A traditional broadsword would NOT weigh 40-50 pounds, but in face, is closer to the 5-10you suggested for this high-tech sword. The heavier end is usually about 1 lb. per foot, with many being even lighter than that.
Something about your statement makes me thing you've never in your life picked up a 3 foot long broadsword. I have. I've weighed them. The specific one I was looking at weighted 28lbs and was considered light for the collection. The only 10 lb sword there was a rapier.
Much of a broadswords power comes from its weight, with the strike being assited by gravity. Although a lighter weapon would be easer to wield, it would require morestrength to strike with the same power as a heaver weapon.
This is true, but it was mostly necessary for traditional broadswords because they were more like 3ft long crowbars than blades. They weren't exactly razor sharp. If this blade is sharp enough to shear through metal with minimal force then the weight can be reduced to allow for faster strikes. Also, speed breeds power. The faster you move the weapon the more power it will have behind it at the point of impact. I imagine there is a point where the weight is balanced out to provide maximum impact and maximum speed. I'm hoping they will use some of the technology available to locate that point and design the weapon accordingly. It might end up being 20lbs, or 15, or maybe the traditional 40-50lb weight IS optimal. But it would be interesting to know how they plan on determining the weight if they really are using as much of our advanced tech as possible in the creation of the blade.
I didn't see this in the article, but I wonder if they are planning on making it weigh 40 - 50 lbs the way a traditional broadsword would, or plan on using the technology available to cut the weight down to 5-10lbs or even less. That would make one hell of a devestating hand to hand weapon.....
Personally I'd love to see Ewoks. More specifically I'd love to see Ewoks carve Jar Jar apart and eat him. Preferably in a huge orgy of bloody screaming and burning flesh and spears and cutting and whatnot....
The problem is that the law currently doesn't recognize free software and places the same requirements on all software. IMO people who take money for software should be obligated to provide a money-back warranty. People who give software away should not be required to provide a warranty. The problem comes when somebody sells free software, as in a distribution. They can be made to pay customers back, and then can turn around and sue the developer to recover their damages. I want to protect that developer when it's free software. Thanks
Hrmmm. I'd have to agree with that. A company that takes a piece of free software, packages it, and resells it should not be able to sue the developer of that software if they are required to provide a warranty. It just means that they will have to (Horror! Tragedy!) inspect the code themselves to make sure it doesn't have any horrible bugs in it. The developer should always be protected, just as a regular corporation can't hire a couple of programmers, have them write some code, then sue them if the code breaks. They can fire them, but they can't sue them for damages unless they can prove it was malicious, then it becomes a criminal affair.... So yeah, I have to agree that the developer should be protected from retribution by companies which are profitting from code that the developer gave away for free.
The problem is that UCITA requires warranties in some cases and prohibits contracts that waive the warranty. Then we have the question of whether or not our licenses are contracts, but we are on real thin ice there. I am talking with an attorney who assures me there really is a problem. I can put you in touch with the attorney if you want some assurance that I know what I'm talking about.
Thanks
Let me see if I properly understand the situation here. UCITA would require warranties on free software, but not on purchased software? If that is not the case, and it would require warranties on both then what's the problem? MSFT would immediately fail because it can't garauntee the operation of its OS under anything more strenuous than 100% clean, no load testing. If it is lopsided and would only require it for free software then I'd have to say that's pretty clearly an anti-competitive piece of legislation and could be struck down rather easily. I personally wouldn't mind someone forcing all of the big commercial software houses to garauntee their product. They might actually turn out something bug free.... If my view of this is completely wrong please let me know. But as I see it this isn't a new horrible thing, it's just the same horrible UCITA that needs to be gotten rid of, and we already knew that.
I'm not sure I agree that it's actually so terribly smart of a thing to do. I mean, the guy is planning on going 60 miles into the atmosphere. NASA supposedly defines space as starting at 62 miles up. What happens if his already rough-sounding calculations are off by a couple of percent, and he ends up in space for real? Spend the next 30 seconds desperately trying to formulate an atmospheric re-entry plan? (Make sure Gary Sinese is on call...)
