We just need an army of benign self-replicating robots on the Moon (think Peace On Earth) or in the asteroid belt. If they can get fueled by the Sun and extract useful matter from the flying rocks, they can probably grow exponentially. They would have no competition. And after we have lots and lots of them, they can start building ships out of all the stuff they mined. Likely, by then computers will have their own ideas about exploring space, but they should be even more ambitious than ours, since robots are not as tied down to the Earth's biosphere.
Not to mention the small problem of where all the other people besides Adam and Eve came from.
That's easy. According to Genesis, Adam lived to be 930 years old. We can assume that Eve was about as long-lasting, and that she had her menopause at the age of 500 (at about half of her lifespan). Suppose further that for 400 years Adam and Eve produced children at an average rate of 1 per year, which would be in accord with God's commandment to "be fruitful and multiply". With only their children around, we have 400 people added to the world's population by the time Adam died. Needless to say, these people did not stay celibate, but obeyed God's will (anyone who believes otherwise is a heretic and should have his genitals removed with a rusty chainsaw).
Let us now present a simple discrete dynamical model for estimating the population at the time of Adam's death. The whole span we consider is 400 years, and we allow that after 30 years we have 15 people of age suitable for reproduction. We set each generation to be 15 years (giving us 370/15=24 generations), and furthermore assume that each generation produces offspring for the next 30 years, thereby adding to two following generations. Finally, we suppose that in a generation of n people, there are n/3
couples who produce an offspring each year.
This gives us an approximation for the population function, counting nth generation:
While I agree with your sentiment, the music tax is not an idea out of this world. We'll just end up with government-sponsored art (first music, then movies, and then everything else). On the plus side, it will allow for creation of pieces of epic proportions in the economy where copyright is unenforceable. There is, however, a downside too. It has been done before in socialist countries, and the outcome is always the same: a steaming pile of shit (granted, of epic proportions), which is little more than propaganda. Since USA is slowly but steadily moving towards a socialist economy, I would estimate the chances of an art tax being eventually introduced as pretty good, especially because the idea is backed by a very powerful lobby.
If you ask me, though, I see no reason to collect taxes just so that the government can fuel its propaganda machine. I, personally, would like to see a system where commercial artists sell out directly to clients (recording industry could still make a pretty penny by facilitating recording and marketing), and where producing a few digital copies of legitimate material (think, not child porn) is legal.
Why is this insightful? It's a flamebait. Wine is an exercise in futility 6 days a week and reverse-engineering on Sundays. It's silly to say that its shortcomings are a typical feature of OSS. Also, strictly speaking, Wine is not just OSS, it's FOSS, which makes the parent even less coherent.
Fine, go get stoned. [...] And stop interrupting serious forums where most folks want to talk about serious topics [...]
OK! But wait, it's illegal and expensive. They are not whining. Are you sure you cannot see a problem with MJ being illegal and demonized, while alcohol, which is much more dangerous and about as addictive, lines up shelves in your neighborhood market and graces billboards all over your highways? Or may be you see it as justice, when one looses employment or freedom for possession of a minuscule quantity of a largely harmless substance? Is War On Drugs not a serious topic? Are billions of dollars they pour into it every year just pocket change? Sheesh.
Alexei Smirnov, the general director of ALT Linux, commented on the reason for creating in Russia a 'national OS' for power structures and government agencies:
"An OS can be called national if the state has the right to distribute and modify it, and, as a client, affects its development. There are no systems which would satisfy these requirements at present, neither among free nor among proprietary software". Smirnov opines that the first stage of the project will be foundational: "For instance, without it, we cannot start talking about developing 'national hardware'". We shouldn't forget, Smirnov reminds, that if the 'free' model is adapted for the system, then "the greater is Russia's contribution to the worldwide Free Software movement, the greater is its influence".
Another great quote is:
Even though it is assumed that open source software will be the foundation for [the national OS], the question of the degree to which it is free "will remain open" in the letter, "in order to avoid burdening the president with technical specifics".
