Nuclear is OK as an intermediate. But Uranium is still a finite mined resource. It makes sense to look to renewables as much as possible. They are the only long term energy solution. There's more than enough renewable energy in the environment to serve everybody. It's just a case of having the will to harness it.
I'm afraid it's contrary to the first law of robotics. Sorry about that.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Here's a novel idea. How about issuing everyone in the country with an equal share of the country's resources. And not a tradable share, as they'll just end up back in the hands of 1%. A share issued upon birth, thus diluting the value of everyones share, but destroyed upon death thus restoring value to everyone else's share.
It dates back a lot further than that. The Luddites were destroying machines back in the 1810s on the basis that the machines would put them out of a job.
The framing of the question is wrong. People don't necessarily need jobs. Certainly not repetitive ones, boring or drudge ones such as a machine might replace. What they need is the means to put a roof over their heads, care for their families and to have an equitable standard of living.
If a machine replaces a boring or drudge job, that's unquestionably a good thing. If people are struggling to have a decent life because they don't have means, then society needs to change and deal with that.
The Register has investigative reporters and aggressive editors. If they were able to diagnose the problems in other companies data systems, how come they were so blind to what was happening in their own organisation.
And how crass not to accept blame as an organisation, but to put the blame on an individual employee. They would ridicule any other company that tried to deflect blame this way.
This isn't as though they are somehow more virtuous that other companies that they've attacked for the same thing. 3,521 people know that The Register leaked that mailing list. And it's their legal responsibility to report their fuck up to the ICO.
They couldn't do anything other than report themselves to the ICO given that they are based in England. Or face legal repercussions for not doing so. It doesn't change the significance of the summary one bit.
So you said. Your assumption is that you bought the very same memory for 1/4 the price. Your assumption may be wrong.
Update. I've just been to Crucial's site. I've compared the memory they recommend for Mac Pros with what Apple Store sells. The Crucial memory isn't even the same spec. OK, time's moved on since you bought yours from them, but it confirms that they don't necessarily sell the same thing that you're getting from Apple.
Whilst Apple IS the most expensive source for memory, and shopping around is a good idea. It definitely becomes caveat emptor when you do. The saving that you make may not wholly be in Apple's markup, but also in the competitor cutting corners.
I like to be original. Actually I was just commenting on the GPs $800 vs $200. Since then I've been to the Apple Store, and to Crucial web-sites. And I've discovered that the memory that Crucial recommend for Mac Pros isn't even the same spec as Apple recommends. For sure that means its cheap in the sense of not as good, in addition to being a much lower price.
Crucial is a manufacturer for Apple. Same stuff, I just bought it farther up the supply line.
So you said. Your assumption is that you bought the very same memory for 1/4 the price. Your assumption may be wrong.
All I'm saying is that when I used to do my own car maintainance, a task for which I was no expert but could get by, If something I couldn't explain went wrong, one of the things I'd look at would be the last thing I myself had fitted. The computer will still operate with the old configuration, unless you disposed of the original memory. So what have you to lose?
Amazingly doubtful.
Hey, it's up to you if you don't want to try something free before spending money. My main suggestion was to get a Mac store to take a look. Preferably a genius bar at an Apple Store. And you don't even respond to that.
You don't actually seem that interested in solving the problem. Just proving to us and your GF that Macs are a bad choice. Me, I'd be more interesting in fixing the computer that my GF chose than converting her to my way of thinking.
First party memory is from Apple. From anybody else it's 3rd party. Apple apparently charge $800, he bought it for $200. That is by definition cheap 3rd party memory.
He already priced a repair, it's the same cost as building a top end gaming rig from new components...Except his time, considering he already knows what the problem is..
He said: "Since normal diagnostics haven't shown anything, and it's out of Apple's warranty, I have to figure it out on my own... If I want to pick up parts to experiment with, I'll be spending about $1,000. I'd probably buy a new PS first. Knowing how things turn out, that won't be the fault. Even if I buy both to test, there's still a good chance it's something else, like a flaky CPU." That isn't "pricing a repair". That's speculating on things that might be wrong. He's suggesting buying parts to "experiment with" for Christs' sake. He most certainly doesn't "know what his problem is".
