when they present their photoID it is run through a scanner and copied so that the picture can be altered and it can be used to access your real account.
I believe many terrorist organisations use plotters. Oh, you mean the drawing ones...
Sorry, it just reminded me of the English rhyme about Guy Fawkes attempting to blow up parliament: Remember, remember the Fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
Could you use the argument that OpenSource software reduces piracy? I would have thought that most people pirate software because they can't afford the genuine product - presuming that they can be persuaded that OpenSource is a viable alternative, why wouldn't they use that instead? That would then open the door for reasonably priced support - you might not pay $Au400 for an Office Suite, but be prepared to fork out a smaller, regular sum for updates, support, tutorials etc. on a package that you own free and clear.
How about a slogan: Death to the Pirates, use Open Source Maybe that should be a poll, any other slogans? My other OS is a penguin What do Gates and Windows have to do with each other anyway?
I don't know whether it works with moving pictures or not, but it seems to me that the projection system is the best part of this. Fancy a shirt that can change colours? Shop mannequins that take a picture of your face and show you wearing their clothes? Advertising on the back of your coat?
Well actually, no I don't, but I'm sure this type of technology can be used in novel ways that might be good. A red hat that runs a Linux display maybe?
I understand that in the US you are allowed to buy guns pretty easily. Surely needing a fingerprint scan to play music but not to fire a gun is a bit disproportionate? Also, what about disabled or paralysed people, won't this restrict their access to music? How about when visiting someone's house, or a holiday lease with a music system?
I can only think that this is a deliberate attempt to kill off the purchase of the 'hardware' ie. physical media, and replace it with a pay per play system, so you won't ever own the music, but can purchase it online every time you want to play it for a nominal fee.
Weren't the 'new civilizations' also human, so not in need of discovering by humans? I know what you mean, I'm just interested in the implicit assumptions of the language implying that those discovered were somehow not human!
Presumably aliens are alien. Assigning human motivations is probably not useful. Of course, if we do find aliens and find out that the laws of physics and biology cause convergent development then this would be false.
Assuming the aliens act in an equally human way, we'd better discover them first before they do it to us!
These are two completely different places. The Moon has no atmosphere to contend with, lower gravity and would make a great place for testing technologies needed for exploring/ exploiting asteroids.
Mars is more like the Earth, in that it has atmosphere (and so weather) and would be a better model for eventual off-world colonisation in other solar systems, should that ever be possible.
If a choice had to be made, I would prefer a permanent base on the Moon to a brief visit to Mars. After all, if its turns out that there are enough resources on the Moon to exploit, possibly we could make mass drivers to boost these into Lunar orbit for manufacture of space industries or vessels without the fuel cost of lifting things from the Earth. How about a test space elevator made on the Moon? (I can see the headlines: elevator from nowhere to nowhere!)
Also, what happens if we find life on Mars - even of the simplest form? Could we then exploit the planet in any way that would avoid destroying this?
Very off-topic, but I remember seeing a demonstration 10-15 years ago of the latest Spectrum Analyser, where the salesman made a big deal of the battery backed RAM saving the settings when the device was switched off. One of the older engineers said "we've got that on the analogue spec analysers, we call it a knob."
Not sure about this - you do know geostationary orbits are at around 35000 kms don't you? I know that the shuttle/ space station experience atmospheric drag, but they're only a few hundreds of kms up (see here and scroll down for a graph)
Geostationary orbit satellites only last about 10-15 years before the satellites run out of fuel. I don't know if a Martian equivalent would need more or less fuel due to the lower gravity. The current orbiters can also do useful planetary observation as well as acting as a communication relay, precisely because they do orbit over the planet's surface and can see the whole of it from close range. I doubt that 3 aerostationary, or whatever the correct Martian term is, satellites would adequately perform observations for their much higher orbit as well as providing blanket comms coverage for the planet. Plus power considerations etc. I'm sure it will happen, but not for a good while yet.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not a real doctor but I am a real worm
Sorry, it just reminded me of the English rhyme about Guy Fawkes attempting to blow up parliament:
Remember, remember the Fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
How about a slogan: Death to the Pirates, use Open Source
Maybe that should be a poll, any other slogans?
My other OS is a penguin
What do Gates and Windows have to do with each other anyway?
... all your bugs are belong to us ...
No, but there is a Mirror Mirror
Well actually, no I don't, but I'm sure this type of technology can be used in novel ways that might be good. A red hat that runs a Linux display maybe?
I can only think that this is a deliberate attempt to kill off the purchase of the 'hardware' ie. physical media, and replace it with a pay per play system, so you won't ever own the music, but can purchase it online every time you want to play it for a nominal fee.
They could try this!
So that's 11 years then - sorry, thought it was 10++ years :-)
Not related to Dorian Gray by any chance? Or is that just Wilde speculation ...
You mean in 600 years, everyone reading this could be dead?
Don't gnaw it off, you'll end up with Blue Tooth ...
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
John Kenneth Galbraith
I think they mean leads (as in cables, pronounced leeds) not the chemical. I read it that way at first too! (That's read as in red, not reed...)
Mars is more like the Earth, in that it has atmosphere (and so weather) and would be a better model for eventual off-world colonisation in other solar systems, should that ever be possible.
If a choice had to be made, I would prefer a permanent base on the Moon to a brief visit to Mars. After all, if its turns out that there are enough resources on the Moon to exploit, possibly we could make mass drivers to boost these into Lunar orbit for manufacture of space industries or vessels without the fuel cost of lifting things from the Earth. How about a test space elevator made on the Moon? (I can see the headlines: elevator from nowhere to nowhere!)
Also, what happens if we find life on Mars - even of the simplest form? Could we then exploit the planet in any way that would avoid destroying this?
Yes, I have read a lot of science fiction :-)
Shouldn't they call this Gig-gle?
There's too many dimensions, you need to search on Googleplex!
Vesta has already been used.
And instead of an Axminster carpet, you get a Buckmeister one ...
Very off-topic, but I remember seeing a demonstration 10-15 years ago of the latest Spectrum Analyser, where the salesman made a big deal of the battery backed RAM saving the settings when the device was switched off. One of the older engineers said "we've got that on the analogue spec analysers, we call it a knob."
Not sure about this - you do know geostationary orbits are at around 35000 kms don't you? I know that the shuttle/ space station experience atmospheric drag, but they're only a few hundreds of kms up (see here and scroll down for a graph)
Geostationary orbit satellites only last about 10-15 years before the satellites run out of fuel. I don't know if a Martian equivalent would need more or less fuel due to the lower gravity. The current orbiters can also do useful planetary observation as well as acting as a communication relay, precisely because they do orbit over the planet's surface and can see the whole of it from close range. I doubt that 3 aerostationary, or whatever the correct Martian term is, satellites would adequately perform observations for their much higher orbit as well as providing blanket comms coverage for the planet. Plus power considerations etc. I'm sure it will happen, but not for a good while yet.
So you're saying it isn't rocket science?