The Article Said:
Walker figures the peak of his trajectory would be about 160,000 feet, or 30 miles above Earth.
He has about a 30 mile margin of error. So I don't think he's got that much to worry about.
And you were talking about work, not home. Is this really your very first computer at work? In 2000? No wonder they almost fired you.
No, I was not talking about work dumbass. I was talking about my home machine. Yeesh... It's a rather long story but someone compromised my home machine and used it to attack someone, when I logged into my home machine from work to get some work done it got traced back to there and they called the company I work for.
Not to flame, but... From somebody you know who has as secure box and a CD burner?
Hrrmmm... Let me see.... That would be no one. I don't know anyone who is running RH in my area that would be willing to burn me a CD of anything. So what am I left to do? Leave my computer sitting turned off and unplugged? Switch back to Win98 (At least that never got cracked in to)? No. I turn the thing on, plug it in and start getting patches. But oh horror of horrors, I don't have an infinite amount of free time and happen to have to actually go out and DO something in the middle of that. So my box gets left unsecure for a couple of days. Tragedy beyond belief....
Yeesh. That shouldn't be a concern for newbies. What about those newbies who don't constantly follow slashdot and bugtraq and etc.. etc.. etc..? How are they supposed to know that when they isntall this thing it's going to leave their system open to anyone and everyone who wants to waltz in and screw around with them? It's not really RHs fault if someone knows their system is insecure and fails to patch it in time. But if they don't have a huge warning in the manual or on the box (I didn't see any) that says 'THIS SYSTEM IS ABOUT AS SECURE AS WET TOILET PAPER!' then they are at fault when someone wanted to try linux out gets it installed, gets rooted, and then gets in trouble because someone was doing something from his machine.
You get them from RetHat's site. Using a machine that is secure. And put them on a floppy. Duh.
Oh gee yes, I'll just fire up this SECOND computer I have laying over here that just happens to have a secure install of RH on it already. Silly me, why didn't I think of that.... We don't all have multiple linux boxen strewn about our homes.
I was wondering, everyone is so eager to prove that Napster isn't simply a means of pirateing music, so why hasn't anyone taken a bunch of political speeches, presidential debates, etc... that are available on tape and put them into.mp3 format. Then you could propgate them throughout napster etc... Then someone would be using napster for an educational purpose. You could even justify it to your college admins, 'I have this poli-sci test next week and I need to find the bush-clinton debate from 1992, I HAVE to be able to use napster!' Really that's not a half bad idea... I wonder how many I can find... and what's the best way to encode a tape without really screwing the quality...?
Why did you connect your Linux box to the net knowing that you still had security holes to patch?
There would be the issue of obtaining the aforementioned patches. I couldn't find any 'Complete up to the minute RedHat 6.0 Patch CD' for sale anywhere. So I had to download and apply all of the ones I needed. They had to come from somewhere. Where would YOU Suggest I get them?
I hope that AOL's defense of "it is user-configurable" gets tossed - it would set a nice precedent of companies being responsible for the default configuration of their software (can we sue MS for all the virii propagated by poor Outlook configurations?).
Yeah, then I could sue RedHat for their default installation being insecure since it almost lost me my job in the 3 days it took me to get all of the upgrades and patches applied that I needed. Yeesh.... It's not RedHat's fault that someone found my open system before I finished patching all of the known security problems.
Again people are making the same mistake, they say that genetic treatments will cure everything, ignoring other factors such as the environment. I agree that it has very big potential, but we should be more cautious before making such statements.
Show me who is saying this is a cure all for everything? Everyone is saying it has huge beneficial possiblity, and could mean the end of many diseases and defects. Those statements are true. It COULD be. Radiation has done a lot of good in treating things like cancer. It didn't cure it all, but it helped a lot. And if someone had said, 'Well, it didn't cure everything, so lets just forget about it.' we'd be worse off for it. I have yet to see one statement to the effect that this is a complete cure all for disease and defect.