Of course, no Russian periodical would be complete without praising Russia while smearing neighbors:
Strictly speaking, if the 'Russian OS' will happen, then it will be a unique phenomenon for the entire world: until now, attempts to create national systems, including notorious Chinese Red Flag, were rather unsuccessful.
And, surprise:
The Microsoft office in Russia suggests that a national system is not needed at all. [...] "It is not enough to develop OS, one also needs to 'tie' it to existing solutions, peripherals, and to provide interoperability and infrastructure".
Translation is mine.
I want to bet that the Russian government will take the bait. They cannot go for a day without making a great leap towards national this or sovereign that.
You've gotta be kidding. Ein is amiable and intelligent, while Keanu has all the charm of of a ship-mounted laser turret. He could probably pull it off as a Vicious-like syndicate henchman. He is long overdue for a sadistic villain role.
That's a good representation, even I cannot find an obvious reference to Dali using psychedelics. You would have to swallow a lot of LSD though to get visuals that bizarre. Mostly it is just vibrating or waving surfaces, things moving slightly on pictures, etc.
I have a friend though who swore that he once was attacked by flying tortillas, and then he looked at the sky, and gigantic flying tortillas were all over the place. That sounds just like Dali to me:)
I am familiar with three big schools: Moscow State, San Jose State, and Boston University; I TAed for about 5 years and I taught my own class. I've come to realize that big-hall lectures are all but useless.
The only exception on my memory is the Bible History class at SJSU, taught by Brent Walters. He basically approached it as a stand-up act, complete with pre-written gags. The texts were Hebrew scriptures and early Christian writings, and the only thing given in class was his perspective. The attendance soared.
In my own subject, math, I cannot think of a single instance where undergrads were happy about lectures, and I sympathize with them. If a single definition is unclear, the rest of the lecture could as well be in Greek, and there is not enough time for a meaningful discussion. At least for math, anything besides a small seminar—where everyone gets a chance to talk and to write—is a massive compromise.
Where the real world scenarios in which DRM in Vista hurts anyone?
The point of the paper was that the DRM increased various costs associated with the OS. Thanks to DRM implementation, Vista took longer to develop, has more bugs (and therefore is less stable and less secure from attacks which matter to you, the user), and has fewer working drivers. DRM hurts everyone who is using Vista, all the time, why is that so hard to understand?
it's that Joe Public realizes that he constantly has earn his pay, and it's only fair that others should too.
To preface, I basically agree with everything else you say. This, however, is patently untrue: no one actually believes that. Virtually everyone is perfectly content with rich people—the ones who are born (or marry, or gamble their way) into the money—not ever working to earn their living. There is nothing fair about the labor wages in industrialized countries. The system is basically a wage slavery for the majority of the population, who earn just enough to buy food, shelter, and cheap entertainment.
For me, no game is worth more than $5. Not because I'm cheap, but because I hardly ever play, and if it do, it's only for a while.
You, sir, are a terrible consumer, and should be ashamed of yourself. What is next? Christmas becoming a holiday of the spirit, with no shopping involved? People like you doomed USA.
There have been slight variations in the description of the issue, but most accounts agree the lines are grey or white, horizontal or slightly angled, granulated or pixelated in appearance, and are very subtle. Overall the lines are said to give the screen the appearance of a piece of parchment or recycled paper.
Clearly, it is just another stroke of Steve's genius: adding a classy and subtle texture to an otherwise flat and boring screen. The very next major release will include an option for switching between Ancient Parchment, Shiny Chrome, and Hairy Carpet themes.
Not prove in the mathematical sense, but show that the statements are true with arbitrarily high probability. It is akin to determining the area of the circle using Monte Carlo method. The law of large numbers guarantees that you will get the correct result if you invest infinite time.
Slashdot Mirror
We just need an army of benign self-replicating robots on the Moon (think Peace On Earth) or in the asteroid belt. If they can get fueled by the Sun and extract useful matter from the flying rocks, they can probably grow exponentially. They would have no competition. And after we have lots and lots of them, they can start building ships out of all the stuff they mined. Likely, by then computers will have their own ideas about exploring space, but they should be even more ambitious than ours, since robots are not as tied down to the Earth's biosphere.
