Oh, I agree, the phonetic method is the way to go. That's why I listed writing first. IIRC, learning phonics consisted of repeatedly writing and saying phonemes and then of course concatenating them into words.
Arithmetic is certainly rote, the deeper learning in more advanced math (algebra and up) is not entirely rote, but I'll still say that's a large part of learning it. Note that you're already teaching algebra if you ask, "3 plus what is seven?" Although, it's usually not taught that way.
3 = 'Riting + Reading + 'Rithmetic +4 = History + Literature + Mathematics + Physics -- 7 =... well damnit, an education. (fscking bad analogies)
You remember that seen in Pink Floyd's The Wall where all the children stood reciting lessons as the teacher walked around to keep them going? It was made to look very bad, but I think it usually worked. Why? Because the three R's are best learned by rote. Doing the right thing over and over so you always get it right. Understanding? Bah, you can't begin to understand something when you don't know anything about it. So drill them kiddies and drill 'em hard. But keep it brief! Don't make schools prison-daycares for children. Send them for less than 6 hours and then let their parents deal with them. They're kids for crying out loud! They need discipline and structure for part of the day, but they don't need the macabre sadistic school environment for the whole day! Let them play - that's where they learn to appreciate life and curiosity and sometimes their fellows.
If some of the kids are really bright, let them advance more rapidly; don't give them 'resource room' and more heaping BS. Sure maybe they'll be in classes with bigger kids for more hours as they advance and schoolwork becomes less drilling and more thinking. But they'll be learning, not playing school politics. When they get out of class they can play with age peers or intellectual peers.
So eventually they all have the 3 R's down pat. The foundation is laid. They can 'talk' to themselves (read think) because they've learned language and logic. Of course they start getting bigger and stronger and more often have to deal with adults. So prepare them. Not with DARE and other such crap. But by learning about what men have done (history), what men can do (physics), how they can do it (math), and what they might and should do (literature). Once they can a reason about the things a man in any time or place might find, that's it! They've been educated - i.e., "lead out" from the whims of other men or their ideas.
Keep the school day short, keep childhood education brief. Let them play and pursue their own interests whatever they may be. Some will find satisfaction and challenge in manual labor, others in more-trained jobs, still others might go to college.
Sorry, about the terseness and vulgarities. I'll exclude them from the final (and more researched;) article.
3M has something similar, but I think it's just flexible circuit board for use in those curvy ergonomically designed cellular phones. Sorry, no time to hunt the website down.
The article mentions the 'folk-wisdom' that one "cannot teach an old dog new tricks". Until about 1995 (wild guess) I'd always read the neurologists/neuroscientists believed this to be true in the sense of no new neurons being formed after X years. Now we know that new neurons can form in adult brains.
This is not as simple a change in knowledge as, for example, recognizing an Rh factor in the blood. To say one year there are 4 blood types and the next year say there are eight is not a contradiction (unless you say _only_ 4). But it is a contradiction to say one year that new neurons don't form, and the next year new neurons do form.
So what does this matter? People make mistakes, right? Well sure, but any neurologist who mouthed off saying 'no new neu' really should have said 'I have no clue', 'I don't know', or any myriad of truthful statements; if you're going to be a scientist, you mustn't just make $#!+ up!
And another rant! Even if we could grow neurons, that wouldn't preclude learning in later years. Barring X-Files pedagogy, there isn't anyone who knows for certain how the brain and the mind come together. Last I'd heard, neurons were no longer the brain's wires (probably a bad metaphor anyway), but the microtubules within the neurons were. And the (programmer's) neural net idea seems to be out too, since there are non-neuronal broadcasts also; chemical for sure, and electrical as well, IIRC.
