Actually most recent biology books catagorize both as Canis Lupis. The domestic dog is a sub-species Canis Lupis Familiaris.
The mice analogy is very flawed. Dogs and Wolves are much more genetically similar that mice and humans. They can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. They also are willing to interbreed.
No one said that we evolved from chimps. What was said is we came from a common ancestor. What most likely happened is that early chimps and our early ancestors lived in slightly different eviornments and thus evolved into different species.
well scientifically speaking their species is the same... they have the same latin name for both wolves and dogs, with the dogs existing as a subspecies. Not everyone has accepted this new naming yet.
the only problem I have with this is that it's so hard to do. Not only do you have to be very familiar with the linux kernal, you also have to be familiar with the other source (in this case the SCO code). The biggest down side I see is that once you've found this person(s), they can no longer really be used to develop code for you because they're knowledge of both systems could easily lead to contamination.
Also, assuming IBM did in fact break the NDA, why would SCO be pouring over any source that IBM contributed. I wouldn't find it odd if they assumed that IBM was following the terms of the NDA and didn't audit that code closely.
Complete, fucking, idioacy. Afghanistan is no longer ruled by the Taliban, the government that al'Queda was a military branch of. Iraq is no longer ruled by Saddam Hussein, a brutal dictator personally responsible for over a million deaths. There has not been a single successful terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11.
Now it's ruled by a bunch of war lords who operate just like the mafia and have taken the heroin trade to new levels. Other than a small section of kabul there is no law an order. The people in the country probably believe we delivered them something much worse than the taliban.
jpeg2000 does have advantages. It provides higher quality compression and smaller file sizes. Now for the web, it's usefullness is debatable. But for things like digital camera's it has many advantages.
Wavelets are your friend, and the DCT is your enemy:)
how does that not include living costs? Sure there hotels are paid for when they're on the road, but they still have to keep a home somewhere. So that's rent/mortgage. Then there are income taxes and property taxes. Do they have a car at home, if so there's a payment and insurance. They still have all their bills at home to pay. The record companies also don't provide health insurance, and when you're buying it yourself it's quite expensive.
24,000 - 30,000 isn't good at all.
Re:The reason people steal DIDN'T music
on
PressPlay + Roxio?
·
· Score: 1
The polyphonic spree... you can probably buy their record from their website. you can also go to good records. That's a record store in dallas that the band actually owns. Beyond that most good indie record stores will carry it.
First, since this is a trade secret case we will never know what the code that SCO claims is stolen is, unless it is established in court that it is not a trade secret. My question is then if the court does up hold that the code is a stolen trade secret, what does linux do? SCO can't tell them what code to take out, because that would reveal their trade secret. Since linux is open source even if all the developers signed NDA's, a quick grep would show what code was removed and violate the trade secret. So, in the sort of situation what happens?
Second question. Lets say SCO did the smart thing here (I know it's a stretch, but lets pretend). They completly isolate their unix and linux groups. They know if any of their unix code ends up in linux they loose the copyright. They assume IBM does the same thing. IBM puts some of the unix code into linux. How is SCO supposed to know this? Their linux team doesn't know what the unix source looks like. This is the kind of dilemna that might start scarring people away from linux.
well, they're on atlantic, a major label. I was speaking of indie bands. But even so, if they make 6 thousand dollars each that's still going to equate to $24,000 - $30,000 a year, if they were to tour for a full year. That's not very good. Plus that's what they are slated to make. A few cancelled shows, a couple of places that don't sell out well, a flat tire here and there, someone getting sick. They could easily end up making much much less. They better hope they sell alot of CD's, because they aren't going to make enough to pay for recording their next disc, unless of course they go into atlantic's debt.
I just don't see the human body as being well designed. Me being an engineer can see many flaws in it. The same kind of flaws that occur when constantly adapting a device to do new tasks. For instance look at the Pentium IV chip. If some one had no knowledge of any of the previous x86 chips, one would say that it it a horrible design. But if you know the history, you'll undertand why it is designed the way it is and how it evolved into that.
I bet many machines could easily run for a hundred years if we let them... the problem is why let them when they're obsolete in 10 years.