Hmm. You are absolutely right.
Not to mention the small problem of where all the other people besides Adam and Eve came from.
That's easy. According to Genesis, Adam lived to be 930 years old. We can assume that Eve was about as long-lasting, and that she had her menopause at the age of 500 (at about half of her lifespan). Suppose further that for 400 years Adam and Eve produced children at an average rate of 1 per year, which would be in accord with God's commandment to "be fruitful and multiply". With only their children around, we have 400 people added to the world's population by the time Adam died. Needless to say, these people did not stay celibate, but obeyed God's will (anyone who believes otherwise is a heretic and should have his genitals removed with a rusty chainsaw).
Let us now present a simple discrete dynamical model for estimating the population at the time of Adam's death. The whole span we consider is 400 years, and we allow that after 30 years we have 15 people of age suitable for reproduction. We set each generation to be 15 years (giving us 370/15=24 generations), and furthermore assume that each generation produces offspring for the next 30 years, thereby adding to two following generations. Finally, we suppose that in a generation of n people, there are n/3 couples who produce an offspring each year.
This gives us an approximation for the population function, counting nth generation:
p(n+2) = 15 * [p(n+1)/3 + p(n)/3] = 5[p(n+1)+p(n)],
where p(0) = 15, p(1) = 5p(0) = 75.
An easy calculation shows that
p(24) = 34355167386474609375,
i.e. by the time Adam died, the human population could grow to an arbitrary number. In particular, it could reach the natural population cap.
Canada, Australia and the UK all have public broadcasters producing content that is quite good and often very critical of the government.
What are they?
While I agree with your sentiment, the music tax is not an idea out of this world. We'll just end up with government-sponsored art (first music, then movies, and then everything else). On the plus side, it will allow for creation of pieces of epic proportions in the economy where copyright is unenforceable. There is, however, a downside too. It has been done before in socialist countries, and the outcome is always the same: a steaming pile of shit (granted, of epic proportions), which is little more than propaganda. Since USA is slowly but steadily moving towards a socialist economy, I would estimate the chances of an art tax being eventually introduced as pretty good, especially because the idea is backed by a very powerful lobby.
If you ask me, though, I see no reason to collect taxes just so that the government can fuel its propaganda machine. I, personally, would like to see a system where commercial artists sell out directly to clients (recording industry could still make a pretty penny by facilitating recording and marketing), and where producing a few digital copies of legitimate material (think, not child porn) is legal.
I am still not sure what it is an example of, seeing how it's not 1.0. As for being a troll, I don't mind: what's karma good for if I don't burn it?
Why is this insightful? It's a flamebait. Wine is an exercise in futility 6 days a week and reverse-engineering on Sundays. It's silly to say that its shortcomings are a typical feature of OSS. Also, strictly speaking, Wine is not just OSS, it's FOSS, which makes the parent even less coherent.
Fine, go get stoned. [...] And stop interrupting serious forums where most folks want to talk about serious topics [...]
OK! But wait, it's illegal and expensive. They are not whining. Are you sure you cannot see a problem with MJ being illegal and demonized, while alcohol, which is much more dangerous and about as addictive, lines up shelves in your neighborhood market and graces billboards all over your highways? Or may be you see it as justice, when one looses employment or freedom for possession of a minuscule quantity of a largely harmless substance? Is War On Drugs not a serious topic? Are billions of dollars they pour into it every year just pocket change? Sheesh.
Alexei Smirnov, the general director of ALT Linux, commented on the reason for creating in Russia a 'national OS' for power structures and government agencies: "An OS can be called national if the state has the right to distribute and modify it, and, as a client, affects its development. There are no systems which would satisfy these requirements at present, neither among free nor among proprietary software". Smirnov opines that the first stage of the project will be foundational: "For instance, without it, we cannot start talking about developing 'national hardware'". We shouldn't forget, Smirnov reminds, that if the 'free' model is adapted for the system, then "the greater is Russia's contribution to the worldwide Free Software movement, the greater is its influence".
Another great quote is:
Even though it is assumed that open source software will be the foundation for [the national OS], the question of the degree to which it is free "will remain open" in the letter, "in order to avoid burdening the president with technical specifics".