So I'll through out three hypotheses for fun and chunk in an aphorism. Fun Hypothesis #1: The heart is the seat of the soul/mind/whatchamacallit. Why? Electrical isolation. It sets its own rhythm. Fun Hypothesis #2: The stomach is the seat of the soul/mind/whatchamacallit. Why? Just a gut feeling. Fun Hypothesis #3: The entire body is the seat of the soul/mind/whosamadosit. Huh? Ever seen them seperated? Phantom limbs/pain. All cells have microtubules. Easy check: start correlating physiological and psychological dysfunction; such as (say) systemic failure (a la lupus) with dissociative personality disorder. If there is a correlation then see which came first. If there is such an order, see if the connection is causal. (Of course, I'll bet the disease is just so bad that dissociation is a coping action. But even that idea supports a much stronger tie between the whole body and the mind.)
Aphorism: The second most important statement in science is: "I don't know." The first should follow the second.
Actually, in America, a person who demonstrates ability in high school and on the SAT has better than a free ride through college, if he maintains that level of performance. But if you don't finish high school because of having to work, kids, etc. then you'll have trouble.
Last I checked there was only one university in the USA that refused to accept state money; somewhere in Illinois or Ohio, I think. Even those who don't get scholarships can get loans or state grants if they show financial hardship.
The question is why don't colleges maintain a high standard of education when all they have to do is say, "we don't want you or your money". And I'll not even go on about what college athletics do to the whole thing.
In general a GPA (Grade Point Average) is done this way: A=4 B=3 C=2 ("average") D=1 F=0 Add letter-grade-values and divide by number of grades. Of course the scheme varies wildly. Some universities consider only some grades. Some high schools assign and additional point for "honors" course, etc.
SAT used to range from 200 to 800 on two sections, math and "verbal". They dumbed down the whole system a few years ago, so I don't know how much has changed.
Grades are also dumbed down over time, but not formally like the SAT.
I have to agree, this is pure FUD. Not only does XFree86 rarely crash, but it never generates a kernel oops, or any such thing. Maybe I'm in a mood today, but this ad really pissed me off and though I considered shopping around commercial X servers, I'm sure as hell not going to use this one and probably no other either. As for those few crashes...the usual culprit is a java app in netscape. (Whoever thought of using java to make a web page pretty or for any other thing that doesn't need it should go work for the company that makes this ad.)
Lest I be too negative, I can proudly say that I've renedered my laptop inoperable through my own foolishness. (Actually, if I'd had a net connection at the time, I could have fixed it by remotely killing my client, and the X server would have been fine.) I must remember not to grab to keyboard and pointer asynchronously, or was it synchronously, when I don't process their input.:)
-EXPCITE- TITLE 35 - PATENTS PART II - PATENTABILITY OF INVENTIONS AND GRANT OF PATENTS CHAPTER 10 - PATENTABILITY OF INVENTIONS
-HEAD- Sec. 100. Definitions
-STATUTE- When used in this title unless the context otherwise indicates - (a) The term ''invention'' means invention or discovery. (b) The term ''process'' means process, art or method, and includes a new use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or material. (c) The terms ''United States'' and ''this country'' mean the United States of America, its territories and possessions. (d) The word ''patentee'' includes not only the patentee to whom the patent was issued but also the successors in title to the patentee.
-SOURCE- (July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 797.)
-MISC1- HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES Paragraph (a) is added only to avoid repetition of the phrase ''invention or discovery'' and its derivatives throughout the revised title. The present statutes use the phrase ''invention or discovery'' and derivatives. Paragraph (b) is noted under section 101. Paragraphs (c) and (d) are added to avoid the use of long expressions in various parts of the revised title.
I know no good reason why discoveries should be patentable. This was taken from the US House website. Hmm... maybe I can make a database and sue for patent or copyright infringement if anyone obeys the laws of the US.:)
OT: Does anyone recognize the tags they use? Is there a reader that makes sense of them?
Opera's text browser PNG is showing either tables or stylesheet formatting! This is a very good thing. Are lynx developers working on this?