This really is a minor issue which can and will be easily solved by the free market as long as people do something constructive about it (such as changing ISP if they are not happy) rather than trying to restrict the freedoms ISPs Just because YOU don't like what they offer doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to offer it.
I absolutely agree, I was just explaining why the lawsuit won't immediately be laughed out of court, as much as it might deserve that fate.
Inter-species transfer of genetic materal so enable children to do things that God never intended them to do? This may seem somewhat farfetched, but the hubris of scientists and the greed of corporations guarantees that all this, and more, will happen, and sooner than you'd think.
Trust me, if God doesn't intend for it to be done, then it won't happen. But if you believe in God, then you believe he put us here to have dominion over the earth and all of its creatures. Well, we're one of its creatures, so we have free reign to improve or destroy ourselves as we choose. Now yes, complete free reign to tinker with peoples genetic code just for kicks might be a bad thing. But controlled genetic experimentation can be nothing but a good thing in the long run. Turning everyone into clones is in no one's best interest. Heck, making everyone immortal is a pretty BAD idea too considering. I'm not even for increasing the overall lifespan of humanity right now. We really need to expand off of this planet before we do anything that would increase the population dramatically.... But back to the point at hand, yes there are potential problems with genetic engineering, but there are also great potential benefits. You must risk the one to achieve the other, that's the way life is.
It seems like alot of people see genetics as a panacea for all human ills. However this overlooks the fact that the environment is just as important as genetics. In some respects, the attention that whole gene therapy is getting resembles the hype that surrounded radiation in the early 20th century when radiation was going to cure anything and everything.
Well we bloody well have to start somewhere now don't we?! Geez, be patient, they've really just started looking into genetics, if it takes another hundred years to figure out how it all works we'll still be doing good. Yeesh, No one is claiming this is the be all end all of medicine, but it's a damn good step in the right direction for understanding how our bodies work.
Honestly, i don't see how having to look at an anoying popup advert is any basis for a lawsuit
Well, if you are on AOL there is a good chance you are paying by the hour. That means that if it takes 3 extra seconds per popup add to load, and another 2 seconds to close it and get back to where you wanted to be, you've lost 5 seconds. So after 12 popup adds you've lost a minute. If you have to do that with say 24 popup adds a day you're losing 2 minutes a day, after a month you've lost an hour of time by being forced to close their popup ads. Also, the extra traffic reduces the overall performance of your connection. These may seem like really tiny petty things, and I think they are as well, but people ARE able to show damages, no matter how minute, by these popup ads, so they have a case.
hmmm, another fad, just like pogs, and magic cards, and then beanie babies and finally pokemon, do i sense a pattern ??
Oddly enough Magic has neither disappeared nor declined in popularity. It is rapidly becoming the premier intelectual sport of the world attracting spectators and players from over 50 different countries. The M:TG national and world competitions are regularly broadcast on ESPN2 and as rapidly as the older players are growing out of it new players are coming in. Admittedly a lot of us can't stand the way the game is going in recent years, but we still enjoy the game as much as ever. I doubt it will die out any more than Poker or Chess did. Even if WotC goes out of business and stops printing new sets the players will still enjoy the game, will still play it, and the Duelist Convocation will probably still hold huge tournaments.
I like my SUV with V8 power just fine. And yes, I want to make sure I have way more weight than you. As far as I'm concerned, it's survival of the biggest.
Well if you people in SUVs didn't drive like FUCKING MORONS that wouldn't be a problem. I moved from Georgia to Maryland a year and a half ago, and it's like no one up here has any idea what a turn signal is for. I see people backing out of their driveways into the street without even looking. 7/10 people talking on their cellphone while driving. People weaving in and out of traffic like madmen. And a lot of the time it's people in bigass Vans, SUVs, and Trucks. Now, up here in the middle of the city, with their sparkly clean Dodge Ram 1500 that takes up 2 parking places, they can't possibly need that kind of vehicle. I've only seen 2 trucks actually carrying anything while I've been here and one of those was a smaller toyota. We need to move towards smaller vehicles, a small toyota truck is enough to haul anything the suburbanites want to carry. A Honda hatchback will carry 5 people easily, if you need more than that get a station wagon. I own a tiny ass little Geo Metro convertible. I'm getting tired of these big black SUVs cutting me off without signalling and changing lines as if I don't exist!!
