As to it having a celphone for spying, are celphones banned from all meetings? My guess is most Generals are armed with a celphone.
Yes cellphones are banned from secured areas. That's all cellphones. So if one were to show-up on a military installation carrying a new generation phone with camera, where there are big freakin' "NO cameras, or recording devices allowed" signs, then you are a dumbf*ck idiot who needs to spend some time in the brig.
Note that few such places allow a PDA these days either. Unless of course you want them to significantly disable it for you.
Celphone jammers are realitively cheap and availible. It might be a smarter and more pratical thing to simply use them in conference rooms and not sweat the Majors new lapel phone let alone coke can.
Then again, you're in the military. Might be a hell of a lot smarter to follow some simple orders and save the taxpayers on several fronts.
Thud . . . . counting the seconds before you see the bloom start, knowing that the longer the time, the bigger the display. Or when you start hearing the rapid fire launch of the finale and just sit waiting for the good stuff.
From the Commercial Weather Services Association (CWSA) own presentation on this topic:
[NWS Position Statement:]
The NWS should make its data and products available in internetaccessible digital form. Information held in digital databases should be based on widely recognized standards, formats, and metadata descriptions to ensure that data from different observing platforms, databases, and models can be integrated and used by all interested parties in the weather and climate enterprise.
CWSA Position Statement:.. CWSA endorses the dissemination of all NWS data and information (including experimental) in real time without delay in Internet accessible digital form to the private sector for distribution to the public in formats that are appropriate to carry out a properly defined NWS mission. The digital database should not be used to allow the NWS to expand beyond its core mission, jeopardize the existing infrastructure, or enter areas creating publicly-funded competition with the Commercial Weather Industry.
Note the first part of the CWSA position. The part where publicly-funded weather information should go directly to the private sector. They'll decide the what, when, how and how much of subesquent dissemination to the public. All data. All formats (even the experimental stuff, we wouldn't want them to miss out on anything tasty). Then the private sector can package it for profit (what you call value-added).
I gather from your argument, that the government should not provide publicly-funded data (not software, cars or some other private venture) to the public? If commercial companies can take raw data, do something productive with it, and sell it, good for them. But there's not a chance in hell that they should be the only ones with access to the data. The public paid for the data at least once already.
No mention of what their thermal protection system involves, but there's a picture that is labelled as such. Here's another shot showing the wing coating. Look for the pinkish material on the nose/chin and leading edges. Does that give anyone additional clues as to the material involved?
You mean the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Castro, Krushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, and Gorbachev Cold War don't you? It's not like Reagan started this all on his own in '46.
My apologies to readers from the UK for leaving out Churchill from that list (given that he coined the term "Iron Curtain").
NASA's stalled and caught in buracrecy, GovCo's got a poltical agenda for the Mars mission.
You're too young to remember that we've been here before. Kennedy went to space for political reasons too. Americans were trying to one-up the Russians. Check this and this out. For those who don't like to RTFA:
Contrary to the popular view of John Kennedy as a space visionary, the president had little interest in space and strove to put humans on the moon only for its political importance. "I'm not that interested in space," he told NASA chief James Webb late in 1962.
Computer programmers are more likely to have their work last longer than movie actors and screen writers who most often get royalties for use.
I understand your passion, but there is absolutely nothing to support your argument. Outside of code components for an operating system (Windows or *nix, take your pick), I seriously doubt that there is much in the way of code that will last more than 10-15 years.
Look at how we progress through the popularity of programming languages. _Ideas_ persist, but the code doesn't. It's re-written in another language or improved in the existing one. We are not going to see the programming equivalent of Citizen Kane that stands unadulterated for decades.
By the same token, I see no reason for providing copyright and royalties for musicians who cover someone else's work or sample the crap out of it. Where is the artistry in that?
My wife works for Prudential's former mortgage business unit (since acquired by a certain stagecoach company). Judging from the interface and performance (or lack thereof), I think I can say without equivocation that Prudential's UNIVAC is still in service.