And just a general note... I'd rather GPL'ed software so I probably won't switch from lynx unless I switch to Opera from Netscape and their text browser is included. I'd much prefer an Xlib based GPL'ed browser. Are there any in the works? (Mozilla is not GPL) The w3c has a library ((L)GPL) for the guts of the `net communication; so with a proper renderer, the project is 'done'. Any takers?
Aren't intellectual property rights commercial rights? That is, rights to the sale of a good? I checked the US legal code and it does say that (without authority) making, using, offering to sell, and selling patented things are infringements of patents, but is this the way it _should_ be? I read somewhere that patent rights were only _supposed_ to cover the _sale_ of goods; as a matter of the theory of natural law/rights which the USA was founded upon.
I don't recall the history well enough, but Eli Whitney had patented the cotton gin and then tried to collect licensing fees from people who had seen one and privately built their own. The widespread copying for personal use was unstoppable either because it invalidated the patent (as obvious) or because the commercial right to the device didn't prohibit private construction and use.
This would obviously be a saving grace for free software since it is not sold, though service contracts or physical media are sold.
If they claim to be an internet service provider and restrict access to any part of the internet then sue or bring charges of fraud. The internet is the whole thing. There is no right to rewrite reality.
I didn't see this mentioned in the other posts so . . .
A large database of papers, like xxx.lanl.gov, could be used by journals the same way sunsite.unc.edu and others are used by free software companies; or the same way other web articles are used by slashdot.
While anything meeting certain minimum guidelines like a format or content focus would be accepted by the database (by mirroring or linking), the established journals would provide selection and review. If you can't go through 1000 articles a day, you would go to your favorite portal which would provide a digest of rigorously selected articles.
Basically, the journals would be value-added resellers. (I hate that term, I think it's inaccurate.)
There are surely a variety of IP issues that would have to be worked out, and the journals and databases would need some compensation for server space, collection efforts, and review. But it shouldn't be too hard to work out; Cygnus, Slashdot and the for-profit Linux distributions are proofs-of-principle and good examples.
Each portal/journal could implement its own style of open review as well, and some might even link to articles and provide only commentary from their servers.
If the IP issues of such a database can be worked out, there are many business models that could spring up around it. The big open databases could be compensated by restricting HTTP-REFERRER to subscribing journals or people directly browsing the server. That might be too restrictive, or too easy to work around; I haven't run a web server, so I don't know what's possible or feasable - suggestions?
--- disclaimer --- This is a joke. This is only a joke. Had this been a real conspiracy theory the subject would have read "Clone!!!" and been followed by statements attesting to first-hand knowledge of a MS janitor's claim of creating the clone or disposing of the bodies and being fired for threatening to go public about those and the theft of GPL'ed genentic code. --- end of disclaimer ---
Here are my guesses. 1) It's for system-on-a-chip integratation.
2) It's for a 'self-programming' chip; i.e., the circuits can be 'changed' after manufacturing. I reliable cache for a new instruction set would be very important. (Hi, I'm an x86. Now, I'm a SPARC. Now, I'm an Alpha!:) (Oops! MOV != MOE | LARRY | CURLY. Now, I'm a cow chip because my cache failed:( Please reinsert smoke. )
Seriously though, I think there's a project at MIT like number 2. (FPGA ?)
Since JFK Jr. and family were reported missing and the popular news media have been *cough* *cough* 'reporting' on it, I've been waiting to hear through my favorite other sources (e.g./.) that the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been repealed. (For non-U.S.A.: 1st Amendment is freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition) I guess this and the other Wired headlines for today indicate how close they (congress) dare, since most of America is watching the sea-burial.
So is this convenience, conspiracy, or coincidence?
Historically, those with a good foundation in basic science are the first to say, "It can't be done". I can't remember how many times this has happened, but you'll find plenty of examples on a humorous-quote page.
