no government leader in this world, apart from the so-called terrorists who are sort of fighting in a different way, would like to deploy nuclear weapon of anykind into the earth
Although my belief (hope?), like yours, is that this is a purely scientific venture, I do need to point out that although during the cold war, neither the US nor the USSR wanted to use nukes, they kept building their ammunitions up. The point is that if the other nations know that you're *able* to deliver nukes, that will act as a deterrent, causing the other nation to leave you alone.
I'll leave it to the historians to decide whether or not that's actually effective.
Please don't begin to kid yourselves that these countries have an interest in visiting the stars, their entire motive (while hidden well) is to develope their own rockets that will deliever their own nuclear weapons.
Heh...your post sounds like the middle eastern population calling us "american devils" and whatnot
Give them the benefit of the doubt. Not everything a communist country does has to be a "politically correct ploy for world destruction."
kindly keep in mind that most open source and free software licenses, including the GPL, depend on copyright.
Well, kindly keep in mind that the reason the GPL is often referred to as "copyleft" is because there's no reason it should exist if it were not possible to copyright software. It's a manner to fight copyright using its own laws.
Basically, these "licenses" depend on copyright because it exists, but open source would do very well without them if no other software was copyrighted.
In addition to the 75% MS probability factor, there's also a 150% chance Ballmer wrote it himself. The word "developers" is mentioned 6 times in those 4 pages.
human attributes...were selected by sexual, not environmental selection. I.e. we look like we do largely because, like glowing fish, we find ourselves "cute".
That's part of environmental selection, the humans around you being the environment. You're inferior if you can't find a mate, and you don't pass your genes.
Besides...what causes us to find a particular someone "cute"? Could it be that these preferences too have "evolved" as part of environmental selection? And don't give me the "we don't select our mates based on animal instincts, we're intelligent people" crap..if that were true, the infamous "dumb blond" species would never reproduce.
USB 2.0 "Hi-Speed" ports will be painted bright yellow, come with custom rims, and include VTEC stickers. They may not quite put out 480Mbps, but they sure will look like they do.
Alright...combine that with the description from the article:
To help the public grasp this subtle distinction USB 2, which was the old USB 1.1, would have ``Full Speed'' added to its title and USB 2, which was USB 2, would have ``Hi-Speed'' added.
The "High Speed" ones are the 480Mbps ones...
Aaaaaahhhhhh! To help the public grasp the distinction??? Even us tech savvies/.ers are getting confused.
the salesperson will probably not know this subtle text difference.
Well...if this is to be believed, they don't want the salesperson to know the difference. They made the change because people were demanding USB 2.0 with their computers, and they (apparently) want to sell more USB 1.1's
Why they would actually want to sell more 1.1's is beyond me though.
Why do you blame them because you bought a piece of crap DVD player? Sounds like the one at fault here is you. Take a little responcibility for your actions and admit you screwed the pooch.
Although I agree that this is probably not because of copy protection...I don't think the one at fault is him. I think it's the manufacturer of his crap DVD player.
Why are we consumers supposed to be responsible for piece of shit products? No matter how cheap the product is, it's supposed to do what it advertises. If one player is more expensive than another, it should be because of added features, not because the low end one won't do what it's supposed to. Instead of trying to return DVD's, he should be returning that player.
This would mean that you would be required to post the responses as well as authenticate their origin and make the responses available for some period of time.
So the answer is they're required to verify it. My question is, who's going to get the burden of authentication? Can you get away with just not posting responses that don't include some form of authentication, or do you have to go talk with everyone who submits a response letter to find out if they're aurthentic or not? That could be a potential pain.
I'm not an apple fanatic. But I think this demonstrates the character of the company. From the article:
In any case, no company is required to pay more than $110,000, said Graham Bird, vice president of marketing for The Open Group.
You know the legal battle will cost much, much more than that...but instead of doing what makes economic sense, they're doing what's right, and taking the burden off the rest of us. Because you know that if the Open Group succeeds, they're probably going to start suing red-hat and other linux distros for explaining that linux is "unix based" in their FAQ.
Also, those transmissions are all within the Faraday cage that is the aircraft's skin
Any trasmissions originating inside a hollow perfect conductor won't exist within the conductor, but will propagate outside it without any loss (except of course by the distance that that the trasmission has travelled).
The effect of a "Faraday cage" doesn't apply here. That effect relates to a perfect hollow conductor that is charged--that charge will not induce an electromagnetic field inside it. Thus, the plane can get hit by lightning and you won't get shocked (because the charge will be in the outer layer) and instruments won't suffer (because there will be no resulting electromagnetic field inside the cage).