Even us neck-beareded, deoderant-fearing, hippy Linux users know that our time isn't free.
But you do appear to jump to conclusions without bothering to read all of a post. Or possibly since you didn't understand the first line, it's a comprehension problem.
So you say you fitted some cheap third party memory, and now the machine is overheating. I have to say I'd try removing the memory before buying a new power supply.
And if you're really at the stage where you can't diagnose the fault and you feel your next step is to buy expensive parts on a trial and error basis, then I'd suggest you probably want to get a Mac shop to take a look at it. Personally I'd try the genius bar at an Apple Store. They'll diagnose your problem and give you a price for repair. Then you can decide whether its worth it. At worse you'll have a diagnosis from a professional that'll tell you whether you should replace that PSU or some other part. And the diagnosis part won't cost you anything.
How do you support a legacy? AFAICT a legacy is an inanimate thing and would neither know nor care what you do. Steve's dead; perhaps it's time to let your hate die too. It's not affecting anyone but yourself.
Cost is at best an implementation detail. At worst an excuse for 1% of the population to live a life of luxury, and having whatever they want, whilst the rest work to keep it that way.
The US has the resources to give higher education to as many people who are willing and able. If the current distribution of playing tokens and rules of the game provide an excuse not to do that, then that's a problem with the implementation of the society. It's not a real reason not to educate people.
The concept of guilt, and the presumption of innocence are from the world of criminal law. This is civil law. It's both acceptable and usual to speculate on which side will win a civil case.
The goal to make sure those who have the drive to pursue education can do so is not the same as the goal to make sure as many people as possible receive a higher education.
No indeed. But it is the same as making sure as many people as possible have the opportunity to receive a higher education. Which is what I want. I want education of those who are willing and able without any restriction of financial means.
As for education being for life, the same can be said of any personal endeavor. Education for the sake of its overall effect on your life and outlook is really no different than engaging in hang gliding or stock car racing for their own sake.
If they are persued for excellence there's an argument for that. For sure if someone has the ability to be an exceptional athlete for example, then that's probably a better way for him to spend his self development time than in academic education. But you picked hang-gliding and stock car racing to sound trivial. And for sure if we're just talking recreation, it's the equivalent of reading trashy novels compared with doing an english literature degree.
If one questions how these intangible benefits work, the topic shifts to increased earnings potential.
Not with me it doesn't. The way education improves a person is reward in itself. It doesn't need the crass comparison of potential earnings. Particularly as plenty of worthwhile ways of spending a lifetime don't pay well.
From what I have seen the students themselves are devaluing their own educational quality, complaining about too much work etc.
Yeah, right. Because we NEVER complained about too much work!
Look at the engineering curriculum from the 1940s compared to the 1980s compared to today. It is depressing.
There will have been things taught in the 1940s that aren't taught anymore. There will also of course be things that are taught now that weren't taught then. Things change.
In the UK, ever year, there are complaints in the popular press that High school exam standards are slipping. (GCSE and A Level) On a couple of times when I've actually seen the two properly compared, it simply isn't true.
Certainly my own contact with high school students is that they work far harder than we used to.
So I'm a better person driving a gasoline tanker, because I came away from university with a 3.43 GPA?
No. You're a better person callled Spugglefink because you had a good education. A person is not his job.
You know it's the most mind-numbingly boring and crass thing to do when asking about a person to say "and what is he?" meaning what's his job. Or when meeting to say "And what do you do?" meaning what is your job.
We're not worker bees. We're people. The most interesting thing about a person is not how he earns his money. "Fred is an engineer working for General Motors". Boring. "Fred spends his weekends rebuilding a steam engine." Now I'm interested.
I'm sorry if you've got crass parents that judge you by your job and think that's the reason they paid for an education. But nobody is perfect.