Public policy? I'm not sure, though I have some idea, of what you mean to say. Ozone is a chemical and is studied by industries that use or produce it. Climatology, I honestly hadn't heard of that; how is it different from meteorology or geology? Ecology? Unless there have been some remarkable changes in that field, it is still a pseudo-science run by fascists or facist sympathizers. The 'Creation Scientists' aren't the only ones who fabricate 'science' to promote a political agenda. From what I can see, environmental regulation has largely distracted attention from improper _local_ dumping which destroys lives and property in an effort to 'save the planet'. It has also produced a systems of kickbacks and head-turning in waste disposal that has created more problems than simple enforcement of land rights would have fixed.
The banks in America are run by the federal gov't, and our currency is debased, so bad bank policies are another example of gov't meddling. There is some recourse through CBO's or credit unions, but you really have to shop around. (And sometimes even move or manage accounts across state lines, which the fed tries to prevent.)
Eeek. I thought the Slashdot Effect was just a focus of hits from all over the world, not one person, and not any abnormal (ping of death?) activity. If it's more than just multiple hits and individual e-mails (though from many individuals), please let me know and ignore my previous agreement.
It would increase my respect. Identity theft, fraud, defense of one's rights and honor are just the kind of things to "get all governmental about". If the gov't doesn't exist to protect individuals then what good is it?
I often wonder how many (if any) violations of individual rights perpetrated by Microsoft are ignored by focusing on the bogus anti-trust laws.
I agree; but reading that reminded me of the scene is "Robin Hood: Men in Tights" when a spectator at the archery contest says, "Let's give 'im the chop!"
Unfortunately !) my email sits comfortably behind a university firewall, so no spam for me so far.
Tim Berners-Lee was working at CERN doesn't mean the web had anything to do with high-energy research. The same motivation (communication of research data et al.) could have existed for any other research project. Similarly, that we currently devote much computing power to this doesn't mean that there is nothing else that could demand the same power. The first cyclotron was smaller than a cubic decimeter, IIRC, and anyone who knows what parts to get could probably find them in a hardware store; consider the nuclear reactor built for the University of Illinois (?) scavanger hunt.
If the same funding went to cosmic ray research, we might have developed, for example, floating cities, like in Empire Strikes Back, or a working space station to further that research. I think the idea in economics is 'opportunity cost'; what other things could have been done with the money is part of the cost.
That national labs have better technology than the technology industry is probably the best indictment of how much taxation has hindered the development and spread of technology. If these companies didn't have to spend so much on taxes, accountants to calculate them, their support staff, and lawyers and their support staff, they could devote those funds to lowering costs or further research.
Also, every dollar that gov't spend on research displaces more than a dollar of private funds. Basically the companies have to spend more on taxes and their calculation to give to the gov't, the gov't has to process this money (all the while using it) and then, after much has been leaked off to unnessesary bureaucracy, the money gets to the labs. Since the industries have less to spend on research and they've 'contributed' already, they spend far less than they would have before because they become 'free-riders' of a sort.
As for the medical research, the unhealthy influence of gov't on that should be clear. Cancers are far more common than AIDS, but which gets more funding? Much research, and looking around, indicates that the American diet is unhealthy. Gov't subsidies of various food industries artificially lower the cost of certain foods that would normally be less affordable and eaten less. By making toxic levels of these foods cheap, the gov't makes the population unhealthy and then asks for (nay, takes) more money to fix the problem it created. Al Capone would be so jealous.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, it's not new; Gold has said it for years. Other people are just now catching on.
Oh, I agree, the phonetic method is the way to go. That's why I listed writing first. IIRC, learning phonics consisted of repeatedly writing and saying phonemes and then of course concatenating them into words.
Arithmetic is certainly rote, the deeper learning in more advanced math (algebra and up) is not entirely rote, but I'll still say that's a large part of learning it. Note that you're already teaching algebra if you ask, "3 plus what is seven?" Although, it's usually not taught that way.
3 = 'Riting + Reading + 'Rithmetic ... well damnit, an education. (fscking bad analogies)
;) article.
