Has anyone else ever avoided an accident by accelerating?
Absolutely. First one that springs to mind: Driving in LA, trying to pass a semi that decided he wanted to be in the same (left) lane I was in. Not enough time to brake, plus the cars behind me would probably have rear-ended me, so I poked it. Squirted out in front of him, probably doing 85 or so. If something had decided I couldn't do that, I would have been smushed against the median barrier.
Actually, there is question regarding that, because while research shows that accidents are more lethal at high speeds, more accidents are being cause by people driving TOO SLOWLY.
Actually, I think you'll find the research shows the accidents happen because of the large disparity in speed. If everybody is going 70, there are fewer accidents than if some are going 60 and some are going 80.
If this guy has ever had to sit on the other end of a telephone with a complete computer illiterate I think he would have a very different outlook on user support.
Did you read the article? He said he did tech support for 4 years. He surely must have run into his share of morons.
(Side note: I did end user tech support for 6 years.)
We're talking about shutting down our site, but more because of script kiddies taking the opportunity to mess with sites than because of a Y2K problem.
It reall boils down to limiting the control responses (movement of the players) and increasing the external stimulous to the system. If the movement was limited to what a star player should be expected to do, then maybe we could design the response to external disruptions (being hit) such that they would throw a classic linear control system off enough to make it non competitive.
And I'd edit my client to disregard all those external stimuli.
If the entire environment depends on the reaction of a client, and I get to control what that client does, then saying "we'll make the client do this" won't work because I'll make the client do something else. The fix has to be external to the client.
How is this proof? That people corrupt the intent of the software? Fooey. That happens regardless of the source being open or closed. One example: AOHell appeared, corrupting the security model of AOL, despite the closed-source distribution environment of AOL.
Closed source doesn't prevent bad people from doing bad things.
What I dislike the most about patents, is that they actually are a legal way of creating a monopoly.
Which was actually the intent. The idea behind patents is that the person who thought of it should have a monopoly. The trade-off is that in exchange for that monopoly:
The technology must be published, so that everybody can see it;
The monopoly expires after a relatively limited time (in the U.S., 20 years). After that, it's fair game for anybody.
This 20 year time period seems a bit long in the Internet era (which works in dog years), but it's worked for a long time.
Since there's no such thing as a PC with no moving parts being made anymore...
Acutally there are. You need to look in industrial computer catalogs. Considerable number of (expensive) parts for situations like this, including solid-state disks.
Michigan has had a line on their tax form asking you to fill in the sales tax you were supposed to pay on mail-order stuff for as long as I can remember. I'm pretty sure it's close to universally ignored.
Re:How does this mock religion?
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 2
It's not circular so much as it is a tautology. It's true because it's true.
The problem is that there's nothing that seems to require a who except your faith.
...phil
Re:The greatest evils in the world...
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 2
I believe there is a moral order to the universe, that good and evil exist outside the will of the human race.
Of course, you are welcome to believe whatever you wish. Doesn't give you the right to proclaim whatever morality you ascribe to upon the rest of us, though.
I even think Jon Katz must believe this on some level, else why shouldn't it be "Do what thou wilt be the whole of the law?"
Does it bother you that you're misquoting the law here? It's really:
As it harm none, do what thou wilt be the whole of the law."
Kind of puts a different spin on it, huh? There's an implicit morality there, that somehow you managed to leave out of your version. I wonder why?
...phil
Re:How does this mock religion?
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 3
Who wrote the rules?
Nobody. It's referred to as the Strong Anthropic Principle:
The universe is structured to support our kind of life because if it wasn't, our kind of life wouldn't be here.
There might have been billions of universes before ours, and might be billions after. There might be billions of parallel universes with different conditions. In this universe, we are here to observe because it supports life. That's all. No other reason.
...phil
Re:A Christian's perspective
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 2
I believe that my posting does indicate that I don't stand with the so-called loudmouths.
It does. That is good. Thank you.
You ask where you should stand, to differentiate yourself from the loudmouths? Ultimately, you'd probably have to stand UP TO them, in the same forum where they are.
...phil
Re:A Christian's perspective
on
Planet Gattaca
·
· Score: 2
There are areas of genetic reseach that are rationally opposed. For example, fetal tissue research that gets it's raw material through unconscionable activites like partial birth abortion.
Actually, by the time that a fetus gets to the stage where a 'partial birth' abortion is necessary, the genetic material is not usable for research. Fetal tissue research involves stem cells, which exist early on after conception.
The problem that leads to people pointing at Christians and saying they want to snuff out research is because there are a few loudmouths out there who do exactly that. Then the rest of the Christians, the rational ones, don't stand up and denounce the loudmouths. If you don't want to be painted with the broad brush, you need to exclude yourself. That doesn't happen.
Also, it doesn't help when you mis-state facts like your 'partial-birth' abortion comment above. If you said it in error, you should have checked your facts first. If you said it intentionally, is there not something about 'bearing false witness' that Christians are supposed to watch out for?
It's kind of funny... the guy (who has the.com name) says he's looking to sell it, and has got other bidders. Hah! We've got the trademark tied up in the USA, so no one else is going to touch it. We'll just wait for it to become available for the regular price.
