The police in this case have stated that the customers of these USB keys (The list being compiled from information collected at the raid) will be persued by police and treated as “receivers of stolen property."
I really want to see how that bullshit plays out in court.
Probably exactly as the police expect. You may have notices that the Australian Courts are even more on the side of big media than the US courts.
and if you're running it on a halfway decent Mac, it actually does its job well.
For some obscure definition of "well".
Tell me, have you never used another device? Android doesn't need or have anything like itunes. Somehow, it does everything an iphone does, and then some. You shouldn't, and don't need a computer to manage your phone.
Launch from altitude make more sense than any of those.
Substituting fairly cheap fuels and reusable lift vehicles to bring your space craft to 50-70,000 feet reduces costs and risks substantially.
Expensive space fuel requirements are drastically reduced, as you are burning Jet A to get to launch altitude.
Lets face it, space elevator is not happening any time soon, and moon base is loony-tunes until we have better lift capability. We can barely keep the ISS manned at this point. Getting any amount of building materials or modules to the moon and landing them safely is simply off the drawing board until this problem is solved.
The problem is really simple. It's cheap to study a potential space travel mechanism on paper. But you cannot make any real progress unless real hardware is built and tested in space. And that costs a fortune, because a kilogram in space costs about $10,000 to get it there. Not to mention costs other than money, such as time and launch windows and delays and so forth.
Cheap to study indeed. From the announcement:
Following the announcement, NASA awarded five companies four-month study contracts totaling approximately US$3 million, with a maximum individual contract award of $600,000. The selected companies were Analytical Mechanics Associates, Ball Aerospace & Technologies, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. Each company is tasked with providing a final report that will help identify technology gaps and look at possible solutions using SEP systems.
$3 million spread among 6 companies is not serious money. It actually sounds like "lets keep Joe on the payroll" money. Money to keep a company interested and a few scientists (maybe 5 or 6 per company) employed till there is something "real" to do. (Not that I think that is a bad idea in general, scientists have to eat between big projects, especially if you want them to stick around and not wander off to some other industry.).
But I don't think this is serious money. Its barely brain-storm money.
In fact its so suspiciously small it could actually be a cover for something else, with one guy writing a summation of all existing SEP science, while the rest work on something cool for the future.
This only works toward reducing the trustworthiness of Blogger as a blogging platform.
Blogs dealing with sensitive topics in certain countries will simply go elsewhere. Yes that elsewhere runs the risk of being blocked by that country, but at least it will be that county doing the blocking, not Google.
The phrase "at the height of" means "the beginning of the end."
I'd be more interested in knowing what the deepest cores show, from the beginning of the last ice age. If they were similarly high, then your question is insightful.
If however the co2 peeked sometime within the ice age, and that was followed by the decline of the ice age we have an interesting coincidence, but still no causation.
The question then becomes where did this co2 come from. Did it come from the much reduced plant intake of co2 due to having significant areas of the planet in a deep freeze? Were the oceans chilled enough such that marine organisms ceased sequestering co2 into reefs?
Or was there some as yet undocumented sources of co2 that were ramping up production?
Or was the output of the sun reduced during this period and any suggestion about co2 merely mistaking the effect for the cause?
But lets just say that vast majority of people who might try to replace Windows with any current version of Ubuntu would probably succeed, because the installer is just that good.
I fully agree with you. Itunes is an abomination. Apple makes good hardware.
But iTunes is an utter embarrassment to the company. The programming staff should all be fired. I've never seen such an ill behaved piece of software. They make Adobe look like wizards.
No please. I fully understand that it may please some "I'm so good" geek, but it's not nice for people. This is the problem with Linux in general.... Either tell me what I gain from using Linux, or I'm not even going to try it.
Actually Slack is never intended for the entry level user.
Ubuntu is. 98% of the time anyone who has ever used Windows or Mac can install Ubuntu and have it fully functional out of the box, or bittorrent. They do market themselves, and have done well with that over the years.
Ubuntu is the Gateway Drug for Linux. It might not be where you end up, but its where most new users start out. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of others that install and run fine out of the box or the download. But Ubuntu you have heard of. The others, maybe not.
Further, Ubuntu, SuSE, Red Hat have a business plan, a way to make money. Even the most die-hard fan gets tired of working for nothing, and gets tired of doing everything the hard way.
As to what you are going to gain, its an easy sell for the home user who has ever even once lost his entire computer drive to malware or viruses. If everything works the same, no learning curve and the malware risk is virtually gone, you'd be surprised how many will use it, if someone else installs it. (Which, by the way, is exactly the same as windows. Most Windows users never install their own OS).
Interesting, but not accurate enough. This is a bullet we are talking about, not a missile. Try getting an enemy combatant to hold one of your transmitters. Maybe tell him its an iPod. Chances are pretty good you find yourself strapped to a tree with it taped to your chest.
Can't snipers already hit a target a mile out, without needing million dollar bullets?
Usually not done at that distance, but possible. In some environments (urban buildings) the wind is so variable that snipers have a hard time "doping" it to allow for cross winds. Add to that a walking target, and you can see that just having to fire in something close to the general direction and have your painter keep the target in the cross hairs for the entire flight time would be much easier.