To Americans this may seem strange, but many small European cars do 70-80mpg. A friend of mine has a Volgswagen Lupo (small, but five seats) that he drives 100 miles a day. It does 85mpg.
The Lupo is actually not street legal (I'm pretty sure it was the Lupo) in the US. It's too small or too light one, I can't remember. But I wanted to have one imported for the obscene fuel efficiency. Instead we got a diesel new beetle and get about 50mpg. But remember, small doesn't mean fuel efficient, my Geo Metro is only a little bit bigger than the Lupo and only gets about 30mpg. And of course things like the Z3 and the Miata get about 15-20mpg.
Kintanon
Re:No, hacking is not a good thing
on
Hacking The Tivo
·
· Score: 1
I'll hope you're kidding, because otherwise you need to switch to CrackRockLite(tm) or something. Hacking has nothing to do with breaching security. This story has nothing to do with breaching security. You are either misinformed or simply stupid.
Am I the only one that noticed that there is no way to contact PETA through their website? I was going to send them an e-mail protesting their conduct and letting them know how I felt about it. But there doesn't seem to be any way to express my outrage at their conduct, short of making a website... about... hrmmm... Somehow I think I've found a problem. If I make a website about PETA, name it anything that relates to its content, and say bad things about PETA in it, I'm going to get ordered to relinquish it? Oh well, I guess the constitution is just something we can point at while we stick our tongues out at England and pretend we're better than they are.
I do want to see this appealed however, up to the Supreme Court, such that some national precident is set; hopefully not in the judges words, but to the point that the cybersquatting/trademark laws are more strongly set. Why this case? Neither side is a large company with lots of money to blow, so this won't be a battle of resources, but of true intent.
I dunno which PEthicalTreatmentA you've been looking at, but the one we have here in the USA can afford high powered lawyers, TV commercials, and many many other things, in fact, the only thing that distinguishes them from a large company is that they don't have er... umm.... Hmmm, oh wait, I guess they are just a large company with a political goal that is, instead of profiting wildly, feeding all of the money back into protests and sabotageing farms and testing labs. They would grind this poor guy into the ground in seconds if it came to a legal battle. He'd never be able to crawl out from under the paperwork they'd flood him with. If they wanted PETA.ORG they should have registered it years ago, but they DIDN'T and it belongs to this guy and should stay that way. His website relates to PETA quite clearly, just because it is in a derogatory term doesn't mean that PETA can walk in and demand he turn it over to them. That is WRONG. VERY wrong. It shouldn't happen. But the world sucks, so it does happen. Anyone want to pull an Etoy sit-in on PETA?
The only reason Transmetta could be a success is because they offer Windows compatibilty and like AMD they will be crushed by Intel - if not now, in the near future. It would have been interesting to see a new, radically different design that does not keep the pathetic x86 compatibilty, but hey marketing is always more important.... I personally don't like Microsoft's Paul Allen's behavior and having in mind that he is a major investor in Transmetta just makes me sick....
I'm looking at AMD, then I'm looking at Intel, and them I'm looking at your post and I'm thinkin, 'Someone isn't paying attention to the real world.' AMD is doing just fine and and isn't in any danger of being crushed by Intel. If anything it will be the other way around. Transmeta is going to be succesful because they are offering a VERY low power chip that will run linux and windows in a laptop without any compatibility issues. The key being a LOW POWER chip. They'll be able to use the profits from this to fuel the development of even lower power, faster, and more versatile software to run with their processor. Transmeta is going to succede on its own merit, despite Intel and AMD, because it produces something that neither of those chipmakers has managed to produce.
Slashdot Mirror
A traditional broadsword would NOT weigh 40-50 pounds, but in face, is closer to the 5-10you suggested for this high-tech sword. The heavier end is usually about 1 lb. per foot, with many being even lighter than that.
