Feel free to provide it here. Saying "It's obvious" would not stand up in court. You must have some real evidence, otherwise you wouldn't be standing up in public making this sort of accusation. So, let's have the evidence.
Who gives moderators a right to determine whether or not my post is allowed to be read by users with a default setting for "scores"?
Cmdr. Taco does. It's his system, he sets the rules. If you don't like the rules he sets, you can get a copy of the software (he's giving it away), set up your own site and run it with your own rules.
It should be up to the READERS to make this determination, not slashdot Nazis.
Moderators are readers who have registered. You haven't registered, therefore you don't have the right to moderate. There's an easy way to fix that.
Yeah, and it's too bad the FBI doesn't have anything better to do, so they spied on U.S. citizens simply because they were donating and supporting the wrong political party (i.e. against Nixon).
See, the problem is that we have a demonstrated history of the gvmnt misusing their powers. If it happened once, it can happen again. And what makes you think the NSA wouldn't provide that back door to some other governmental department that asked for it?
So we should be protected from witnessing prayer in a public place? So then, you would be effectively taking away certain rights to speech. If I am no longer allowed to pray to my God in public...
The issue is not whether you are allowed to pray. This issue is whether you are allowed to force me to pray, and further to use your prayer. You're welcome to pray all you want. You're not welcome to force that view on others. Get the difference into your head.
As for creationism: notice that it's called the "theory of natural selection", the "THEORY of evlotuion". Do I need to explain the difference between scientific theory and scientific law to you?
All this shows is that you do not know how scientists use the word 'theory'. This invalidates the rest of your argument.
...free to advocate evolution but not the (self-evident) fact that God created the universe.
The problem is that it's not self-evident. There lots of indications otherwise.
When the government proposes to prohibit me from praying in a given place, it is establishing a religion: atheism.
I advise you to check a dictionary. A word that expressly means the absence of religion is only defined as a religion by those people who want to impose their religion on others. (Yes, I know that's deliberately provocative.)
The creationist view is a view that belongs only to one particular religion. To give that view a special place is to promote that particular religion, in a place that should be religion-neutral. But it's funny that the fundamentalist Christians are the only people who complain when they aren't allowed to impose their religious views.
First of all, the understanding of evolution has gone way beyond what Darwin ever thought of, so labelling it as 'Darwinian evolution' is somewhat bogus.
Science is an attempt, through a rigorous process, to come up with explanations that are consistent with what we observe. In regards to what is called the 'theory of evolution', this theory (actually an entire collection of theories) does a vastly better job of explaining the facts we observe than anything else that has been presented. Evolution is not a 'misguided view of science', as you assert. Instead, it is one of the most comprehensive applications of the scientific method we have. That it disagrees with your view of the universe is not a problem of science; rather it's a problem of your view of the universe.
If you don't like what the theory of eveolution has to say about the history of man, then you are perfectly welcome to construct alternate theories. However, you have to explain all the observed facts. Creationism has attempted to do this, with poor success.
There was some stink on Compuserve over 10 years ago on this same topic. Compuserve invented GIF, and included LZW compression without a license. Unisys did the same thing then, and there was an effort way back then to come up with a LZW-free image compression. I don't know what ever happened to that issue, and I stopped using Compuserve a couple of years ago.
Unisys does not have a patent on GIF, they have a patent on LZW compression, which is used in GIF (and PKZip, in case you're wondering where else you might stumble across it).
You must be using a definition for the word 'immoral' with which I am unfamiliar. (You can't mean 'unethical', because what Unisys is doing is definitely within their rights as set out by patent law.)
Are you protesting the entire patent system? You say "...protect small time inventors and operators..." but there is nothing in the patent law, as originally created or now, that restricts patents based on size. Sounds to me like you want to have two different types of intellectual property, or perhaps two different types of companies - one that's allowed to have intellectual property and one that's not - with a dividing line based on some unspecified size constraint.
I guess I'm confused by your attitude. Questions: (1) Can companies have intellectual property? If no, then why not? (2) If yes, then are they allowed to profit from and protect their intellectual property? If no, why not?
RF doesn't go noticeably slower through air than through that copper wire.
Signal propagation through copper is not as an electromagnetic wave, so the speed of light is not relevant. In fact, the signal is a surge of electrons, and is always slower than the speed of light. Depending on the particular cable involved, the signal can be as much as 60% of the speed of light.
That said, when considering the distances we're looking at here, the latencies are almost entirely going to be introduced by the routers, not the links.
Slashdot Mirror
Karma has been added to the user info page.
...phil
I used cypherpunks for both, and got right in. (note the 's' at the end)
...phil
How about opening up moderating of all AC posts to all registered users without restriction?
...phil
How about opening up all AC posts to all registered users without restriction?
...phil
It's around N 37 degrees 27 minutes, by W 115 degrees 44 minutes.
And they're not called GPS coordinates, they're called longitude and latitude.
...phil
Feel free to provide it here. Saying "It's obvious" would not stand up in court. You must have some real evidence, otherwise you wouldn't be standing up in public making this sort of accusation. So, let's have the evidence.
Thanks in advance.