No, I don't mean that. And indeed that's not what happens in state run universities elsewhere in the world. Quite the contrary in fact - the universities are often hotbeds of counter incumbent party thinking, Including the academic staff.
Who says Microsoft isn't willing to take it to court? More than 50% of Android manufacturers have settled, which means they believe Microsoft WILL take it to court. There is no other reason to settle.
The've fallen one by one. I can quite believe that Motorola will be able to avoid payment, because they have a huge stack of mobile patents of their own. And these things are generally sorted out by size of stack of patents. Barnes & Noble by the same reason have no chance of winning. They haven't settled yet, but they probably will. It'll cost them far more to go through court.
Unless, of course, you believe that all work should be paid at exactly the same rate.
My point, made elsewhere in this thread is that higher education is not about producing workers. Education is for life, not something to please potential employers. If a person chooses to use a degree to advance their prospects in a particular profession, then good for them. But thinking the other way around - that degrees are only for getting into a job, is wrong headed.
Everyone deserves the opportunity to get a degree, regardless of whether they end up in a job that doesn't require it.
Those who are not able and willing to perform at a higher level must necessarily accept less.
Actually I'm the one who's advocating that university education should be on the basis of who is most able and willing to do it. NOT based on who can afford it. Nor on what arbitrary set of skills employers value this year.
Then let me correct: The lawsuits are over hardware, not the OS.
Still wrong. The lawsuits relate to companies shipping phones. The phones have hardware and software. The patent infringements that we know about are software. Android.
Your original comment, "Android the Free OS, heh heh" is no less misguided. I won't go so far as to say "stupid" as you have, since you're not a stupid fellow. But your comment was somewhat high and wide of the point.
It's absolutely on the button. Android is not free in either sense of the word.
Slashdot Mirror
Nuclear is OK as an intermediate. But Uranium is still a finite mined resource. It makes sense to look to renewables as much as possible. They are the only long term energy solution. There's more than enough renewable energy in the environment to serve everybody. It's just a case of having the will to harness it.
I'm afraid it's contrary to the first law of robotics. Sorry about that.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Here's a novel idea. How about issuing everyone in the country with an equal share of the country's resources. And not a tradable share, as they'll just end up back in the hands of 1%. A share issued upon birth, thus diluting the value of everyones share, but destroyed upon death thus restoring value to everyone else's share.
That seems fair.
It dates back a lot further than that. The Luddites were destroying machines back in the 1810s on the basis that the machines would put them out of a job.
The framing of the question is wrong. People don't necessarily need jobs. Certainly not repetitive ones, boring or drudge ones such as a machine might replace. What they need is the means to put a roof over their heads, care for their families and to have an equitable standard of living.
If a machine replaces a boring or drudge job, that's unquestionably a good thing. If people are struggling to have a decent life because they don't have means, then society needs to change and deal with that.
It's funny that ANY ONE here is defending this sort of nonsense.
Who's defending it? I'm just describing it.
The upload to Pastebin is fake. Trolling is very much in the spirit of El Reg.
Well there's that. And also the fact that their main assert is Paul Merton, and he couldn't stand the sight of Angus.
The Register has investigative reporters and aggressive editors. If they were able to diagnose the problems in other companies data systems, how come they were so blind to what was happening in their own organisation.
And how crass not to accept blame as an organisation, but to put the blame on an individual employee. They would ridicule any other company that tried to deflect blame this way.
This isn't as though they are somehow more virtuous that other companies that they've attacked for the same thing. 3,521 people know that The Register leaked that mailing list. And it's their legal responsibility to report their fuck up to the ICO.
They couldn't do anything other than report themselves to the ICO given that they are based in England. Or face legal repercussions for not doing so. It doesn't change the significance of the summary one bit.
So you said. Your assumption is that you bought the very same memory for 1/4 the price. Your assumption may be wrong.