Something about your statement makes me thing you've never in your life picked up a 3 foot long broadsword. I have. I've weighed them. The specific one I was looking at weighted 28lbs and was considered light for the collection. The only 10 lb sword there was a rapier.
Kintanon
Much of a broadswords power comes from its weight, with the strike being assited by gravity.
Although a lighter weapon would be easer to wield, it would require morestrength to strike with the same power as a heaver weapon.
This is true, but it was mostly necessary for traditional broadswords because they were more like 3ft long crowbars than blades. They weren't exactly razor sharp. If this blade is sharp enough to shear through metal with minimal force then the weight can be reduced to allow for faster strikes. Also, speed breeds power. The faster you move the weapon the more power it will have behind it at the point of impact. I imagine there is a point where the weight is balanced out to provide maximum impact and maximum speed. I'm hoping they will use some of the technology available to locate that point and design the weapon accordingly. It might end up being 20lbs, or 15, or maybe the traditional 40-50lb weight IS optimal. But it would be interesting to know how they plan on determining the weight if they really are using as much of our advanced tech as possible in the creation of the blade.
Kintanon
I didn't see this in the article, but I wonder if they are planning on making it weigh 40 - 50 lbs the way a traditional broadsword would, or plan on using the technology available to cut the weight down to 5-10lbs or even less. That would make one hell of a devestating hand to hand weapon.....
Kintanon
Personally I'd love to see Ewoks.
More specifically I'd love to see Ewoks carve Jar Jar apart and eat him.
Preferably in a huge orgy of bloody screaming and burning flesh and spears and cutting and whatnot....
Kintanon
The problem is that the law currently doesn't recognize free software and places the same requirements on all software. IMO people who take money for software should be obligated to provide a money-back warranty. People who give software away should not be required to provide a warranty. The problem comes when somebody sells free software, as in a distribution. They can be made to pay customers back, and then can turn around and sue the developer to recover their damages. I want to protect that developer when it's free software.
Thanks
Hrmmm. I'd have to agree with that. A company that takes a piece of free software, packages it, and resells it should not be able to sue the developer of that software if they are required to provide a warranty. It just means that they will have to (Horror! Tragedy!) inspect the code themselves to make sure it doesn't have any horrible bugs in it. The developer should always be protected, just as a regular corporation can't hire a couple of programmers, have them write some code, then sue them if the code breaks. They can fire them, but they can't sue them for damages unless they can prove it was malicious, then it becomes a criminal affair....
So yeah, I have to agree that the developer should be protected from retribution by companies which are profitting from code that the developer gave away for free.
Kintanon
The problem is that UCITA requires warranties in some cases and prohibits contracts that waive the warranty. Then we have the question of whether or not our licenses are contracts, but we are on real thin ice there.
I am talking with an attorney who assures me there really is a problem. I can put you in touch with the attorney if you want some assurance that I know what I'm talking about.
Thanks
Let me see if I properly understand the situation here. UCITA would require warranties on free software, but not on purchased software? If that is not the case, and it would require warranties on both then what's the problem? MSFT would immediately fail because it can't garauntee the operation of its OS under anything more strenuous than 100% clean, no load testing.
If it is lopsided and would only require it for free software then I'd have to say that's pretty clearly an anti-competitive piece of legislation and could be struck down rather easily.
I personally wouldn't mind someone forcing all of the big commercial software houses to garauntee their product. They might actually turn out something bug free....
If my view of this is completely wrong please let me know. But as I see it this isn't a new horrible thing, it's just the same horrible UCITA that needs to be gotten rid of, and we already knew that.
Kintanon
Jelson said:
I'm not sure I agree that it's actually so terribly smart of a thing to do. I mean, the guy is planning on going 60 miles into the atmosphere. NASA supposedly defines space as starting at 62 miles up. What happens if his already rough-sounding calculations are off by a couple of percent, and he ends up in space for real? Spend the next 30 seconds desperately trying to formulate an atmospheric re-entry plan? (Make sure Gary Sinese is on call...)