The other giveaway is the large coal chute on the back side of the building.
Rather than ask amongst Slashdot users "What keeps you off of Windows?", perhaps we should ask the rest of the computing public a much more interesting question.
What keeps you off of Linux?
The first question merely allows us to puff out our collective chests and bleat for the rest of the assmbled throng. Then we nod appreciatively at our confirmation of the "obvious". Tell it brother!
But why don't more people use Linux or BSD (and their collective assortment of redheaded step-children)? What aren't we doing right that there isn't greater acknowlegement of the beneifts outlined in countless posts here. The question is not that far removed from the ease with which some snake oil salesman from the land of de Tocqueville is able to con the masses about Linux and Open Source.
Open Source and Linux need a really good PR guru that can get our voice heard. A few shouts in the wilderness ain't doing the job.
Then again, maybe we need to spend more time on improving this mouse trap so the world will beat a path to our door.
China keeps showing more and more signs that it wants to be a big player in the world despite being communist. If they could just smooth over the human rights people (I suppose they should actually improve the human rights thing in general), they could very well become a very important figure in the world economy (not that they're not already).
China has the largest population on the planet with 1.3+ Billion people. The USA, including all states, protectorates, territories and New Jersey, is not quite 300 million (2000 census). That would make China four times the size in population. But you don't think they're very important.
News Flash: With only the most minor of exceptions, the governments of the world obviously don't care about China's human rights policies. Even the US, under the Clinton administration, gave in. Why? Because China already IS an economic power.
Do you stand in front of mountain and insist that it come to you? Think of economic power in terms of kinetic energy. KE = 0.5 * mass * velocity^2. Right now, China's economy doesn't have much velocity, but it sure as hell has mass. Let's apply that to the most fundamental priciple of economics: Supply and Demand. When demand rises while supply stays the same or goes down, price rises. China is untapped demand potential. That demand potential is unmatched. And as that demand changes from potential to realized, we'll all pay more... for everything.
What happens to OpenOffice if MS acquires Sun? (not now, but in 2007 after SUN has laid off half its staff and lost most of its reserves?)
What happens to Java for that matter?
IF, Microsoft were to acquire Sun... (given that I find this a remote possibility)
1) Star Office would be officially pronounced (as in Medical Examiner) within days. 2) Open Office would continue more or less unaffected 3) Java on the other hand, in the form we currently know it, might also die for entirely BS reasons provided by Microsoft:
Redmond, Washington -- Officials at software giant Microsoft announced today that the entire Java development team had left the company to pursue "other opportunities". This stunning turn of events comes just weeks after Microsoft completed its acquisition of ailing Sun Microsystems. In the announcement, Microsoft said the move was driven by the failure of Java in the marketplace. "Unfortunately, it just never took hold. It was only a matter of time once we introduced.Net anyway" said an anonymous source. Officials at the company did say that they would vigorously defend any efforts to steal corporate IP. This in reference to vows from the Open Source community to create a repleacement for Java.
Here's the big question, though: why would having an artist spend time to do facial expressions be more cheap and convenient than simply having an actor doing them?
Cost.
Actors cost more than digital animators. Both gross pay and overhead. Some even get a cut of the "profits" though we've seen how Hollywood loathes the officially declare a profit for just that reason. Need to re-shoot a scene? You've got to work with the actor's schedule. Multiply that by the number of actors. Then there are the support staff (lighting, grip, gaffers, caterers, etc). Don't need those either.
Am I alone in wanting a completely computer-generated movie that looks real instead of cartoony and actually has a good plot?
I think you can safely say that, as a union, SAG (Screen Actor's Guild) is less than thrilled about the prospect. In the not too distant future, there may not be a need for human actors. Believable human animation may be to live acting, what sound was to silent movies. It's not the crowd scenes that are the problem. Weta proved that. Being able to model actors closeup will be the milestone. At that point, who do you give the Academy Award for Best Actor to when Shrek is brought to life by a cast of... geeks?
