We're compelled to do this because we're compelled to spread ourselves out to cover as much territory as we can.
The reason you don't get it is because you haven't realized that you (and all of us) are merely a vessel for DNA. DNA is looking to replicate and spread out and SURVIVE. Getting off the planet and on to multiple others will help with that a lot.
Is there any habitable portion of the Earth left uninhabited? Have we (animals) not found ways (through intelligence and evolution) to inhabit those places previously though uninhabitable?
So we have just dug a bit deeper. The question is no longer why go to mars. But why does the DNA care to survive so much?
Neither do my parents archive the entire collection of raw video data of my kid - but I do. Because, to me, it's worth while to watch 3 hours of my infant daughter rolling around on a blanket and chewing on her stuffed animals. It feels good to relive the moments of me playing with her at that age and seeing her react and respond to me. While I could live without that footage... well I'd just plain rather not.
Since this is a home backup solution we're talking about I think most of the data COULD be lost without extreme consequences... and so all of it would fall into that "I could live without it but I'd really rather not."
Rule three: If it's 3 TB of video of the first year of your kid's life then edit it down to 5 minutes because that's all that anyone will watch (willingly) anyway.
Do you have kids? If so, then I'm curious as to whether or not you've ever gone back to watch old videos of your children from when they were just days, weeks, months or a few years old. You can't stop watching it. The emotions that come bubbling up are undeniable. You want to hang on to three terabytes of video of your kids for _your own sake_ - not anyone else.
Do you not have kids? If not then I recommend you not open your mouth on topics you've got no experience on. To the rest of us (with experience) it just makes it obvious how ignorant you are on the subject and, due to association, casts everything else you say into doubt.
I can't cite the source and I didn't even review the numbers - but I once read an article referencing research that shows most people make most trips of 3 miles or less by car. Perfectly bike-able distance (10 minutes or so). Get a bike.
But your statement reminds me of the argument that pay-as-you-go data plans for cell phones are no good because power users would end up floating impossible bills while a lot of others would pay minimal fees every year. Current plans essentially have low-use customers subsidizing those who use more than their "fair share."
It sucks either way - someone is going to pay more than they want to. I'm not sure how I feel. The whole problem I've always faced with car insurance is that you are paying knowing you're unlikely to be in an accident. I mean if you were likely to be in an accident they wouldn't insure you.
It's a bummer, the whole insurance thing... no matter how you structure the price. Oh well.
...could explain this, at least partially. All things combined and considered I am not suprised that IE is accounting for only 56% of browsers reported. Were we limited to desktop only, that might be different.
I see a lot of you saying things like, "big deal," "this idea sucks," "just use batteries," etc. As though the current implementation is the final version of this technology. I'm surprised that, on/. of all places, you guys aren't thrilled that this implies in the near future you won't even notice this technology... it ought to just work.
Instead you're all bashing it and claiming it's a bad/stupid idea and implying they ought to just scrap the whole project.
I say - keep working on it, no matter how ugly those coils are, because I know sooner or later, I won't even see the coils anymore.
Schools are _totally_ a business. I was an English tutor at my community college and my job was not to make sure that the other students understood the process of writing a good paper but to make sure they passed. Period. Push them through so the numbers look good.
Seriously. You're 42. It's time to grow up, be a man and take responsibility for yourself, not depend on dishonest corporations or dishonest other people to take care of you. In this case, figure out how to block cross-site cookies, or block cookies all together. Learn how to use an anonymizer.
Only on Slashdot does blocking cross-site cookies and using an anonymizer make you a man.
If I write an email to you, out of the blue, but it is personalized, it is allowed. I can not spam you - that is illegal and pertains to mass mailing using mailing lists and form letters.
But if I sit down and take the time to write an email to you there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, nor illegal, even if we do not have a prior business or personal relationship.
Why should Microsoft have to install anyone else's browser on their operating system? It's not like they prevent you from downloading and installing third party browsers. Matter of fact - I'm using one right now!
That's (kind of) like saying you've never had to do tech support for someone with a sager laptop. You're less likely to see them because you're less likely to encounter them in the wild.
I have two things to add, one in response to your comment about the monitoring stations and the other just in general on this topic, but they tie together:
1. If a hospital is running a machine that is vulnerable to any worm, including a friendly worm, then I question their entire network/security structure in the first place and it is only a matter of time until the monitoring station goes down, anyway.
2. Friendly worms? Definitely. I am a technician/manager of a small shop and see people whose machines are constantly bombarded with malware of all kinds. While it would hurt our bottom line to see friendly worms in the wild dismantling these botnets it would no doubt save a lot of people a lot of trouble. These folks who are infected generally don't know what their doing and don't care to learn - they're worried about using their computer to perform a certain task - not understanding the ins and outs of how it functions. If a few people are affected by some "friendly fire" so be it - they would have gotten infected in the first place.
I somehow stumbled upon this while doing some research in college. I decided after reading through all of the articles that most of us have been cheated, and if I ever have a son, it'll be a decision he can make when he is older.
Slashdot Mirror
See ya!
I want to have a viking funeral, burning on $1 bills.