Update. I've just been to Crucial's site. I've compared the memory they recommend for Mac Pros with what Apple Store sells. The Crucial memory isn't even the same spec. OK, time's moved on since you bought yours from them, but it confirms that they don't necessarily sell the same thing that you're getting from Apple.
Whilst Apple IS the most expensive source for memory, and shopping around is a good idea. It definitely becomes caveat emptor when you do. The saving that you make may not wholly be in Apple's markup, but also in the competitor cutting corners.
I like to be original. Actually I was just commenting on the GPs $800 vs $200. Since then I've been to the Apple Store, and to Crucial web-sites. And I've discovered that the memory that Crucial recommend for Mac Pros isn't even the same spec as Apple recommends. For sure that means its cheap in the sense of not as good, in addition to being a much lower price.
Crucial is a manufacturer for Apple. Same stuff, I just bought it farther up the supply line.
So you said. Your assumption is that you bought the very same memory for 1/4 the price. Your assumption may be wrong.
All I'm saying is that when I used to do my own car maintainance, a task for which I was no expert but could get by, If something I couldn't explain went wrong, one of the things I'd look at would be the last thing I myself had fitted. The computer will still operate with the old configuration, unless you disposed of the original memory. So what have you to lose?
Amazingly doubtful.
Hey, it's up to you if you don't want to try something free before spending money. My main suggestion was to get a Mac store to take a look. Preferably a genius bar at an Apple Store. And you don't even respond to that.
You don't actually seem that interested in solving the problem. Just proving to us and your GF that Macs are a bad choice. Me, I'd be more interesting in fixing the computer that my GF chose than converting her to my way of thinking.
Crucial is not cheap 3rd party memory
First party memory is from Apple. From anybody else it's 3rd party. Apple apparently charge $800, he bought it for $200. That is by definition cheap 3rd party memory.
He already priced a repair, it's the same cost as building a top end gaming rig from new components...Except his time, considering he already knows what the problem is..
He said:
"Since normal diagnostics haven't shown anything, and it's out of Apple's warranty, I have to figure it out on my own... If I want to pick up parts to experiment with, I'll be spending about $1,000. I'd probably buy a new PS first. Knowing how things turn out, that won't be the fault. Even if I buy both to test, there's still a good chance it's something else, like a flaky CPU."
That isn't "pricing a repair". That's speculating on things that might be wrong. He's suggesting buying parts to "experiment with" for Christs' sake. He most certainly doesn't "know what his problem is".
Even us neck-beareded, deoderant-fearing, hippy Linux users know that our time isn't free.
But you do appear to jump to conclusions without bothering to read all of a post. Or possibly since you didn't understand the first line, it's a comprehension problem.
So you say you fitted some cheap third party memory, and now the machine is overheating. I have to say I'd try removing the memory before buying a new power supply.
And if you're really at the stage where you can't diagnose the fault and you feel your next step is to buy expensive parts on a trial and error basis, then I'd suggest you probably want to get a Mac shop to take a look at it. Personally I'd try the genius bar at an Apple Store. They'll diagnose your problem and give you a price for repair. Then you can decide whether its worth it. At worse you'll have a diagnosis from a professional that'll tell you whether you should replace that PSU or some other part. And the diagnosis part won't cost you anything.
How do you support a legacy? AFAICT a legacy is an inanimate thing and would neither know nor care what you do. Steve's dead; perhaps it's time to let your hate die too. It's not affecting anyone but yourself.
Cost is at best an implementation detail. At worst an excuse for 1% of the population to live a life of luxury, and having whatever they want, whilst the rest work to keep it that way.
The US has the resources to give higher education to as many people who are willing and able. If the current distribution of playing tokens and rules of the game provide an excuse not to do that, then that's a problem with the implementation of the society. It's not a real reason not to educate people.
The concept of guilt, and the presumption of innocence are from the world of criminal law. This is civil law. It's both acceptable and usual to speculate on which side will win a civil case.
The goal to make sure those who have the drive to pursue education can do so is not the same as the goal to make sure as many people as possible receive a higher education.