I have no problem accepting that there could be a creator. I don't believe any human is capable of completly comprhending the begining of the universe unless they factor in a creator. The concepts of no time, no dimensions, etc. just don't work in our minds. What I have a problem with is the idea of the creator that religion portrays. Which leads to people using religion and faith to argue against things like physics, biology, and chemistry. Evolution happened. It might not have happened in exactly the same manner that we think it did, but it was pretty close.
Re:The reason people steal DIDN'T music
on
PressPlay + Roxio?
·
· Score: 1
The band I listed as an example doesn't have a record company (they put out there own records), and they only get played on KEXP (non commercial radio). It costs them $80,000 to start a tour. That's very hard to come up with unless you do have a record company behind you. The best way to support a band is to buy t-shirts and cd's at their concerts because that's the only way a good portion of your cash is going to go to them.
you can do it, if you play often enough and don't have to travel. But a small band from a place like dallas can't go on a large scale tour of the US and expect to make any money, unless they are selling lots of CD's and T-shirts on the tour.
The statistics say most music sharers are like you and myself. We here about a new band either by word of mouth, the radio, mtv2, much music, etc; and we download some music. We like it, so we get the CD. We like it so we get their past works and then discover similar artists. Every study I've seen says that most people who use file sharing to get MP3's actually buy more music then those who don't. It breaks down when you get people who download hundreds of songs a month. Of course those are the kind of people who are never going to pay for a service or a CD.
Of course the only ones saying the indies are clamoring is steve jobs, so you must take it with a grain of salt.
Also remember that they made a deal with the 5 largest record companies. Quite possibly they don't want any indies on the service and may have made it part of the deal.
Re:The reason people steal DIDN'T music
on
PressPlay + Roxio?
·
· Score: 1
Did you 90% of all bands loose money when they tour? The only way they don't is if they sell loads of T-shirts and CD's at their shows.
Imagine for example The Polyphonic Spree. I saw them last month, and it was one of the best shows I've ever seen. There are 26 people in the band. The all have instruments. They are from Dallas, TX. Imagine the cost it took to get them to seattle. Now imagine hotel bills and food bills for all those people. They play at a club that holds 1200 people if they are lucky. If they were to get 100% of the door charge they still only make $14400. Do you think that covers their expenses? The only ones who make money touring are the huge bands promoted heavily by the record labels. There are a few exceptions, but in general that is the rule.
NYC, London, Paris they seem to work well... So tell me, when you want to go somewhere and you drive how often do you think the finding a parking spot, parking, and then walking to the store you are going to more than equal the walk from the transit center?
Seattle's not perfect, but it is laid out fairly well. The bus system is adequate, but if we ever get some sort of rail it would be excelent. Every neighborhood is a self contained mini-city. Once you're in the neighborhood, you can walk to everything (Fremont, Wallingford, U-district, downtown, belltown, Capitol Hill, Queen Anne, Ballard, Greenlake, etc). But if you decide you need to go to another neighborhood, you can easily take the bus there and walk from shop to shop. You don't have to struggle with traffic and parking. Believe me, when I've had to drive somewhere the cost of parking, plus the trouble, plus the distance I am away from my destination makes transit a definate plus.
I'm not saying everyone get rid of there car. What I am saying is that the city should be designed around transit first and cars second. I have a car, I like it. When I have to go buy something big I drive it. When I go snowboarding I drive it. When I leave town I drive it. Other than that it sits and I take the bus.
You just proved you don't understand anything about cars. Station wagons and minivans are unibody construction, using lightweight parts. SUV's are frame on body contruction with heavier truck parts. They're always heavier. Plus they're less aerodynamic which causes them to need a bigger thirstier engine. Add to this the fact that the engine is designed to produce low end towing tourque, and you see why the wagon is by far the better pick.
that's why I said within walking distance or A SHORT TRANSIT TRIP away. If you read the fucking post you would understand that you could go anywhere with in the city. Although most people would come to love their neighborhood stores, I know that I have.
Your just being illogical. Statistaclly speaking, trucks have the worst safety record of any vehicle. Not to mention you are saying a crash is unavoidable. If you drove a car, you probably would never have to worry about a sever crash.