Oh yeah, dude, this is called "The Law of Diminishing Returns" You would think you slashdot crew would know it.
doubling my first post count every 18 months
We're compelled to do this because we're compelled to spread ourselves out to cover as much territory as we can. The reason you don't get it is because you haven't realized that you (and all of us) are merely a vessel for DNA. DNA is looking to replicate and spread out and SURVIVE. Getting off the planet and on to multiple others will help with that a lot. Is there any habitable portion of the Earth left uninhabited? Have we (animals) not found ways (through intelligence and evolution) to inhabit those places previously though uninhabitable? So we have just dug a bit deeper. The question is no longer why go to mars. But why does the DNA care to survive so much?
Neither do my parents archive the entire collection of raw video data of my kid - but I do. Because, to me, it's worth while to watch 3 hours of my infant daughter rolling around on a blanket and chewing on her stuffed animals. It feels good to relive the moments of me playing with her at that age and seeing her react and respond to me. While I could live without that footage... well I'd just plain rather not.
Since this is a home backup solution we're talking about I think most of the data COULD be lost without extreme consequences... and so all of it would fall into that "I could live without it but I'd really rather not."
Rule three: If it's 3 TB of video of the first year of your kid's life then edit it down to 5 minutes because that's all that anyone will watch (willingly) anyway.
Do you have kids? If so, then I'm curious as to whether or not you've ever gone back to watch old videos of your children from when they were just days, weeks, months or a few years old. You can't stop watching it. The emotions that come bubbling up are undeniable. You want to hang on to three terabytes of video of your kids for _your own sake_ - not anyone else. Do you not have kids? If not then I recommend you not open your mouth on topics you've got no experience on. To the rest of us (with experience) it just makes it obvious how ignorant you are on the subject and, due to association, casts everything else you say into doubt.
I can't cite the source and I didn't even review the numbers - but I once read an article referencing research that shows most people make most trips of 3 miles or less by car. Perfectly bike-able distance (10 minutes or so). Get a bike. But your statement reminds me of the argument that pay-as-you-go data plans for cell phones are no good because power users would end up floating impossible bills while a lot of others would pay minimal fees every year. Current plans essentially have low-use customers subsidizing those who use more than their "fair share." It sucks either way - someone is going to pay more than they want to. I'm not sure how I feel. The whole problem I've always faced with car insurance is that you are paying knowing you're unlikely to be in an accident. I mean if you were likely to be in an accident they wouldn't insure you. It's a bummer, the whole insurance thing... no matter how you structure the price. Oh well.
...could explain this, at least partially. All things combined and considered I am not suprised that IE is accounting for only 56% of browsers reported. Were we limited to desktop only, that might be different.
I see a lot of you saying things like, "big deal," "this idea sucks," "just use batteries," etc. As though the current implementation is the final version of this technology. I'm surprised that, on /. of all places, you guys aren't thrilled that this implies in the near future you won't even notice this technology... it ought to just work.
Instead you're all bashing it and claiming it's a bad/stupid idea and implying they ought to just scrap the whole project.
I say - keep working on it, no matter how ugly those coils are, because I know sooner or later, I won't even see the coils anymore.
I bet that spacecraft will be seen by many politicians as profoundly dangerous.
And therefore, profitable.
Off topic but - Wow, great story Scott! Do you have any other recommendations of good scifi on gutenberg? I really enjoyed the read :-)
Schools are _totally_ a business. I was an English tutor at my community college and my job was not to make sure that the other students understood the process of writing a good paper but to make sure they passed. Period. Push them through so the numbers look good.
But - it's gotta be rather trivial for google to add the ability to add equation capabilities - IE =sum(A:A+B:B) ala excel...
Oh well, that's called Web 2.0
Seriously. You're 42. It's time to grow up, be a man and take responsibility for yourself, not depend on dishonest corporations or dishonest other people to take care of you. In this case, figure out how to block cross-site cookies, or block cookies all together. Learn how to use an anonymizer.
Only on Slashdot does blocking cross-site cookies and using an anonymizer make you a man.
If I write an email to you, out of the blue, but it is personalized, it is allowed. I can not spam you - that is illegal and pertains to mass mailing using mailing lists and form letters. But if I sit down and take the time to write an email to you there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, nor illegal, even if we do not have a prior business or personal relationship.
Interesting comparing this post to your sig. :)
Why should Microsoft have to install anyone else's browser on their operating system? It's not like they prevent you from downloading and installing third party browsers. Matter of fact - I'm using one right now!
That's (kind of) like saying you've never had to do tech support for someone with a sager laptop. You're less likely to see them because you're less likely to encounter them in the wild.
I have two things to add, one in response to your comment about the monitoring stations and the other just in general on this topic, but they tie together: 1. If a hospital is running a machine that is vulnerable to any worm, including a friendly worm, then I question their entire network/security structure in the first place and it is only a matter of time until the monitoring station goes down, anyway. 2. Friendly worms? Definitely. I am a technician/manager of a small shop and see people whose machines are constantly bombarded with malware of all kinds. While it would hurt our bottom line to see friendly worms in the wild dismantling these botnets it would no doubt save a lot of people a lot of trouble. These folks who are infected generally don't know what their doing and don't care to learn - they're worried about using their computer to perform a certain task - not understanding the ins and outs of how it functions. If a few people are affected by some "friendly fire" so be it - they would have gotten infected in the first place.
It's not the people who are slow. Their comments are just tied up in the RISS awaiting gov approval.
you meant to post that over here I think http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/04/0241218
Doesn't the public library do things in a very similar fashion?
I somehow stumbled upon this while doing some research in college. I decided after reading through all of the articles that most of us have been cheated, and if I ever have a son, it'll be a decision he can make when he is older.