...phil
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
...phil
Cmdr. Taco does. It's his system, he sets the rules. If you don't like the rules he sets, you can get a copy of the software (he's giving it away), set up your own site and run it with your own rules.
It should be up to the READERS to make this determination, not slashdot Nazis.
Moderators are readers who have registered. You haven't registered, therefore you don't have the right to moderate. There's an easy way to fix that.
...phil
Go away, troll.
...phil
I choose to use Yahoo for my mail address to absorb spam. It's much easier for me to ditch it if I need to.
You should evaluate based on what he says, not trivalities such as e-mail address.
...phil
Yeah, and it's too bad the FBI doesn't have anything better to do, so they spied on U.S. citizens simply because they were donating and supporting the wrong political party (i.e. against Nixon).
See, the problem is that we have a demonstrated history of the gvmnt misusing their powers. If it happened once, it can happen again. And what makes you think the NSA wouldn't provide that back door to some other governmental department that asked for it?
...phil
The exploit is referred to as 'Van Eck' monitoring. 'Tempest' refers to the technology to block this kind of monitoring.
...phil
So we should be protected from witnessing prayer in a public place? So then, you would be effectively taking away certain rights to speech. If I am no longer allowed to pray to my God in public...
The issue is not whether you are allowed to pray. This issue is whether you are allowed to force me to pray, and further to use your prayer. You're welcome to pray all you want. You're not welcome to force that view on others. Get the difference into your head.
...phil
Does anyone else feel the same way, or am I just an outcast from both sides of the coin?
No, actually there's a fair subset of people who think that way.
...phil
As for creationism: notice that it's called the "theory of natural selection", the "THEORY of evlotuion". Do I need to explain the difference between scientific theory and scientific law to you?
...free to advocate evolution but not the (self-evident) fact that God created the universe.
All this shows is that you do not know how scientists use the word 'theory'. This invalidates the rest of your argument.
The problem is that it's not self-evident. There lots of indications otherwise.
When the government proposes to prohibit me from praying in a given place, it is establishing a religion: atheism.
I advise you to check a dictionary. A word that expressly means the absence of religion is only defined as a religion by those people who want to impose their religion on others. (Yes, I know that's deliberately provocative.)
The creationist view is a view that belongs only to one particular religion. To give that view a special place is to promote that particular religion, in a place that should be religion-neutral. But it's funny that the fundamentalist Christians are the only people who complain when they aren't allowed to impose their religious views.
...phil
Time for home schooling?
...phil
First of all, the understanding of evolution has gone way beyond what Darwin ever thought of, so labelling it as 'Darwinian evolution' is somewhat bogus.
Science is an attempt, through a rigorous process, to come up with explanations that are consistent with what we observe. In regards to what is called the 'theory of evolution', this theory (actually an entire collection of theories) does a vastly better job of explaining the facts we observe than anything else that has been presented. Evolution is not a 'misguided view of science', as you assert. Instead, it is one of the most comprehensive applications of the scientific method we have. That it disagrees with your view of the universe is not a problem of science; rather it's a problem of your view of the universe.
If you don't like what the theory of eveolution has to say about the history of man, then you are perfectly welcome to construct alternate theories. However, you have to explain all the observed facts. Creationism has attempted to do this, with poor success.
Go ahead - take your shot.
...phil
Since in many countries outside the US, Darwinist evolution is not accepted any longer...
Unsupported assertion. Documentation, please.
...phil
I've been on since 1990, anyone want beat that and chat about the good old days?
I sent my first Internet email in 1981. It was the ARPAnet then. I was dialed into the net at 300 baud.
...phil
Their patent WAS NOT legally obtained.
How so?
...phil
There was some stink on Compuserve over 10 years ago on this same topic. Compuserve invented GIF, and included LZW compression without a license. Unisys did the same thing then, and there was an effort way back then to come up with a LZW-free image compression. I don't know what ever happened to that issue, and I stopped using Compuserve a couple of years ago.
...phil
Unisys does not have a patent on GIF, they have a patent on LZW compression, which is used in GIF (and PKZip, in case you're wondering where else you might stumble across it).
...phil
You must be using a definition for the word 'immoral' with which I am unfamiliar. (You can't mean 'unethical', because what Unisys is doing is definitely within their rights as set out by patent law.)
Are you protesting the entire patent system? You say "...protect small time inventors and operators..." but there is nothing in the patent law, as originally created or now, that restricts patents based on size. Sounds to me like you want to have two different types of intellectual property, or perhaps two different types of companies - one that's allowed to have intellectual property and one that's not - with a dividing line based on some unspecified size constraint.
I guess I'm confused by your attitude. Questions: (1) Can companies have intellectual property? If no, then why not? (2) If yes, then are they allowed to profit from and protect their intellectual property? If no, why not?
...phil
If GIF animation were to vanish, I for one would not be terribly upset.
...phil
RF doesn't go noticeably slower through air than through that copper wire.
Signal propagation through copper is not as an electromagnetic wave, so the speed of light is not relevant. In fact, the signal is a surge of electrons, and is always slower than the speed of light. Depending on the particular cable involved, the signal can be as much as 60% of the speed of light.
That said, when considering the distances we're looking at here, the latencies are almost entirely going to be introduced by the routers, not the links.
...phil