Of course, no Russian periodical would be complete without praising Russia while smearing neighbors:
Strictly speaking, if the 'Russian OS' will happen, then it will be a unique phenomenon for the entire world: until now, attempts to create national systems, including notorious Chinese Red Flag, were rather unsuccessful.
And, surprise:
The Microsoft office in Russia suggests that a national system is not needed at all. [...] "It is not enough to develop OS, one also needs to 'tie' it to existing solutions, peripherals, and to provide interoperability and infrastructure".
Translation is mine.
I want to bet that the Russian government will take the bait. They cannot go for a day without making a great leap towards national this or sovereign that.
That's what she said.
That would be a Keanu movie I love to see.
He is not entirely useless though. He could probably pull off the main role in Soylent Green. Starring as Soylent Green.
I was also thinking Depp, but Bale is even better. He can act and kick things, and hair can be done.
You've gotta be kidding. Ein is amiable and intelligent, while Keanu has all the charm of of a ship-mounted laser turret. He could probably pull it off as a Vicious-like syndicate henchman. He is long overdue for a sadistic villain role.
Using only the words found in the Bible:
Shut the hell up, you damn ass whore!
-Bart Simpson
Does it run Linux?
Why do you think that is the case? I bet, financial security of MIT attendees may have something to do with that.
That's a good representation, even I cannot find an obvious reference to Dali using psychedelics. You would have to swallow a lot of LSD though to get visuals that bizarre. Mostly it is just vibrating or waving surfaces, things moving slightly on pictures, etc.
I have a friend though who swore that he once was attacked by flying tortillas, and then he looked at the sky, and gigantic flying tortillas were all over the place. That sounds just like Dali to me :)
I totally agree.
I am familiar with three big schools: Moscow State, San Jose State, and Boston University; I TAed for about 5 years and I taught my own class. I've come to realize that big-hall lectures are all but useless.
The only exception on my memory is the Bible History class at SJSU, taught by Brent Walters. He basically approached it as a stand-up act, complete with pre-written gags. The texts were Hebrew scriptures and early Christian writings, and the only thing given in class was his perspective. The attendance soared.
In my own subject, math, I cannot think of a single instance where undergrads were happy about lectures, and I sympathize with them. If a single definition is unclear, the rest of the lecture could as well be in Greek, and there is not enough time for a meaningful discussion. At least for math, anything besides a small seminar—where everyone gets a chance to talk and to write—is a massive compromise.
Where the real world scenarios in which DRM in Vista hurts anyone?
The point of the paper was that the DRM increased various costs associated with the OS. Thanks to DRM implementation, Vista took longer to develop, has more bugs (and therefore is less stable and less secure from attacks which matter to you, the user), and has fewer working drivers. DRM hurts everyone who is using Vista, all the time, why is that so hard to understand?
it's that Joe Public realizes that he constantly has earn his pay, and it's only fair that others should too.
To preface, I basically agree with everything else you say. This, however, is patently untrue: no one actually believes that. Virtually everyone is perfectly content with rich people—the ones who are born (or marry, or gamble their way) into the money—not ever working to earn their living. There is nothing fair about the labor wages in industrialized countries. The system is basically a wage slavery for the majority of the population, who earn just enough to buy food, shelter, and cheap entertainment.
For me, no game is worth more than $5. Not because I'm cheap, but because I hardly ever play, and if it do, it's only for a while.
You, sir, are a terrible consumer, and should be ashamed of yourself. What is next? Christmas becoming a holiday of the spirit, with no shopping involved? People like you doomed USA.
Can you say "x is bloody pants"?
I totally agree. From TFA:
Clearly, it is just another stroke of Steve's genius: adding a classy and subtle texture to an otherwise flat and boring screen. The very next major release will include an option for switching between Ancient Parchment, Shiny Chrome, and Hairy Carpet themes.
Not prove in the mathematical sense, but show that the statements are true with arbitrarily high probability. It is akin to determining the area of the circle using Monte Carlo method. The law of large numbers guarantees that you will get the correct result if you invest infinite time.