Don't give me any bullshit about being too tall to drive a car. I have an audi a4. It's a compact car. I'm 6'1". When I put the seat all the way back I can't reach the pedals.
Slashdot Mirror
Quick, which is closer: german shepard vs. chihuahua or german shepard vs. timber wolf? They're all the same species.
Actually most recent biology books catagorize both as Canis Lupis. The domestic dog is a sub-species Canis Lupis Familiaris.
The mice analogy is very flawed. Dogs and Wolves are much more genetically similar that mice and humans. They can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. They also are willing to interbreed.
No one said that we evolved from chimps. What was said is we came from a common ancestor. What most likely happened is that early chimps and our early ancestors lived in slightly different eviornments and thus evolved into different species.
I don't remeber us adding a kingdom any time recently. Now I do remeber us adding a new phyllum.
well scientifically speaking their species is the same... they have the same latin name for both wolves and dogs, with the dogs existing as a subspecies. Not everyone has accepted this new naming yet.
the only problem I have with this is that it's so hard to do. Not only do you have to be very familiar with the linux kernal, you also have to be familiar with the other source (in this case the SCO code). The biggest down side I see is that once you've found this person(s), they can no longer really be used to develop code for you because they're knowledge of both systems could easily lead to contamination.
Also, assuming IBM did in fact break the NDA, why would SCO be pouring over any source that IBM contributed. I wouldn't find it odd if they assumed that IBM was following the terms of the NDA and didn't audit that code closely.
So you think all the people who distribute Linux do a line by line audit of the source code before every release?
jpeg2000 does have advantages. It provides higher quality compression and smaller file sizes. Now for the web, it's usefullness is debatable. But for things like digital camera's it has many advantages.
:)
Wavelets are your friend, and the DCT is your enemy
how does that not include living costs? Sure there hotels are paid for when they're on the road, but they still have to keep a home somewhere. So that's rent/mortgage. Then there are income taxes and property taxes. Do they have a car at home, if so there's a payment and insurance. They still have all their bills at home to pay. The record companies also don't provide health insurance, and when you're buying it yourself it's quite expensive. 24,000 - 30,000 isn't good at all.
The polyphonic spree... you can probably buy their record from their website. you can also go to good records. That's a record store in dallas that the band actually owns. Beyond that most good indie record stores will carry it.
First, since this is a trade secret case we will never know what the code that SCO claims is stolen is, unless it is established in court that it is not a trade secret. My question is then if the court does up hold that the code is a stolen trade secret, what does linux do? SCO can't tell them what code to take out, because that would reveal their trade secret. Since linux is open source even if all the developers signed NDA's, a quick grep would show what code was removed and violate the trade secret. So, in the sort of situation what happens? Second question. Lets say SCO did the smart thing here (I know it's a stretch, but lets pretend). They completly isolate their unix and linux groups. They know if any of their unix code ends up in linux they loose the copyright. They assume IBM does the same thing. IBM puts some of the unix code into linux. How is SCO supposed to know this? Their linux team doesn't know what the unix source looks like. This is the kind of dilemna that might start scarring people away from linux.
Since the source to windows isn't open, no one other than microsoft and sco can really answer that question.
well, they're on atlantic, a major label. I was speaking of indie bands. But even so, if they make 6 thousand dollars each that's still going to equate to $24,000 - $30,000 a year, if they were to tour for a full year. That's not very good. Plus that's what they are slated to make. A few cancelled shows, a couple of places that don't sell out well, a flat tire here and there, someone getting sick. They could easily end up making much much less. They better hope they sell alot of CD's, because they aren't going to make enough to pay for recording their next disc, unless of course they go into atlantic's debt.
I just don't see the human body as being well designed. Me being an engineer can see many flaws in it. The same kind of flaws that occur when constantly adapting a device to do new tasks. For instance look at the Pentium IV chip. If some one had no knowledge of any of the previous x86 chips, one would say that it it a horrible design. But if you know the history, you'll undertand why it is designed the way it is and how it evolved into that.
I bet many machines could easily run for a hundred years if we let them... the problem is why let them when they're obsolete in 10 years.