I think lightning could still cause a problem though, if it managed to hit any component outside the plane, but I'm not sure. They probably have everything shielded so that the charge will get distributed around, and the energy won't knock off an engine.
this is a matter of parents not understanding the dangers of letting their kids online with no restrictions. does your 8yr old daughter have a cell phone? no? why does she have email?
If there's net access to your household, chances are e-mail is free. An 8yr girl (or boy for that matter) doesn't drive, so she doesn't really go anywhere where a mobile phone would be useful, so why pay for it? She can talk to her friends on the good ole' land line phone, call home from friends' houses, etc. Email, on the other hand is a great communication tool that is available. Why would you restrict it?
at least with email you can specify who she can receive email from and block everybody else. if you gave her a cell phone whats to stop some creep from calling her and talking nasty and/or lurring her out someplace.
Why do so many parents feel that a tight grip on their children's life is a replacement for properly raising their children? You can't be with your children all the time, so if you don't teach them things such as "don't talk to strangers", the moment you're not there to protect them, they may get lurred by that creepy stranger in person. If you're 10 minutes late picking you're daughter up at school, that's a time any creep can talk to her and lure her out someplace...unless she knows not to trust them. For god's sake, teach your children not to trust creeps who call them on their phone and ask them to meet them someplace...same for e-mail, instant messaging, etc. Teach them to be cautious, it IS a dangerous world, and you CAN'T protect them from everything.
Now think about this...that creep trying to lure children to him is doing something illegal. We're asking here whether adult spam to children (or those who could potentially be children) should also be illegal. How comfortable would you be if some guy was calling your house phone and saying innapropriate things and receive the reply, "we can't do anything about it, it's legal for him to do that, just don't let your child answer the phone." from the police?
Sorry, this is going to take a bit of rambl^H^H^H^H^H background info. I've read a lot of posts saying how cursive writing is so much more of a pain than just writing in plain text...basically, how it's slow and useless.
Personally, I was taught to write in cursive before I was taught the "standard" letters. That makes writing in cursive easier and faster for me. Compared to how long it takes others to take notes in class, I'd say it does make a positive difference in speed over printing letters. That said, I can't counteract the "ugly" argument...when taking notes in classes with professors that use powerpoint and dont post them on the web (wtf?), I end up having to write too fast and parts of it are difficult for me to read back myself (although at least I do get them, while a lot of people end up with incomplete notes)
That said...the loss of this ability may cause us to finally see innovations in a system that hasn't changed in a very long time. I would love to have, for example, an "electronic notepad". As many people have mentioned before in other articles, taking notes with a laptop makes it difficult when you have to enter equations and drawings...it'd also be too heavy for what I have in mind. I'd like something that would completely replace the notebook--making it easy for me to enter my notes, and having them in electronic format. That would provide benefits such as a keyword search feature to help finding that elusive thing you know you jotted down, but just can't find it anywhere in your notes.
I know that something like that would never happen while there is an alternative cheap solution such as bringing pen to paper. But if the next generation does not become proficient in it, I may have a chance of seeing it in my lifetime.
It's far easier for me to spend time recreating code that exists already than to hunt down what's out there, read the documentation, figure out what drugs the developer was on...
Yeah...it's always a pain when you guess the drugs wrong too. If you don't take the exact same drugs, you still can't understand the dude's code.
I was *really* unproductive in my job when I spent a long time taking the wrong drugs...darn, that was a crazy week.
well...I managed to mess up the retelling of the story. There was a connotation of "try to look as incompetent as you can without getting fired" in it.
I believe the point was that most teenagers act irresponsible at least some of the time.
Yeah, but in my opinion, I figure that if that were due to actual phisiological differences you'd have a much smaller minority of kids that were aware of consequences. And I think there are too many "good kids" to set them out as outliers. Rather, although most teenagers do some things wrong from time to time, I think there is a small minority of kids that, for example, get in trouble with the law, or do things that threaten their lives.
That indicates to me that most teenagers can predict consequences to their actions. They just decide that they can take some consequences (such as the risk of being caught and scolded by your parents for doing something they told you not to) while others are not acceptable (like going to jail for something).
If you never did anything out of line when you were a teenager then I think you were in the minority.
Actually, I think I do more things out of line now than when I was a teenager--I figure I can get away with it.:)
My engineering ethics professor told us that when we get our first job, we shouldn't try to impress them by "volunteering to all sorts of activities when they are proposed. Instead, don't do any work that's not specifically assigned to you, because the moment you show them that you're competent with other duties, they'll start assigning them to you and you'll never get any free time."