+4 = History + Literature + Mathematics + Physics
--
7 =
You remember that seen in Pink Floyd's The Wall where all the children stood reciting lessons as the teacher walked around to keep them going? It was made to look very bad, but I think it usually worked. Why? Because the three R's are best learned by rote. Doing the right thing over and over so you always get it right. Understanding? Bah, you can't begin to understand something when you don't know anything about it. So drill them kiddies and drill 'em hard. But keep it brief! Don't make schools prison-daycares for children. Send them for less than 6 hours and then let their parents deal with them. They're kids for crying out loud! They need discipline and structure for part of the day, but they don't need the macabre sadistic school environment for the whole day! Let them play - that's where they learn to appreciate life and curiosity and sometimes their fellows.
If some of the kids are really bright, let them advance more rapidly; don't give them 'resource room' and more heaping BS. Sure maybe they'll be in classes with bigger kids for more hours as they advance and schoolwork becomes less drilling and more thinking. But they'll be learning, not playing school politics. When they get out of class they can play with age peers or intellectual peers.
So eventually they all have the 3 R's down pat. The foundation is laid. They can 'talk' to themselves (read think) because they've learned language and logic. Of course they start getting bigger and stronger and more often have to deal with adults. So prepare them. Not with DARE and other such crap. But by learning about what men have done (history), what men can do (physics), how they can do it (math), and what they might and should do (literature). Once they can a reason about the things a man in any time or place might find, that's it! They've been educated - i.e., "lead out" from the whims of other men or their ideas.
Keep the school day short, keep childhood education brief. Let them play and pursue their own interests whatever they may be. Some will find satisfaction and challenge in manual labor, others in more-trained jobs, still others might go to college.
Sorry, about the terseness and vulgarities. I'll exclude them from the final (and more researched
3M has something similar, but I think it's just flexible circuit board for use in those curvy ergonomically designed cellular phones. Sorry, no time to hunt the website down.
You say 'probable cause'. More likely is 'reasonable suspicion'. Or does it already suffice for that?
Then why have my pre-1995 scores been raised? It's not norming, it's plain dumbing down.
The article mentions the 'folk-wisdom' that one "cannot teach an old dog new tricks". Until about 1995 (wild guess) I'd always read the neurologists/neuroscientists believed this to be true in the sense of no new neurons being formed after X years. Now we know that new neurons can form in adult brains.
This is not as simple a change in knowledge as, for example, recognizing an Rh factor in the blood. To say one year there are 4 blood types and the next year say there are eight is not a contradiction (unless you say _only_ 4). But it is a contradiction to say one year that new neurons don't form, and the next year new neurons do form.
So what does this matter? People make mistakes, right? Well sure, but any neurologist who mouthed off saying 'no new neu' really should have said 'I have no clue', 'I don't know', or any myriad of truthful statements; if you're going to be a scientist, you mustn't just make $#!+ up!
And another rant! Even if we could grow neurons, that wouldn't preclude learning in later years. Barring X-Files pedagogy, there isn't anyone who knows for certain how the brain and the mind come together. Last I'd heard, neurons were no longer the brain's wires (probably a bad metaphor anyway), but the microtubules within the neurons were. And the (programmer's) neural net idea seems to be out too, since there are non-neuronal broadcasts also; chemical for sure, and electrical as well, IIRC.
So I'll through out three hypotheses for fun and chunk in an aphorism.
Fun Hypothesis #1: The heart is the seat of the soul/mind/whatchamacallit. Why? Electrical isolation. It sets its own rhythm.
Fun Hypothesis #2: The stomach is the seat of the soul/mind/whatchamacallit. Why? Just a gut feeling.
Fun Hypothesis #3: The entire body is the seat of the soul/mind/whosamadosit. Huh? Ever seen them seperated? Phantom limbs/pain. All cells have microtubules. Easy check: start correlating physiological and psychological dysfunction; such as (say) systemic failure (a la lupus) with dissociative personality disorder. If there is a correlation then see which came first. If there is such an order, see if the connection is causal. (Of course, I'll bet the disease is just so bad that dissociation is a coping action. But even that idea supports a much stronger tie between the whole body and the mind.)