I have no problem accepting that there could be a creator. I don't believe any human is capable of completly comprhending the begining of the universe unless they factor in a creator. The concepts of no time, no dimensions, etc. just don't work in our minds. What I have a problem with is the idea of the creator that religion portrays. Which leads to people using religion and faith to argue against things like physics, biology, and chemistry. Evolution happened. It might not have happened in exactly the same manner that we think it did, but it was pretty close.
The band I listed as an example doesn't have a record company (they put out there own records), and they only get played on KEXP (non commercial radio). It costs them $80,000 to start a tour. That's very hard to come up with unless you do have a record company behind you. The best way to support a band is to buy t-shirts and cd's at their concerts because that's the only way a good portion of your cash is going to go to them.
you can do it, if you play often enough and don't have to travel. But a small band from a place like dallas can't go on a large scale tour of the US and expect to make any money, unless they are selling lots of CD's and T-shirts on the tour.
The statistics say most music sharers are like you and myself. We here about a new band either by word of mouth, the radio, mtv2, much music, etc; and we download some music. We like it, so we get the CD. We like it so we get their past works and then discover similar artists. Every study I've seen says that most people who use file sharing to get MP3's actually buy more music then those who don't. It breaks down when you get people who download hundreds of songs a month. Of course those are the kind of people who are never going to pay for a service or a CD.
Of course the only ones saying the indies are clamoring is steve jobs, so you must take it with a grain of salt.
Also remember that they made a deal with the 5 largest record companies. Quite possibly they don't want any indies on the service and may have made it part of the deal.
Did you 90% of all bands loose money when they tour? The only way they don't is if they sell loads of T-shirts and CD's at their shows.
Imagine for example The Polyphonic Spree. I saw them last month, and it was one of the best shows I've ever seen. There are 26 people in the band. The all have instruments. They are from Dallas, TX. Imagine the cost it took to get them to seattle. Now imagine hotel bills and food bills for all those people. They play at a club that holds 1200 people if they are lucky. If they were to get 100% of the door charge they still only make $14400. Do you think that covers their expenses? The only ones who make money touring are the huge bands promoted heavily by the record labels. There are a few exceptions, but in general that is the rule.
NYC, London, Paris they seem to work well... So tell me, when you want to go somewhere and you drive how often do you think the finding a parking spot, parking, and then walking to the store you are going to more than equal the walk from the transit center?
Seattle's not perfect, but it is laid out fairly well. The bus system is adequate, but if we ever get some sort of rail it would be excelent. Every neighborhood is a self contained mini-city. Once you're in the neighborhood, you can walk to everything (Fremont, Wallingford, U-district, downtown, belltown, Capitol Hill, Queen Anne, Ballard, Greenlake, etc). But if you decide you need to go to another neighborhood, you can easily take the bus there and walk from shop to shop. You don't have to struggle with traffic and parking. Believe me, when I've had to drive somewhere the cost of parking, plus the trouble, plus the distance I am away from my destination makes transit a definate plus.
I'm not saying everyone get rid of there car. What I am saying is that the city should be designed around transit first and cars second. I have a car, I like it. When I have to go buy something big I drive it. When I go snowboarding I drive it. When I leave town I drive it. Other than that it sits and I take the bus.
You just proved you don't understand anything about cars. Station wagons and minivans are unibody construction, using lightweight parts. SUV's are frame on body contruction with heavier truck parts. They're always heavier. Plus they're less aerodynamic which causes them to need a bigger thirstier engine. Add to this the fact that the engine is designed to produce low end towing tourque, and you see why the wagon is by far the better pick.
that's why I said within walking distance or A SHORT TRANSIT TRIP away. If you read the fucking post you would understand that you could go anywhere with in the city. Although most people would come to love their neighborhood stores, I know that I have.
Your just being illogical. Statistaclly speaking, trucks have the worst safety record of any vehicle. Not to mention you are saying a crash is unavoidable. If you drove a car, you probably would never have to worry about a sever crash.
Don't give me any bullshit about being too tall to drive a car. I have an audi a4. It's a compact car. I'm 6'1". When I put the seat all the way back I can't reach the pedals.
Really... I wasn't aware that the London Underground or NYC subway were failures.