The Article Said:
Walker figures the peak of his trajectory would be about 160,000 feet, or 30 miles above Earth.
He has about a 30 mile margin of error. So I don't think he's got that much to worry about.
Kintanon
And you were talking about work, not home. Is this really your very first computer at work? In 2000? No wonder they almost fired you.
No, I was not talking about work dumbass. I was talking about my home machine.
Yeesh... It's a rather long story but someone compromised my home machine and used it to attack someone, when I logged into my home machine from work to get some work done it got traced back to there and they called the company I work for.
Kintanon
Not to flame, but... From somebody you know who has as secure box and a CD burner?
Hrrmmm... Let me see.... That would be no one.
I don't know anyone who is running RH in my area that would be willing to burn me a CD of anything.
So what am I left to do? Leave my computer sitting turned off and unplugged? Switch back to Win98 (At least that never got cracked in to)? No. I turn the thing on, plug it in and start getting patches. But oh horror of horrors, I don't have an infinite amount of free time and happen to have to actually go out and DO something in the middle of that. So my box gets left unsecure for a couple of days. Tragedy beyond belief....
Yeesh. That shouldn't be a concern for newbies. What about those newbies who don't constantly follow slashdot and bugtraq and etc.. etc.. etc..? How are they supposed to know that when they isntall this thing it's going to leave their system open to anyone and everyone who wants to waltz in and screw around with them? It's not really RHs fault if someone knows their system is insecure and fails to patch it in time. But if they don't have a huge warning in the manual or on the box (I didn't see any) that says 'THIS SYSTEM IS ABOUT AS SECURE AS WET TOILET PAPER!' then they are at fault when someone wanted to try linux out gets it installed, gets rooted, and then gets in trouble because someone was doing something from his machine.
Kintanon
You get them from RetHat's site. Using a machine that is secure. And put them on a floppy. Duh.
Oh gee yes, I'll just fire up this SECOND computer I have laying over here that just happens to have a secure install of RH on it already. Silly me, why didn't I think of that....
We don't all have multiple linux boxen strewn about our homes.
Kintanon
I was wondering, everyone is so eager to prove that Napster isn't simply a means of pirateing music, so why hasn't anyone taken a bunch of political speeches, presidential debates, etc... that are available on tape and put them into .mp3 format. Then you could propgate them throughout napster etc... Then someone would be using napster for an educational purpose. You could even justify it to your college admins, 'I have this poli-sci test next week and I need to find the bush-clinton debate from 1992, I HAVE to be able to use napster!' Really that's not a half bad idea... I wonder how many I can find... and what's the best way to encode a tape without really screwing the quality...?
Kintanon
Why did you connect your Linux box to the net knowing that you still had security holes to patch?
There would be the issue of obtaining the aforementioned patches. I couldn't find any 'Complete up to the minute RedHat 6.0 Patch CD' for sale anywhere. So I had to download and apply all of the ones I needed. They had to come from somewhere. Where would YOU Suggest I get them?
Kintanon
I hope that AOL's defense of "it is user-configurable" gets tossed - it would set a nice precedent of companies being responsible for the default configuration of their software (can we sue MS for all the virii propagated by poor Outlook configurations?).
Yeah, then I could sue RedHat for their default installation being insecure since it almost lost me my job in the 3 days it took me to get all of the upgrades and patches applied that I needed.
Yeesh.... It's not RedHat's fault that someone found my open system before I finished patching all of the known security problems.
Kintanon
Again people are making the same mistake, they say that genetic treatments will cure everything, ignoring other factors such as the environment. I agree that it has very big potential, but we should be more cautious before making such statements.
Show me who is saying this is a cure all for everything? Everyone is saying it has huge beneficial possiblity, and could mean the end of many diseases and defects. Those statements are true. It COULD be. Radiation has done a lot of good in treating things like cancer. It didn't cure it all, but it helped a lot. And if someone had said, 'Well, it didn't cure everything, so lets just forget about it.' we'd be worse off for it. I have yet to see one statement to the effect that this is a complete cure all for disease and defect.