Granted...that wasn't part of his actual lecture, it was during his Pre-Lecture Ramblings(tm). Still, I didn't think it was very ethical.
Even stranger...it's one of only three things I remember from that class. No comment on the other two (they're not ethically related either).
Slashdot Mirror
Although my belief (hope?), like yours, is that this is a purely scientific venture, I do need to point out that although during the cold war, neither the US nor the USSR wanted to use nukes, they kept building their ammunitions up. The point is that if the other nations know that you're *able* to deliver nukes, that will act as a deterrent, causing the other nation to leave you alone.
I'll leave it to the historians to decide whether or not that's actually effective.
Heh...your post sounds like the middle eastern population calling us "american devils" and whatnot
Give them the benefit of the doubt. Not everything a communist country does has to be a "politically correct ploy for world destruction."
Well, kindly keep in mind that the reason the GPL is often referred to as "copyleft" is because there's no reason it should exist if it were not possible to copyright software. It's a manner to fight copyright using its own laws.
Basically, these "licenses" depend on copyright because it exists, but open source would do very well without them if no other software was copyrighted.
I think that info is faulty
Is that a problem? The copyright for windows 3.1 would be ending sometime near as well.
In addition to the 75% MS probability factor, there's also a 150% chance Ballmer wrote it himself. The word "developers" is mentioned 6 times in those 4 pages.
Yes, I agree. It's also indicative of their sense of humor.
That's part of environmental selection, the humans around you being the environment. You're inferior if you can't find a mate, and you don't pass your genes.
Besides...what causes us to find a particular someone "cute"? Could it be that these preferences too have "evolved" as part of environmental selection? And don't give me the "we don't select our mates based on animal instincts, we're intelligent people" crap..if that were true, the infamous "dumb blond" species would never reproduce.
Well, you shouldn't joke about that
Alright...combine that with the description from the article:
To help the public grasp this subtle distinction USB 2, which was the old USB 1.1, would have ``Full Speed'' added to its title and USB 2, which was USB 2, would have ``Hi-Speed'' added.
The "High Speed" ones are the 480Mbps ones...
Aaaaaahhhhhh! To help the public grasp the distinction??? Even us tech savvies /.ers are getting confused.
Well...if this is to be believed, they don't want the salesperson to know the difference. They made the change because people were demanding USB 2.0 with their computers, and they (apparently) want to sell more USB 1.1's
Why they would actually want to sell more 1.1's is beyond me though.
After all, every geek knows clock speed isn't the be all end all of performance
Although I agree that this is probably not because of copy protection...I don't think the one at fault is him. I think it's the manufacturer of his crap DVD player.
Why are we consumers supposed to be responsible for piece of shit products? No matter how cheap the product is, it's supposed to do what it advertises. If one player is more expensive than another, it should be because of added features, not because the low end one won't do what it's supposed to. Instead of trying to return DVD's, he should be returning that player.
"Heh...that's funny. Not worth responding."
"Darn...these guys are starting to be annoying. Sigh...it's not worth it, let's ignore them"
"Whoa...they're still at it. Threats to revoke Unix licenses?? Alright...give 'em a fuck off memo, they're *really* annoying"
Next step...
"You're making me angry...you won't like me when I'm angry"
This would mean that you would be required to post the responses as well as authenticate their origin and make the responses available for some period of time.
So the answer is they're required to verify it. My question is, who's going to get the burden of authentication? Can you get away with just not posting responses that don't include some form of authentication, or do you have to go talk with everyone who submits a response letter to find out if they're aurthentic or not? That could be a potential pain.
The one sure way we students have to recognize one another on the internet. I'll bet those 3 meals are also distributed over 3 days.
In any case, no company is required to pay more than $110,000, said Graham Bird, vice president of marketing for The Open Group.
You know the legal battle will cost much, much more than that...but instead of doing what makes economic sense, they're doing what's right, and taking the burden off the rest of us. Because you know that if the Open Group succeeds, they're probably going to start suing red-hat and other linux distros for explaining that linux is "unix based" in their FAQ.
Any trasmissions originating inside a hollow perfect conductor won't exist within the conductor, but will propagate outside it without any loss (except of course by the distance that that the trasmission has travelled).
The effect of a "Faraday cage" doesn't apply here. That effect relates to a perfect hollow conductor that is charged--that charge will not induce an electromagnetic field inside it. Thus, the plane can get hit by lightning and you won't get shocked (because the charge will be in the outer layer) and instruments won't suffer (because there will be no resulting electromagnetic field inside the cage).