Aphorism: The second most important statement in science is: "I don't know." The first should follow the second.
Actually, in America, a person who demonstrates ability in high school and on the SAT has better than a free ride through college, if he maintains that level of performance. But if you don't finish high school because of having to work, kids, etc. then you'll have trouble.
Last I checked there was only one university in the USA that refused to accept state money; somewhere in Illinois or Ohio, I think. Even those who don't get scholarships can get loans or state grants if they show financial hardship.
The question is why don't colleges maintain a high standard of education when all they have to do is say, "we don't want you or your money". And I'll not even go on about what college athletics do to the whole thing.
In general a GPA (Grade Point Average) is done this way:
A=4
B=3
C=2 ("average")
D=1
F=0
Add letter-grade-values and divide by number of grades.
Of course the scheme varies wildly. Some universities consider only some grades. Some high schools assign and additional point for "honors" course, etc.
SAT used to range from 200 to 800 on two sections, math and "verbal". They dumbed down the whole system a few years ago, so I don't know how much has changed.
Grades are also dumbed down over time, but not formally like the SAT.
I have to agree, this is pure FUD. Not only does XFree86 rarely crash, but it never generates a kernel oops, or any such thing. Maybe I'm in a mood today, but this ad really pissed me off and though I considered shopping around commercial X servers, I'm sure as hell not going to use this one and probably no other either. As for those few crashes...the usual culprit is a java app in netscape. (Whoever thought of using java to make a web page pretty or for any other thing that doesn't need it should go work for the company that makes this ad.)
:)
Lest I be too negative, I can proudly say that I've renedered my laptop inoperable through my own foolishness. (Actually, if I'd had a net connection at the time, I could have fixed it by remotely killing my client, and the X server would have been fine.) I must remember not to grab to keyboard and pointer asynchronously, or was it synchronously, when I don't process their input.
Thank you for this opportunity to rant.
Helium!
From my copy:
:)
-CITE-
35 USC Sec. 100 01/26/98
-EXPCITE-
TITLE 35 - PATENTS
PART II - PATENTABILITY OF INVENTIONS AND GRANT OF PATENTS
CHAPTER 10 - PATENTABILITY OF INVENTIONS
-HEAD-
Sec. 100. Definitions
-STATUTE-
When used in this title unless the context otherwise indicates -
(a) The term ''invention'' means invention or discovery.
(b) The term ''process'' means process, art or method, and
includes a new use of a known process, machine, manufacture,
composition of matter, or material.
(c) The terms ''United States'' and ''this country'' mean the
United States of America, its territories and possessions.
(d) The word ''patentee'' includes not only the patentee to whom
the patent was issued but also the successors in title to the
patentee.
-SOURCE-
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 797.)
-MISC1-
HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES
Paragraph (a) is added only to avoid repetition of the phrase
''invention or discovery'' and its derivatives throughout the
revised title. The present statutes use the phrase ''invention or
discovery'' and derivatives.
Paragraph (b) is noted under section 101.
Paragraphs (c) and (d) are added to avoid the use of long
expressions in various parts of the revised title.
I know no good reason why discoveries should be patentable. This was taken from the US House website. Hmm... maybe I can make a database and sue for patent or copyright infringement if anyone obeys the laws of the US.
OT: Does anyone recognize the tags they use? Is there a reader that makes sense of them?
Opera's text browser PNG is showing either tables or stylesheet formatting! This is a very good thing. Are lynx developers working on this?
And just a general note...
I'd rather GPL'ed software so I probably won't switch from lynx unless I switch to Opera from Netscape and their text browser is included. I'd much prefer an Xlib based GPL'ed browser. Are there any in the works? (Mozilla is not GPL) The w3c has a library ((L)GPL) for the guts of the `net communication; so with a proper renderer, the project is 'done'. Any takers?