Kintanon
This really is a minor issue which can and will be easily solved by the free market as long as people do something constructive about it (such as changing ISP if they are not happy) rather than trying to restrict the freedoms ISPs Just because YOU don't like what they offer doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to offer it.
I absolutely agree, I was just explaining why the lawsuit won't immediately be laughed out of court, as much as it might deserve that fate.
Kintanon
Inter-species transfer of genetic materal so enable children to do things that God never intended them to do? This may seem somewhat farfetched, but the hubris of scientists and the greed of corporations guarantees that all this, and more, will happen, and sooner than you'd think.
Trust me, if God doesn't intend for it to be done, then it won't happen. But if you believe in God, then you believe he put us here to have dominion over the earth and all of its creatures. Well, we're one of its creatures, so we have free reign to improve or destroy ourselves as we choose. Now yes, complete free reign to tinker with peoples genetic code just for kicks might be a bad thing. But controlled genetic experimentation can be nothing but a good thing in the long run. Turning everyone into clones is in no one's best interest. Heck, making everyone immortal is a pretty BAD idea too considering. I'm not even for increasing the overall lifespan of humanity right now. We really need to expand off of this planet before we do anything that would increase the population dramatically....
But back to the point at hand, yes there are potential problems with genetic engineering, but there are also great potential benefits. You must risk the one to achieve the other, that's the way life is.
Kintanon
It seems like alot of people see genetics as a panacea for all human ills. However this overlooks the fact that the environment is just as important as genetics. In some respects, the attention that whole gene therapy is getting resembles the hype that surrounded radiation in the early 20th century when radiation was going to cure anything and everything.
Well we bloody well have to start somewhere now don't we?! Geez, be patient, they've really just started looking into genetics, if it takes another hundred years to figure out how it all works we'll still be doing good. Yeesh, No one is claiming this is the be all end all of medicine, but it's a damn good step in the right direction for understanding how our bodies work.
Kintanon
Honestly, i don't see how having to look at an anoying popup advert is any basis for a lawsuit
Well, if you are on AOL there is a good chance you are paying by the hour. That means that if it takes 3 extra seconds per popup add to load, and another 2 seconds to close it and get back to where you wanted to be, you've lost 5 seconds. So after 12 popup adds you've lost a minute. If you have to do that with say 24 popup adds a day you're losing 2 minutes a day, after a month you've lost an hour of time by being forced to close their popup ads. Also, the extra traffic reduces the overall performance of your connection. These may seem like really tiny petty things, and I think they are as well, but people ARE able to show damages, no matter how minute, by these popup ads, so they have a case.
Kintanon
hmmm, another fad, just like pogs, and magic cards, and then beanie babies and finally pokemon, do i sense a pattern ??
Oddly enough Magic has neither disappeared nor declined in popularity. It is rapidly becoming the premier intelectual sport of the world attracting spectators and players from over 50 different countries. The M:TG national and world competitions are regularly broadcast on ESPN2 and as rapidly as the older players are growing out of it new players are coming in. Admittedly a lot of us can't stand the way the game is going in recent years, but we still enjoy the game as much as ever. I doubt it will die out any more than Poker or Chess did. Even if WotC goes out of business and stops printing new sets the players will still enjoy the game, will still play it, and the Duelist Convocation will probably still hold huge tournaments.
Kintanon
I like my SUV with V8 power just fine. And yes, I want to make sure I have way more weight than you. As far as I'm concerned, it's survival of the biggest.
Well if you people in SUVs didn't drive like FUCKING MORONS that wouldn't be a problem. I moved from Georgia to Maryland a year and a half ago, and it's like no one up here has any idea what a turn signal is for. I see people backing out of their driveways into the street without even looking. 7/10 people talking on their cellphone while driving. People weaving in and out of traffic like madmen. And a lot of the time it's people in bigass Vans, SUVs, and Trucks. Now, up here in the middle of the city, with their sparkly clean Dodge Ram 1500 that takes up 2 parking places, they can't possibly need that kind of vehicle. I've only seen 2 trucks actually carrying anything while I've been here and one of those was a smaller toyota. We need to move towards smaller vehicles, a small toyota truck is enough to haul anything the suburbanites want to carry. A Honda hatchback will carry 5 people easily, if you need more than that get a station wagon. I own a tiny ass little Geo Metro convertible. I'm getting tired of these big black SUVs cutting me off without signalling and changing lines as if I don't exist!!
