded along the way.
Having said that, the best thing to do is to:
Individuals that act responsibly concerning their personal information will tend towards the more secure companies. Those that don't, or don't care or know, will continue to be victims of fraud (from a point of view where an individual is ultimately responsible for himself). It might be profitable for a trusted accounting or security firm to perform audits on information protection such that the company can then advertise as being "SecuFirm Certified" or whatever.
Main point being, I would look towards governmental regulation as a last resort, and only after all other methods have failed.
Any new view which sees physical products as transient and temporary will be another blow to capitalism, (and materialism, for that matter) which is only kept honest by the transfer of 'real' commodities. What happens to the law of supply and demand when scarcity suddenly cannot possibly exist for a large class of consumer products? We may be facing the end of capitalism as we know it. The only way to keep it in it's current form is to engineer scarcity back into the model, which as the copyright wars show us, is only possible through totalitarian control of each consumer's tools. I don't think we want to go there.
Well since the purpose of an economy is the distribution of scarce resources, then if capitalism dies, so would any other economy. There would still, however, be scarce resources, after all the amound of matter that could be used as input for the printer is finite. The economy, through, yes, capitalistic forces, would put less emphasis on the objects that can be made by the printer and more on other things (designs, food, "polymer mines").
In fact, it's not too different than what happened in the last few centuries. Food became infinitely easier to produce (no pun intended) so the economy became less formed around agriculture and more around industry. Then industry became much more efficient (through automation), the economy became less formed around manufacturing and more service oriented.
The economic effects, free market style, would not fundamentally effect things. We would just have large shifts in (not along) the supply curves in the effected markets.
So then does "anti-mass" (ie anti-matter) experience anti-gravity? Would anti-matter repel other anti-matter or repel matter? Is this why we don't get much anti-matter casually passing by?
can be done by a computer. Although for the simple tasks that Yahoo is using it for it would work pretty well. However, the ability to do 2D transforms, convolutions, etc is a fairly straightforward thing to do, although not very simple. It still would require some processing power, and a vast library of images to compare against, but it could be done.
As long as it is done within a municipality. Presumably the people of a city could influence their council enough to provide this service. They would do so knowing that they would be taxed for it. As soon as it is passed to a larger body (and anything over ~10K people might be too large) then a simple majority might not justify taxing the minority for the majorities benefit. As a result it should never be universally expected, but we may get to the point where most municipalities offer it, like they do with roads, water, etc.
But I always knew that Tron was a revolutionary film, but everyone always just said I was crazy. "What audiences will see on December 18 marks another step on the road to creating digital characters that feel so real that viewers can't tell them from their flesh-and-blood Hollywood co-actors, a journey that started two decades ago with Tron."
The whole "create more heat" thing would probably be the bad part, since a large asteroid would likely heat up a relatively significant portion of the atmosphere a non-trivial amount. Might take a while to ultimately dissipate all that excess heat.
Wasn't it supposed to be built by Cyberdyne systems with it becoming self aware on 29 Aug 97 and destroying the world shortly thereafter
One could argue that those businesses that really need a cluster will likely buy one preconfigured. Those that do the preconfiguration probably have an established technique (distro, tools, etc.) and won't likely go for something from Mandrake. The hobbiest who builds one to learn about clusters more than likely wants to do everything himself (like start with a strip down install of slackware and build it up from there). That really only leaves the hobbiest that wants to do parallel programming but doesn't want to build the cluster. Not a very large segment.
I'm sure Capcom makes games for other systems, so it's not really a monopoly. Additionally, Nintendo can license their product however they wish. If in their agreement Nintendo and Capcom agreed not to sell games under the Nintendo approved price then them's the breaks. It's not as if Nintendo is enforcing this through big guys name Carmine or Luigi (or Mario?). They likely enforce through the contracts they have with Capcom.
It seems like it has more to do with the open trade policies within the EU than it does with Nintendo.
Take a look at the THEL program. (Tactical High Energy Laser)
Now, how does it do it. (I've been involved with Airborne Laser advanced tracking research for several years, so I do know what I'm talking about.) Basically, if you can see it, you can hit it with a laser. Usually coarse aquisition of the target occurs through the use of some sort of radar. Based on this information, some sort of optical tracking device is aimed in the general direction of the target (think of it as a gimballed telescope that turns quickly and accurately). A camera behind the main aperture then picks up the image. At this point the target is probably less than 1 pixel big, but distinct enought to track. It then uses a fast steering mirror (FSM) to center the image on the camera. Next, it hands off image tracing to a fine track camera that can see more details of the image, which then controls the mirror to center the image even better. The laser, having been boresighted with the cameras during calibration, bounces off the same mirrors used to track and goes straight back at the target. The obvious problem is that the target will have moved a little bit, approx 2vr/c. Here v is the relative tangential (ooh big words, but should be unambiguius(sp?)) velocity, r is the distance to the target, and c is the speed of light. Using the appropriate algorithms (usually some sort of extended Kalman filter) you can predict pretty accurately where the target will be so that you can hit the part of it you want. There's a lot of other stuff going on (adaptive optics, stabalization, etc.) but that about sums it up.
There are several linux based routers that fit on a single 3.5" floppy. For the novice I'd recommend BBIagent.net.