I think lightning could still cause a problem though, if it managed to hit any component outside the plane, but I'm not sure. They probably have everything shielded so that the charge will get distributed around, and the energy won't knock off an engine.
Hmm...didn't humans come up with some chemical compound that would kill the lizards? I thought we had already won.
That said, I'm really looking forward to it. I loved V...I just hope they don't spoil it.
If there's net access to your household, chances are e-mail is free. An 8yr girl (or boy for that matter) doesn't drive, so she doesn't really go anywhere where a mobile phone would be useful, so why pay for it? She can talk to her friends on the good ole' land line phone, call home from friends' houses, etc. Email, on the other hand is a great communication tool that is available. Why would you restrict it?
at least with email you can specify who she can receive email from and block everybody else. if you gave her a cell phone whats to stop some creep from calling her and talking nasty and/or lurring her out someplace.Why do so many parents feel that a tight grip on their children's life is a replacement for properly raising their children? You can't be with your children all the time, so if you don't teach them things such as "don't talk to strangers", the moment you're not there to protect them, they may get lurred by that creepy stranger in person. If you're 10 minutes late picking you're daughter up at school, that's a time any creep can talk to her and lure her out someplace...unless she knows not to trust them. For god's sake, teach your children not to trust creeps who call them on their phone and ask them to meet them someplace...same for e-mail, instant messaging, etc. Teach them to be cautious, it IS a dangerous world, and you CAN'T protect them from everything.
Now think about this...that creep trying to lure children to him is doing something illegal. We're asking here whether adult spam to children (or those who could potentially be children) should also be illegal. How comfortable would you be if some guy was calling your house phone and saying innapropriate things and receive the reply, "we can't do anything about it, it's legal for him to do that, just don't let your child answer the phone." from the police?
Personally, I was taught to write in cursive before I was taught the "standard" letters. That makes writing in cursive easier and faster for me. Compared to how long it takes others to take notes in class, I'd say it does make a positive difference in speed over printing letters. That said, I can't counteract the "ugly" argument...when taking notes in classes with professors that use powerpoint and dont post them on the web (wtf?), I end up having to write too fast and parts of it are difficult for me to read back myself (although at least I do get them, while a lot of people end up with incomplete notes)
That said...the loss of this ability may cause us to finally see innovations in a system that hasn't changed in a very long time. I would love to have, for example, an "electronic notepad". As many people have mentioned before in other articles, taking notes with a laptop makes it difficult when you have to enter equations and drawings...it'd also be too heavy for what I have in mind. I'd like something that would completely replace the notebook--making it easy for me to enter my notes, and having them in electronic format. That would provide benefits such as a keyword search feature to help finding that elusive thing you know you jotted down, but just can't find it anywhere in your notes.
I know that something like that would never happen while there is an alternative cheap solution such as bringing pen to paper. But if the next generation does not become proficient in it, I may have a chance of seeing it in my lifetime.
Yeah...it's always a pain when you guess the drugs wrong too. If you don't take the exact same drugs, you still can't understand the dude's code.
I was *really* unproductive in my job when I spent a long time taking the wrong drugs...darn, that was a crazy week.
well...I managed to mess up the retelling of the story. There was a connotation of "try to look as incompetent as you can without getting fired" in it.
Yeah, but in my opinion, I figure that if that were due to actual phisiological differences you'd have a much smaller minority of kids that were aware of consequences. And I think there are too many "good kids" to set them out as outliers. Rather, although most teenagers do some things wrong from time to time, I think there is a small minority of kids that, for example, get in trouble with the law, or do things that threaten their lives.
That indicates to me that most teenagers can predict consequences to their actions. They just decide that they can take some consequences (such as the risk of being caught and scolded by your parents for doing something they told you not to) while others are not acceptable (like going to jail for something).
If you never did anything out of line when you were a teenager then I think you were in the minority.Actually, I think I do more things out of line now than when I was a teenager--I figure I can get away with it. :)
My engineering ethics professor told us that when we get our first job, we shouldn't try to impress them by "volunteering to all sorts of activities when they are proposed. Instead, don't do any work that's not specifically assigned to you, because the moment you show them that you're competent with other duties, they'll start assigning them to you and you'll never get any free time."
Granted...that wasn't part of his actual lecture, it was during his Pre-Lecture Ramblings(tm). Still, I didn't think it was very ethical.
Even stranger...it's one of only three things I remember from that class. No comment on the other two (they're not ethically related either).