Sorry to puncture your balloon, but you appear to need a little education in trademark law. Unless you are a hugely major brand, like Coke or Disney or McDonalds, you don't have the trademark 'tied up'. You might have the trademark 'tied up' for a particular class of trade, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be used somewhere else. Take a look at the word "Delta". I'm personally aware of three companies that call themselves "Delta" (Airlines, Faucets and Dental Insurance), and their trademarks don't conflict with each other (as long as the airline people don't try to sell faucets).
So, it's entirely likely that your whatever.com address is going away and there's nothing you're going to be able to do about it. It's unlikely that you're bigger than Delta Airlines. And what if he sells it to somebody outside the U.S.?
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely. First one that springs to mind: Driving in LA, trying to pass a semi that decided he wanted to be in the same (left) lane I was in. Not enough time to brake, plus the cars behind me would probably have rear-ended me, so I poked it. Squirted out in front of him, probably doing 85 or so. If something had decided I couldn't do that, I would have been smushed against the median barrier.
...phil
Actually, I think you'll find the research shows the accidents happen because of the large disparity in speed. If everybody is going 70, there are fewer accidents than if some are going 60 and some are going 80.
...phil
Did you read the article? He said he did tech support for 4 years. He surely must have run into his share of morons.
(Side note: I did end user tech support for 6 years.)
...phil
Because, your opinion to the contrary, I believe it does contribute, if only to show a certain position. Your mileage may vary.
...phil
Wesley Crusher, report to airlock 3.
...phil
Hey, I said talking about. I'm not planning on doing anything.
...phil
We're talking about shutting down our site, but more because of script kiddies taking the opportunity to mess with sites than because of a Y2K problem.
...phil
And I'd edit my client to disregard all those external stimuli.
If the entire environment depends on the reaction of a client, and I get to control what that client does, then saying "we'll make the client do this" won't work because I'll make the client do something else. The fix has to be external to the client.
...phil
Only if you consider network security a pointy haired boss issue.
...phil
Closed source doesn't prevent bad people from doing bad things.
...phil
What's the dividing line between science and industry?
...phil
The problem is that those things are obvious now. Where they this obvious two years ago? I know you'll say "yes", but I really wonder.
...phil
Which was actually the intent. The idea behind patents is that the person who thought of it should have a monopoly. The trade-off is that in exchange for that monopoly:
- The technology must be published, so that everybody can see it;
- The monopoly expires after a relatively limited time (in the U.S., 20 years). After that, it's fair game for anybody.
This 20 year time period seems a bit long in the Internet era (which works in dog years), but it's worked for a long time....phil
Those 1000 pins are in high-density cable connectors. The computers are mounted in sealed boxes.
...phil
Acutally there are. You need to look in industrial computer catalogs. Considerable number of (expensive) parts for situations like this, including solid-state disks.
...phil
MP3 it and put it on a site somewhere, then stand back. Hell, I'll mirror it.
...phil
Michigan has had a line on their tax form asking you to fill in the sales tax you were supposed to pay on mail-order stuff for as long as I can remember. I'm pretty sure it's close to universally ignored.
...phil
Exactly correct.
...phil
My bank is at www.53.com. Works fine.
...phil
The problem is that there's nothing that seems to require a who except your faith.
...phil
Of course, you are welcome to believe whatever you wish. Doesn't give you the right to proclaim whatever morality you ascribe to upon the rest of us, though.
I even think Jon Katz must believe this on some level, else why shouldn't it be "Do what thou wilt be the whole of the law?"
Does it bother you that you're misquoting the law here? It's really:
Kind of puts a different spin on it, huh? There's an implicit morality there, that somehow you managed to leave out of your version. I wonder why?
...phil
Nobody. It's referred to as the Strong Anthropic Principle:
There might have been billions of universes before ours, and might be billions after. There might be billions of parallel universes with different conditions. In this universe, we are here to observe because it supports life. That's all. No other reason....phil
It does. That is good. Thank you.
You ask where you should stand, to differentiate yourself from the loudmouths? Ultimately, you'd probably have to stand UP TO them, in the same forum where they are.
...phil
Actually, by the time that a fetus gets to the stage where a 'partial birth' abortion is necessary, the genetic material is not usable for research. Fetal tissue research involves stem cells, which exist early on after conception.
The problem that leads to people pointing at Christians and saying they want to snuff out research is because there are a few loudmouths out there who do exactly that. Then the rest of the Christians, the rational ones, don't stand up and denounce the loudmouths. If you don't want to be painted with the broad brush, you need to exclude yourself. That doesn't happen.
Also, it doesn't help when you mis-state facts like your 'partial-birth' abortion comment above. If you said it in error, you should have checked your facts first. If you said it intentionally, is there not something about 'bearing false witness' that Christians are supposed to watch out for?
...phil
Sorry to puncture your balloon, but you appear to need a little education in trademark law. Unless you are a hugely major brand, like Coke or Disney or McDonalds, you don't have the trademark 'tied up'. You might have the trademark 'tied up' for a particular class of trade, but that doesn't mean that it couldn't be used somewhere else. Take a look at the word "Delta". I'm personally aware of three companies that call themselves "Delta" (Airlines, Faucets and Dental Insurance), and their trademarks don't conflict with each other (as long as the airline people don't try to sell faucets).
So, it's entirely likely that your whatever.com address is going away and there's nothing you're going to be able to do about it. It's unlikely that you're bigger than Delta Airlines. And what if he sells it to somebody outside the U.S.?
...phil