Target movement and side winds would be less of a factor, and the shooter could hit targets they couldn't even see (theoretically).
But you are correct, itunes has no place on a corporate machine. And quite frankly the idea you need a music player to manage a phone is like saying you need a fish to manage your bicycle.
Itunes can be placed on the users home machine. Its not at all certain you can SECURELY accommodate iPhones in the work place AND prevent itunes from being installed. However there is an Apple iPhone Configuration utility that is supposed to do this.
I have yet to see it in use anywhere, but some claim you can use on the corporate network and still block itunes on corporate machines.
There were way to many financial pressures to find a impartial result at way to many steps along the way.
Add that to the difficulty of actually testing anything in the human system and you have a prescription for frequent failure. "According to a recent analysis, more than 40 per cent of drugs fail Phase III clinical trials." A negative result is not a failure. Its the ultimate money (and life) saving step. That they went to clinical trials with little more than hunch, and the FDAs blessing that it "should cause no harm" simply says their internal standards were not tight enough, and testing in glassware and rats not nearly a good enough method.
It says nothing about science at all. TFA's indictment of science seems a little over wrought.
But its not surprising that this author would try to spin it that way when you review his bio you find this prescient quote:
"Lehrer fancies himself – and not without reason – as a sort of one-man third culture, healing the rift between sciences and humanities by communicating and contrasting their values in a way that renders them comprehensible to partisans of either camp."
Given the guys inability to operate in either camp successfully, he appoints himself a ambassador to both! He seems pre-disposed to doubt the methods of science rather than the motivation of the people involved. His training is in neuroscience, the epitome of un-testable theories. And so he presumes the entire world operates that way.
Slashdot Mirror
Rabbits were the same store, were they not?
You didn't make it clear whether you were replying to the first part of my post and being sarcastic or replying to the second part
This is slashdot. Making things clear is optional, and usually counterproductive.
What about insolation?
energy is added to the system
i thought energy can not be created or detroyed
Moved, not created or destroyed.
Come out of your mom's basement, look up at that bright yellow object in the sky.
If there is any global warming, that's where its coming from.
The police in this case have stated that the customers of these USB keys (The list being compiled from information collected at the raid) will be persued by police and treated as “receivers of stolen property."
I really want to see how that bullshit plays out in court.
Probably exactly as the police expect. You may have notices that the Australian Courts are even more on the
side of big media than the US courts.
How many confirmed deaths in Vancouver hockey riot?
None you say?
Thought so. Even in Canukistan people don't kill over hockey.
Because he is directly on topic.
and if you're running it on a halfway decent Mac, it actually does its job well.
For some obscure definition of "well".
Tell me, have you never used another device?
Android doesn't need or have anything like itunes. Somehow, it does everything an iphone does, and then some.
You shouldn't, and don't need a computer to manage your phone.
Except in Egypt, where even a home team win can lead to 78 deaths on the field.
Launch from altitude make more sense than any of those.
Substituting fairly cheap fuels and reusable lift vehicles to bring your space craft to 50-70,000 feet reduces costs and risks substantially.
Expensive space fuel requirements are drastically reduced, as you are burning Jet A to get to launch altitude.
Lets face it, space elevator is not happening any time soon, and moon base is loony-tunes until we have better lift capability. We can barely keep the ISS manned at this point. Getting any amount of building materials or modules to the moon and landing them safely is simply off the drawing board until this problem is solved.
The problem is really simple. It's cheap to study a potential space travel mechanism on paper. But you cannot make any real progress unless real hardware is built and tested in space. And that costs a fortune, because a kilogram in space costs about $10,000 to get it there. Not to mention costs other than money, such as time and launch windows and delays and so forth.
Cheap to study indeed. From the announcement:
Following the announcement, NASA awarded five companies four-month study contracts totaling approximately US$3 million, with a maximum individual contract award of $600,000. The selected companies were Analytical Mechanics Associates, Ball Aerospace & Technologies, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman. Each company is tasked with providing a final report that will help identify technology gaps and look at possible solutions using SEP systems.
$3 million spread among 6 companies is not serious money. It actually sounds like "lets keep Joe on the payroll" money. Money to keep a company interested and a few scientists (maybe 5 or 6 per company) employed till there is something "real" to do. (Not that I think that is a bad idea in general, scientists have to eat between big projects, especially if you want them to stick around and not wander off to some other industry.).
But I don't think this is serious money. Its barely brain-storm money.
In fact its so suspiciously small it could actually be a cover for something else, with one guy writing a summation of all existing SEP science, while the rest work on something cool for the future.
This only works toward reducing the trustworthiness of Blogger as a blogging platform.
Blogs dealing with sensitive topics in certain countries will simply go elsewhere. Yes that elsewhere runs the risk of being blocked by that
country, but at least it will be that county doing the blocking, not Google.
"peaked"
Yup. Guilty. I save my best spelling for people who pay me. ;-)
And of course everyone knows exactly what "semantic web technologies" implies.....