This may be a wetware segfault, but...
Aren't intellectual property rights commercial rights? That is, rights to the sale of a good? I checked the US legal code and it does say that (without authority) making, using, offering to sell, and selling patented things are infringements of patents, but is this the way it _should_ be? I read somewhere that patent rights were only _supposed_ to cover the _sale_ of goods; as a matter of the theory of natural law/rights which the USA was founded upon.
I don't recall the history well enough, but Eli Whitney had patented the cotton gin and then tried to collect licensing fees from people who had seen one and privately built their own. The widespread copying for personal use was unstoppable either because it invalidated the patent (as obvious) or because the commercial right to the device didn't prohibit private construction and use.
This would obviously be a saving grace for free software since it is not sold, though service contracts or physical media are sold.
If they claim to be an internet service provider and restrict access to any part of the internet then sue or bring charges of fraud. The internet is the whole thing. There is no right to rewrite reality.
IANAL
I didn't see this mentioned in the other posts so . . .
A large database of papers, like xxx.lanl.gov, could be used by journals the same way sunsite.unc.edu and others are used by free software companies; or the same way other web articles are used by slashdot.
While anything meeting certain minimum guidelines like a format or content focus would be accepted by the database (by mirroring or linking), the established journals would provide selection and review. If you can't go through 1000 articles a day, you would go to your favorite portal which would provide a digest of rigorously selected articles.
Basically, the journals would be value-added resellers. (I hate that term, I think it's inaccurate.)
There are surely a variety of IP issues that would have to be worked out, and the journals and databases would need some compensation for server space, collection efforts, and review. But it shouldn't be too hard to work out; Cygnus, Slashdot and the for-profit Linux distributions are proofs-of-principle and good examples.
Each portal/journal could implement its own style of open review as well, and some might even link to articles and provide only commentary from their servers.
If the IP issues of such a database can be worked out, there are many business models that could spring up around it. The big open databases could be compensated by restricting HTTP-REFERRER to subscribing journals or people directly browsing the server. That might be too restrictive, or too easy to work around; I haven't run a web server, so I don't know what's possible or feasable - suggestions?
I was reading these just before this story popped up.n g t
http://www.bitlaw.com/internet/index.html
http://www.bitlaw.com/internet/linking.html
http://www.bitlaw.com/internet/webpage.html#linki
http://www.bitlaw.com/links/articles.html#Interne
http://www.patents.com/weblaw.sht#lo
http://www.bitlaw.com/hot/totalnews.html
Here's why I was reading about this:
http://libertyonline.hypermall.co m/copyright.html
And for more fun, view the source of this one:n tent.html
(extracted from a frameset)
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/4446/co
ESR goes to the Redmond campus, and now this!!!
--- disclaimer ---
This is a joke. This is only a joke. Had this been a real conspiracy theory the subject would have read "Clone!!!" and been followed by statements attesting to first-hand knowledge of a MS janitor's claim of creating the clone or disposing of the bodies and being fired for threatening to go public about those and the theft of GPL'ed genentic code.
--- end of disclaimer ---
Have a nice date!
Here are my guesses.
:) (Oops! MOV != MOE | LARRY | CURLY. Now, I'm a cow chip because my cache failed :( Please reinsert smoke. )
1) It's for system-on-a-chip integratation.
2) It's for a 'self-programming' chip; i.e., the circuits can be 'changed' after manufacturing. I reliable cache for a new instruction set would be very important. (Hi, I'm an x86. Now, I'm a SPARC. Now, I'm an Alpha!
Seriously though, I think there's a project at MIT like number 2. (FPGA ?)
Sorry if I'm incoherent, I just woke up.