Why waste such a monster on mere ants. I realize there are some of you out who would think of a certain movie and popcorn (lots of popcorn), but you've got to agree this is more unique.
Meanwhile, the US Congress has been grilling folks lately for not finding a couple of needles in a global haystack.
"What do you mean you're not all knowing? Whack!"
"What do you mean, you're profiling? Whack whack!"
So which is it going to be? Shall we pillory law enforcement and the intelligence community for not anticipating which flights on which days would be turned into guided missiles? OR, shall we now instead beat them more for doing the kind of pro-active investigation that faulted them for not doing before? How politically correct to have them be at fault no matter how we sway in the wind.
Notice how in all the finger pointing at everyone else, Congress has never pointed the finger at themselves?
It's heartwarming to know there are still people who believe that anything a Union does must be good.
Did you know that there's an exemption from prosecution in the case of union violence committed in the name of "legitimate union objectives" such as higher wages? Take a look at the 1973 US Supreme Court ruling in the Emmons case.
Re:On a related note....
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
What would work is for everyone to carpool one day a week, or otherwise find a way to drive less than you otherwise would have. That would cut demand and have a huge impact on prices.
That would have... virtually no impact. We would have to do that on a massive scale and for a long period of time.
Even then, that would have at best a temporary impact. Faster growing countries like China and India are going to have a greater impact on the price of crude in the future than anything the US is likely to do.
And I laugh at those single drivers in their giant trucks and SUVs.
From their perch high above you they don't care. They stopped caring at the moment they bought those high-priced behemoths in the first place.
Gary Kildall anyone? First, on his own merits (see PL/M, CP/M, BIOS and Digital Research). Then because he wasn't available when IBM came calling to use CP/M. In the end, the world got MS-DOS because Bill Gates licensed a CP/M clone and re-licensed it to IBM.
Kurzweil should definitely be considered ahead of Gibson. Yes he's an author, but more importantly he's an inventor. In the 1980s, Kurzweil synthesizers were at the forefront of combining computing and music. He was pushing the boundaries of both.
I grabbed the following from Kurzweill Technologies: Ray Kurzweil was the principal developer of...
the first omni-font optical character recognition system
the first print-to-speech reading machine for the blind
the first CCD flat-bed scanner
the first text-to-speech synthesizer
the first music synthesizer capable of recreating the grand piano and other orchestral instruments
and the first commercially marketed large-vocabulary speech recognition
I had two disparate thoughts about this article. First, looking at the exterior made me think that the designer had made the initial sketches under the influence of something like LSD. Architecture meets Jell-O(tm). But wait, I've seen that kind of hurts-my-head-to-look-at-it design before. Sure enough, Frank Gehry strikes again with a repeat of his design for the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain. It would seem that this time he's added color to give an even more cartoon-ish appearance.
Then again, we have the petulant RMS who threatens to make "the big sacrifice" of leaving MIT because they used RFID badges for building security. Please. Grow the heck up. Don't threaten, leave or shut up.
I will concede your point. However, the majority of the American public will consider any other manual system as, at best, a step sideways rather than a step forward. Hence the push for something based on a computer.
By the way, how do the blind and legally blind complete the felt marker ballot without assistance? Everyone else has the advantage of submitting a private ballot.
Remember, these are the same people that will be developing the ulcers on election night when their systems start shitting out garbage
Remember a few years ago? There was this national election. One side did not get the outcome they wanted from a few counties in one state. Something about not being able to determine whether a card was punched or not... No one really cared about problems or lack thereof in any other town. Just the ones in Florida.
Anyone in a position of authority in Florida was tarred with a very big brush over a very common voting machine that a) has been in use for years, and b) was in use in other areas of the US on the same night with little or no complaint.
So now, having publicly condemned these individuals, you are surprised that their compatriots in other jurisdictions are eager to put into use anything that is new and bears no resemblance to a punch card system.
