If you teach them to use Gimp, then they can legally and without cost do their assignments at home. They could also use the skills you've taught in order to, from home, make nice art for friends' web pages, etc.
If you only teach them PhotoShop, they may be forced to (a) use a pirated copy at home or (b) not use their home computer at all.
I should note that I bloody hate Dolphins (my ex loved the damn things). They aren't as cute as you think, they smell of fish and have attempted genocide [wheelock.edu] on porpoises and even attack humans [scotsman.com].
I'm confused... are you talking about dolphins or about your ex?
No one makes games with great replay value like Blizzard does. Blizzard's strategy of not releasing a game until its ready is almost unheard of in this industry. I seriously hope that the new overlords don't mess with this - I'd hate to stop benefiting from Blizzard's good work.
The quote in the original post is a little misleading - I don't really think NREC is going to be working on mounting weapons on the new vehicle. Primarily they're continuing development on autonomous mobility - can it properly plan and quickly execute a good route to get from point A to point B over rough terrain.
So to summarize your point, "I don't make robots that will kill people. I'm just working on the early unarmed prototype of robots that will kill people!"
People can put your research to good or bad use. Choose wisely what you work on.
I'm surprised the parent got modded "Funny". I actually meant it as a serious lament. Much research money in America comes from the DoD. As a researcher, you often are forced to choose between not being funded, or being funded to support an occasionally evil enterprise.
Defending our own borders rarely troubles my conscience. But invading Iraq based on a lie bothers me a great deal. But many American researchers aren't given the ability to do work that only benefits the former.
How do you decide when it's good to place better weapons in your President's hands vs. when it's not good?
If only the U.S. had several, distinct militaries: a) the Department of Defense (only functions in or near U.S. borders) b) the Department of Securing Cheap Oil c) the Department of Get Them Before They Get Us. d) the Department of Team America, World Police.
Unfortunately, when researchers take DoD money, or soldiers enlist, they have no choice but to support all of a - d. Painful dilemma.
When I heard about the Daly Show being free, I looked for it. All I could on the show's website was a string of Flash clips, pretty much one per segment of the show. I'm pretty sure I wasn't able to see even close to the whole show.
Did I find what people are talking about? Because to be honest I found it pretty clunky and unsatisfying.
Your rights to privacy CANNOT be more important than National Security
If the risk national security was certain, I'd agree. I have no problem with frisking everyone who's definitely a terrorist. But they're not, and the question is how we navigate the grounds of uncertainty.
Also, knowledge is power. In a day when there are so many laws that we're all guilty of something, we're under perpetual threat of prosecution or blackmail. And how well do you think a political campaign to unseat an encumbent President would go if, just to be "safe", his NSA monitored their campaign managers' telephones?
You see, the problem with the "If you have nothing to hide, why be worried?" argument is that if the government isn't filled with saints, the information of even decent persons can be used against them maliciously by the government.
I got one this summer at a FYE store in New England.
My tactic was pretty simple: Ask all of the stores in my area what day of the week they typically get deliveries on. Then call each store on its standard delivery day (and the day after, if the shipment hadn't been unpacked when I called), asking if they had a Wii. It paid off in several months.
I was probably also lucky that I wasn't doing this during the holiday season, otherwise the Wiis probably would have been all snapped up before I got there. But still, my approach may be worth a shot.
P.S. It really is a lot of fun, especially for a casual gamer like me.
How on earth did Creationists get categorically thrown into the same class of groups as the RIAA, Nazis, and patent lawyers?
I'm agnostic, but I know many Creationists who are just trying to find the world view that makes the best sense of their experiences, their reasoning, and various bits of historical evidence. I'm getting pissed that popular sentiment on/. is becoming that Creationists are a bunch of evil, ignorant bastards who are out to wreck the public teaching of science.
Creationism is a world view and a particular take on history, not a political practice. You might judge some Creationists to hold their views for bad reasons or insufficient evidence, but the same could be said of many reductionist evolutionists. But I know plenty of people smart, articulate reasons who understand the debate and have judged it more probable that creationism (not necessarily young-earth creationism) is the most-likely correct account of natural history.
And yet I find myself installing more and more KDE apps on my GNOME system because of how slow or boneheadedly featureless their GNOME equivalents are.
I find that the KDE apps (k3b, kate, etc.) are more full-featured, but the Gnome desktop seems much cleaner to me. So I'm just glad they can peacefully coexist.
That's not "irony". That's evidence that Samsung was also bribing or otherwise corrupting the government that Lee was paid not to monitor.
Are you kidding? This is the very essence of irony. The anti-bribery guy was (allegedly) bribed. It's very much like the firemen accidentally burning down the firehouse.
That's what happens when the judicial system is an adversarial system - the prosecutor feels that the defendant is his enemy, because his record is dependent on the percent of cases he closes with a conviction. At the same time there is little to no penalty for convictions that are later overturned, unless they happen to be VERY high profile cases. I am not saying that another system is better, but this problem is certainly inherent in the system.
Perhaps a court-employed investigator, who's beholden to prosecution nor the defense?
I'm very glad to help cancer research, but will this also result in the development of drug patents that (a) bankrupt some patients, and (b) prevent other researchers from improving on those drugs?
Because that would make me feel a little less charitable with my computing power. (Only a little, though.)
Slashdot Mirror
If you teach them to use Gimp, then they can legally and without cost do their assignments at home. They could also use the skills you've taught in order to, from home, make nice art for friends' web pages, etc.