No indeed. But it is the same as making sure as many people as possible have the opportunity to receive a higher education. Which is what I want. I want education of those who are willing and able without any restriction of financial means.
As for education being for life, the same can be said of any personal endeavor. Education for the sake of its overall effect on your life and outlook is really no different than engaging in hang gliding or stock car racing for their own sake.
If they are persued for excellence there's an argument for that. For sure if someone has the ability to be an exceptional athlete for example, then that's probably a better way for him to spend his self development time than in academic education. But you picked hang-gliding and stock car racing to sound trivial. And for sure if we're just talking recreation, it's the equivalent of reading trashy novels compared with doing an english literature degree.
If one questions how these intangible benefits work, the topic shifts to increased earnings potential.
Not with me it doesn't. The way education improves a person is reward in itself. It doesn't need the crass comparison of potential earnings. Particularly as plenty of worthwhile ways of spending a lifetime don't pay well.
From what I have seen the students themselves are devaluing their own educational quality, complaining about too much work etc.
Yeah, right. Because we NEVER complained about too much work!
Look at the engineering curriculum from the 1940s compared to the 1980s compared to today. It is depressing.
There will have been things taught in the 1940s that aren't taught anymore. There will also of course be things that are taught now that weren't taught then. Things change.
In the UK, ever year, there are complaints in the popular press that High school exam standards are slipping. (GCSE and A Level) On a couple of times when I've actually seen the two properly compared, it simply isn't true.
Certainly my own contact with high school students is that they work far harder than we used to.
So I'm a better person driving a gasoline tanker, because I came away from university with a 3.43 GPA?
No. You're a better person callled Spugglefink because you had a good education. A person is not his job.
You know it's the most mind-numbingly boring and crass thing to do when asking about a person to say "and what is he?" meaning what's his job. Or when meeting to say "And what do you do?" meaning what is your job.
We're not worker bees. We're people. The most interesting thing about a person is not how he earns his money. "Fred is an engineer working for General Motors". Boring. "Fred spends his weekends rebuilding a steam engine." Now I'm interested.
I'm sorry if you've got crass parents that judge you by your job and think that's the reason they paid for an education. But nobody is perfect.
No, I don't mean that. And indeed that's not what happens in state run universities elsewhere in the world. Quite the contrary in fact - the universities are often hotbeds of counter incumbent party thinking, Including the academic staff.
I'm afraid you don't know any better.
Who says Microsoft isn't willing to take it to court? More than 50% of Android manufacturers have settled, which means they believe Microsoft WILL take it to court. There is no other reason to settle.
The've fallen one by one. I can quite believe that Motorola will be able to avoid payment, because they have a huge stack of mobile patents of their own. And these things are generally sorted out by size of stack of patents. Barnes & Noble by the same reason have no chance of winning. They haven't settled yet, but they probably will. It'll cost them far more to go through court.
More people having degrees doesn't mean the people who have degrees are less educated.
Unless, of course, you believe that all work should be paid at exactly the same rate.
My point, made elsewhere in this thread is that higher education is not about producing workers. Education is for life, not something to please potential employers. If a person chooses to use a degree to advance their prospects in a particular profession, then good for them. But thinking the other way around - that degrees are only for getting into a job, is wrong headed.
Everyone deserves the opportunity to get a degree, regardless of whether they end up in a job that doesn't require it.
Those who are not able and willing to perform at a higher level must necessarily accept less.
Actually I'm the one who's advocating that university education should be on the basis of who is most able and willing to do it. NOT based on who can afford it. Nor on what arbitrary set of skills employers value this year.
Then let me correct: The lawsuits are over hardware, not the OS.
Still wrong. The lawsuits relate to companies shipping phones. The phones have hardware and software. The patent infringements that we know about are software. Android.
Your original comment, "Android the Free OS, heh heh" is no less misguided. I won't go so far as to say "stupid" as you have, since you're not a stupid fellow. But your comment was somewhat high and wide of the point.
It's absolutely on the button. Android is not free in either sense of the word.