Wish it was more common in writing to define an acronym before using it, especially one that doesn't appear in the article.
Especially since none of the linked stories ever mentioned RDF even once, nor did the summary even follow up with any specifics.
All of which suggests speculation in the summary title with no actual knowledge of exactly what they are using.
The phrase "at the height of" means "the beginning of the end."
I'd be more interested in knowing what the deepest cores show, from the beginning of the last ice age. If they were similarly high, then your question is insightful.
If however the co2 peeked sometime within the ice age, and that was followed by the decline of the ice age we have an interesting coincidence, but still no causation.
The question then becomes where did this co2 come from. Did it come from the much reduced plant intake of co2 due to having significant areas of the planet in a deep freeze? Were the oceans chilled enough such that marine organisms ceased sequestering co2 into reefs?
Or was there some as yet undocumented sources of co2 that were ramping up production?
Or was the output of the sun reduced during this period and any suggestion about co2 merely mistaking the effect for the cause?
LOL. Point taken.
But lets just say that vast majority of people who might try to replace Windows with any current version of Ubuntu would probably succeed, because the installer is just that good.
Not a fan of Unity either.
Exactly as I predicted when everybody here on Slashdot was insisting the would HAVE TO act.
This is Obama, he need only make the promise. He doesn't have to DO anything.
I fully agree with you. Itunes is an abomination.
Apple makes good hardware.
But iTunes is an utter embarrassment to the company. The programming staff should all be fired. I've never seen such an ill behaved piece of software. They make Adobe look like wizards.
No please. I fully understand that it may please some "I'm so good" geek, but it's not nice for people. This is the problem with Linux in general. ... Either tell me what I gain from using Linux, or I'm not even going to try it.
Actually Slack is never intended for the entry level user.
Ubuntu is. 98% of the time anyone who has ever used Windows or Mac can install Ubuntu and have it fully functional out of the box, or bittorrent.
They do market themselves, and have done well with that over the years.
Ubuntu is the Gateway Drug for Linux. It might not be where you end up, but its where most new users start out.
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of others that install and run fine out of the box or the download. But Ubuntu you have heard of. The others, maybe not.
Further, Ubuntu, SuSE, Red Hat have a business plan, a way to make money. Even the most die-hard fan gets tired of working for nothing, and gets tired
of doing everything the hard way.
As to what you are going to gain, its an easy sell for the home user who has ever even once lost his entire computer drive to malware or viruses.
If everything works the same, no learning curve and the malware risk is virtually gone, you'd be surprised how many will use it, if someone else
installs it. (Which, by the way, is exactly the same as windows. Most Windows users never install their own OS).
Interesting, but not accurate enough. This is a bullet we are talking about, not a missile.
Try getting an enemy combatant to hold one of your transmitters. Maybe tell him its an iPod.
Chances are pretty good you find yourself strapped to a tree with it taped to your chest.
Can't snipers already hit a target a mile out, without needing million dollar bullets?
Usually not done at that distance, but possible.
In some environments (urban buildings) the wind is so variable that snipers have a hard time "doping" it to allow for cross winds.
Add to that a walking target, and you can see that just having to fire in something close to the general direction and have your painter keep the target in the cross hairs for the entire flight time would be much easier.
Target movement and side winds would be less of a factor, and the shooter could hit targets they couldn't even see (theoretically).
No, you can't have "No Lasers" involved.
Its an optical device, sensor in the nose, it needs to see reflected laser light.
Its pretty hard to sneak up on someone and plant an emitter "of some sort" on them, and convince them to stand still for 30 seconds.
Well the fanboys will mod you down for that.
But you are correct, itunes has no place on a corporate machine. And quite frankly the idea you need a music player to manage a phone is like saying you need a fish to manage your bicycle.
Itunes can be placed on the users home machine. Its not at all certain you can SECURELY accommodate iPhones in the work place AND prevent itunes from being installed. However there is an Apple iPhone Configuration utility that is supposed to do this.
I have yet to see it in use anywhere, but some claim you can use on the corporate network and still block itunes on corporate machines.
Exactly.
There were way to many financial pressures to find a impartial result at way to many steps along the way.
Add that to the difficulty of actually testing anything in the human system and you have a prescription for frequent failure. "According to a recent analysis, more than 40 per cent of drugs fail Phase III clinical trials." A negative result is not a failure. Its the ultimate money (and life) saving step. That they went to clinical trials with little more than hunch, and the FDAs blessing that it "should cause no harm" simply says their internal standards were not tight enough, and testing in glassware and rats not nearly a good enough method.
It says nothing about science at all. TFA's indictment of science seems a little over wrought.
But its not surprising that this author would try to spin it that way when you review his bio you find this prescient quote:
"Lehrer fancies himself – and not without reason – as a sort of one-man third culture, healing the rift between sciences and humanities by communicating and contrasting their values in a way that renders them comprehensible to partisans of either camp."
Given the guys inability to operate in either camp successfully, he appoints himself a ambassador to both! He seems pre-disposed to doubt the methods of science rather than the motivation of the people involved. His training is in neuroscience, the epitome of un-testable theories. And so he presumes the entire world operates that way.