Kintanon
To Americans this may seem strange, but many small European cars do 70-80mpg. A friend of mine has a Volgswagen Lupo (small, but five seats) that he drives 100 miles a day. It does 85mpg.
The Lupo is actually not street legal (I'm pretty sure it was the Lupo) in the US.
It's too small or too light one, I can't remember. But I wanted to have one imported for the obscene fuel efficiency. Instead we got a diesel new beetle and get about 50mpg.
But remember, small doesn't mean fuel efficient, my Geo Metro is only a little bit bigger than the Lupo and only gets about 30mpg. And of course things like the Z3 and the Miata get about 15-20mpg.
Kintanon
I'll hope you're kidding, because otherwise you need to switch to CrackRockLite(tm) or something. Hacking has nothing to do with breaching security. This story has nothing to do with breaching security. You are either misinformed or simply stupid.
Kintanon
Am I the only one that noticed that there is no way to contact PETA through their website?
I was going to send them an e-mail protesting their conduct and letting them know how I felt about it. But there doesn't seem to be any way to express my outrage at their conduct, short of making a website... about... hrmmm... Somehow I think I've found a problem. If I make a website about PETA, name it anything that relates to its content, and say bad things about PETA in it, I'm going to get ordered to relinquish it? Oh well, I guess the constitution is just something we can point at while we stick our tongues out at England and pretend we're better than they are.
Kintanon
I do want to see this appealed however, up to the Supreme Court, such that some national precident is set; hopefully not in the judges words, but to the point that the cybersquatting/trademark laws are more strongly set. Why this case? Neither side is a large company with lots of money to blow, so this won't be a battle of resources, but of true intent.
I dunno which PEthicalTreatmentA you've been looking at, but the one we have here in the USA can afford high powered lawyers, TV commercials, and many many other things, in fact, the only thing that distinguishes them from a large company is that they don't have er... umm.... Hmmm, oh wait, I guess they are just a large company with a political goal that is, instead of profiting wildly, feeding all of the money back into protests and sabotageing farms and testing labs. They would grind this poor guy into the ground in seconds if it came to a legal battle. He'd never be able to crawl out from under the paperwork they'd flood him with.
If they wanted PETA.ORG they should have registered it years ago, but they DIDN'T and it belongs to this guy and should stay that way. His website relates to PETA quite clearly, just because it is in a derogatory term doesn't mean that PETA can walk in and demand he turn it over to them. That is WRONG. VERY wrong. It shouldn't happen. But the world sucks, so it does happen.
Anyone want to pull an Etoy sit-in on PETA?
Kintanon
The only reason Transmetta could be a success is because they offer Windows compatibilty and like AMD they will be crushed by Intel - if not now, in the near future. It would have been interesting to see a new, radically different design that does not keep the pathetic x86 compatibilty, but hey marketing is always more important .... I personally don't like Microsoft's Paul Allen's behavior and having in mind that he is a major investor in Transmetta just makes me sick....
I'm looking at AMD, then I'm looking at Intel, and them I'm looking at your post and I'm thinkin, 'Someone isn't paying attention to the real world.' AMD is doing just fine and and isn't in any danger of being crushed by Intel. If anything it will be the other way around. Transmeta is going to be succesful because they are offering a VERY low power chip that will run linux and windows in a laptop without any compatibility issues. The key being a LOW POWER chip. They'll be able to use the profits from this to fuel the development of even lower power, faster, and more versatile software to run with their processor. Transmeta is going to succede on its own merit, despite Intel and AMD, because it produces something that neither of those chipmakers has managed to produce.
Kintanon