Since JFK Jr. and family were reported missing and the popular news media have been *cough* *cough* 'reporting' on it, I've been waiting to hear through my favorite other sources (e.g. /.) that the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has been repealed. (For non-U.S.A.: 1st Amendment is freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition) I guess this and the other Wired headlines for today indicate how close they (congress) dare, since most of America is watching the sea-burial.
:)
So is this convenience, conspiracy, or coincidence?
Oh, yeah. M-x spook.
Historically, those with a good foundation in basic science are the first to say, "It can't be done". I can't remember how many times this has happened, but you'll find plenty of examples on a humorous-quote page.
Public policy? I'm not sure, though I have some idea, of what you mean to say. Ozone is a chemical and is studied by industries that use or produce it. Climatology, I honestly hadn't heard of that; how is it different from meteorology or geology? Ecology? Unless there have been some remarkable changes in that field, it is still a pseudo-science run by fascists or facist sympathizers. The 'Creation Scientists' aren't the only ones who fabricate 'science' to promote a political agenda. From what I can see, environmental regulation has largely distracted attention from improper _local_ dumping which destroys lives and property in an effort to 'save the planet'. It has also produced a systems of kickbacks and head-turning in waste disposal that has created more problems than simple enforcement of land rights would have fixed.
The banks in America are run by the federal gov't, and our currency is debased, so bad bank policies are another example of gov't meddling. There is some recourse through CBO's or credit unions, but you really have to shop around. (And sometimes even move or manage accounts across state lines, which the fed tries to prevent.)
Eeek. I thought the Slashdot Effect was just a focus of hits from all over the world, not one person, and not any abnormal (ping of death?) activity. If it's more than just multiple hits and individual e-mails (though from many individuals), please let me know and ignore my previous agreement.
It would increase my respect. Identity theft, fraud, defense of one's rights and honor are just the kind of things to "get all governmental about". If the gov't doesn't exist to protect individuals then what good is it?
I often wonder how many (if any) violations of individual rights perpetrated by Microsoft are ignored by focusing on the bogus anti-trust laws.
I agree; but reading that reminded me of the scene is "Robin Hood: Men in Tights" when a spectator at the archery contest says, "Let's give 'im the chop!"
Unfortunately !) my email sits comfortably behind a university firewall, so no spam for me so far.
Tim Berners-Lee was working at CERN doesn't mean the web had anything to do with high-energy research. The same motivation (communication of research data et al.) could have existed for any other research project. Similarly, that we currently devote much computing power to this doesn't mean that there is nothing else that could demand the same power. The first cyclotron was smaller than a cubic decimeter, IIRC, and anyone who knows what parts to get could probably find them in a hardware store; consider the nuclear reactor built for the University of Illinois (?) scavanger hunt.
If the same funding went to cosmic ray research, we might have developed, for example, floating cities, like in Empire Strikes Back, or a working space station to further that research. I think the idea in economics is 'opportunity cost'; what other things could have been done with the money is part of the cost.
That national labs have better technology than the technology industry is probably the best indictment of how much taxation has hindered the development and spread of technology. If these companies didn't have to spend so much on taxes, accountants to calculate them, their support staff, and lawyers and their support staff, they could devote those funds to lowering costs or further research.
Also, every dollar that gov't spend on research displaces more than a dollar of private funds. Basically the companies have to spend more on taxes and their calculation to give to the gov't, the gov't has to process this money (all the while using it) and then, after much has been leaked off to unnessesary bureaucracy, the money gets to the labs. Since the industries have less to spend on research and they've 'contributed' already, they spend far less than they would have before because they become 'free-riders' of a sort.
As for the medical research, the unhealthy influence of gov't on that should be clear. Cancers are far more common than AIDS, but which gets more funding? Much research, and looking around, indicates that the American diet is unhealthy. Gov't subsidies of various food industries artificially lower the cost of certain foods that would normally be less affordable and eaten less. By making toxic levels of these foods cheap, the gov't makes the population unhealthy and then asks for (nay, takes) more money to fix the problem it created. Al Capone would be so jealous.