If you only teach them PhotoShop, they may be forced to (a) use a pirated copy at home or (b) not use their home computer at all.
... says the guy who checks /. often enough to jump on a new story and post a comment right away. :)
That's not fair. The chimps didn't have hangovers.
So it's not like the Maytag commercials where the old repair guy is reading a newspaper and bored for lack of work?
All your content are belong to us?
Great, I can see it now:
Agent: It says here you have a truck full of... "baklava"?
Trucker: That's right.
Agent: Hold on, let me just run it through the ole' computer here...
(interminable wait)
Agent (to the crate of deserts): OK Mr. Bahklever, lay on the ground or we'll shoot!
Trucker: Dude... you're yelling at a pastry...
Agent: ON THE GROUND!!!
Trucker: I don't think it can hear you, man.
Agent: (incinerates truck)
I'm confused... are you talking about dolphins or about your ex?
No one makes games with great replay value like Blizzard does. Blizzard's strategy of not releasing a game until its ready is almost unheard of in this industry. I seriously hope that the new overlords don't mess with this - I'd hate to stop benefiting from Blizzard's good work.
So to summarize your point, "I don't make robots that will kill people. I'm just working on the early unarmed prototype of robots that will kill people!"
People can put your research to good or bad use. Choose wisely what you work on.
I'm surprised the parent got modded "Funny". I actually meant it as a serious lament. Much research money in America comes from the DoD. As a researcher, you often are forced to choose between not being funded, or being funded to support an occasionally evil enterprise.
Defending our own borders rarely troubles my conscience. But invading Iraq based on a lie bothers me a great deal. But many American researchers aren't given the ability to do work that only benefits the former.
How do you decide when it's good to place better weapons in your President's hands vs. when it's not good?
If only the U.S. had several, distinct militaries:
a) the Department of Defense (only functions in or near U.S. borders)
b) the Department of Securing Cheap Oil
c) the Department of Get Them Before They Get Us.
d) the Department of Team America, World Police.
Unfortunately, when researchers take DoD money, or soldiers enlist, they have no choice but to support all of a - d. Painful dilemma.
When I heard about the Daly Show being free, I looked for it. All I could on the show's website was a string of Flash clips, pretty much one per segment of the show. I'm pretty sure I wasn't able to see even close to the whole show.
Did I find what people are talking about? Because to be honest I found it pretty clunky and unsatisfying.
If the risk national security was certain, I'd agree. I have no problem with frisking everyone who's definitely a terrorist. But they're not, and the question is how we navigate the grounds of uncertainty.
Also, knowledge is power. In a day when there are so many laws that we're all guilty of something, we're under perpetual threat of prosecution or blackmail. And how well do you think a political campaign to unseat an encumbent President would go if, just to be "safe", his NSA monitored their campaign managers' telephones?
You see, the problem with the "If you have nothing to hide, why be worried?" argument is that if the government isn't filled with saints, the information of even decent persons can be used against them maliciously by the government.
Probably the same reason we pick our noses in our cars, despite everyone being able to see us. It feels more private and anonymous than it really is.
In former-Soviet Russia, your ex-coworkers kill you!
I got one this summer at a FYE store in New England.
My tactic was pretty simple: Ask all of the stores in my area what day of the week they typically get deliveries on. Then call each store on its standard delivery day (and the day after, if the shipment hadn't been unpacked when I called), asking if they had a Wii. It paid off in several months.
I was probably also lucky that I wasn't doing this during the holiday season, otherwise the Wiis probably would have been all snapped up before I got there. But still, my approach may be worth a shot.
P.S. It really is a lot of fun, especially for a casual gamer like me.
And that's not a troll, exactly how?
How on earth did Creationists get categorically thrown into the same class of groups as the RIAA, Nazis, and patent lawyers?
I'm agnostic, but I know many Creationists who are just trying to find the world view that makes the best sense of their experiences, their reasoning, and various bits of historical evidence. I'm getting pissed that popular sentiment on /. is becoming that Creationists are a bunch of evil, ignorant bastards who are out to wreck the public teaching of science.
Creationism is a world view and a particular take on history, not a political practice. You might judge some Creationists to hold their views for bad reasons or insufficient evidence, but the same could be said of many reductionist evolutionists. But I know plenty of people smart, articulate reasons who understand the debate and have judged it more probable that creationism (not necessarily young-earth creationism) is the most-likely correct account of natural history.
Considering that the vast, vast majority of creationists are not members of the Discovery Institute, this headline seems slanderous.
This is a little like having the local Atheists Club killing puppies, and running the headline, "Atheists Kill Puppies".
Does anything run on Vista?
I find that the KDE apps (k3b, kate, etc.) are more full-featured, but the Gnome desktop seems much cleaner to me. So I'm just glad they can peacefully coexist.
Are you kidding? This is the very essence of irony. The anti-bribery guy was (allegedly) bribed. It's very much like the firemen accidentally burning down the firehouse.
Perhaps a court-employed investigator, who's beholden to prosecution nor the defense?
I think you missed the part where it said the companies were currently running XP.
I'll have to check, but I don't think we have that until after we're researched Barracks and Monarchy.
I'm very glad to help cancer research, but will this also result in the development of drug patents that (a) bankrupt some patients, and (b) prevent other researchers from improving on those drugs?
Because that would make me feel a little less charitable with my computing power. (Only a little, though.)