Essentially, this crowd will damn them NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO. And while I'm at it, to those of you filing lawsuits. If only you would put half as much effort into designing, developing and delivering a voting system that would satisfy everyone. Seems to be a lot easier to bitch about the current state than to actually try and fix it. And a lawsuit is not a fix.
We have a fiduciary obligation to our shareholders to do something about this.
So, like SCO, Rambus' answer to problems of their own making is to sue their more successful competition. Perhaps Rambus' chief legal eagle has been reading Darl's book: "Waah, nobody likes me so I'm going to take your toys and go home."
And after years of saying the Windows is the way and the light, they're finally acknowledging that poor security costs money. It's recommendations like this, more than anything else, that will move companies from Windows to Linux.
Because we all know there's no such thing as viruses, worms, trojan horses, etc in the Linux world. Right?
Poor security costs money. Period.
So does flawed thinking. This is not a Windows-only issue. And if you think it is, you are as guilty of myopia as the PHBs you cite. Gartner said jump, and you jumped. You're just jumping in a different direction.
Slashdot Mirror
Dunno about the rest of you, but I'd swear we've heard this dialog before:
..."
"I've just made a deal that will keep the [RIAA] out
which will be followed later by:
"I'm altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
As to it having a celphone for spying, are celphones banned from all meetings? My guess is most Generals are armed with a celphone.
Yes cellphones are banned from secured areas. That's all cellphones. So if one were to show-up on a military installation carrying a new generation phone with camera, where there are big freakin' "NO cameras, or recording devices allowed" signs, then you are a dumbf*ck idiot who needs to spend some time in the brig.
Note that few such places allow a PDA these days either. Unless of course you want them to significantly disable it for you.
Celphone jammers are realitively cheap and availible. It might be a smarter and more pratical thing to simply use them in conference rooms and not sweat the Majors new lapel phone let alone coke can.
Then again, you're in the military. Might be a hell of a lot smarter to follow some simple orders and save the taxpayers on several fronts.
Definitely sound.
Thud . . . . counting the seconds before you see the bloom start, knowing that the longer the time, the bigger the display. Or when you start hearing the rapid fire launch of the finale and just sit waiting for the good stuff.
Note the first part of the CWSA position. The part where publicly-funded weather information should go directly to the private sector. They'll decide the what, when, how and how much of subesquent dissemination to the public. All data. All formats (even the experimental stuff, we wouldn't want them to miss out on anything tasty). Then the private sector can package it for profit (what you call value-added).
I gather from your argument, that the government should not provide publicly-funded data (not software, cars or some other private venture) to the public? If commercial companies can take raw data, do something productive with it, and sell it, good for them. But there's not a chance in hell that they should be the only ones with access to the data. The public paid for the data at least once already.
No mention of what their thermal protection system involves, but there's a picture that is labelled as such. Here's another shot showing the wing coating. Look for the pinkish material on the nose/chin and leading edges. Does that give anyone additional clues as to the material involved?
...Reagan Cold War
You mean the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Castro, Krushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, and Gorbachev Cold War don't you? It's not like Reagan started this all on his own in '46.
My apologies to readers from the UK for leaving out Churchill from that list (given that he coined the term "Iron Curtain").
You're too young to remember that we've been here before. Kennedy went to space for political reasons too. Americans were trying to one-up the Russians. Check this and this out. For those who don't like to RTFA:
Computer programmers are more likely to have their work last longer than movie actors and screen writers who most often get royalties for use.
I understand your passion, but there is absolutely nothing to support your argument. Outside of code components for an operating system (Windows or *nix, take your pick), I seriously doubt that there is much in the way of code that will last more than 10-15 years.
Look at how we progress through the popularity of programming languages. _Ideas_ persist, but the code doesn't. It's re-written in another language or improved in the existing one. We are not going to see the programming equivalent of Citizen Kane that stands unadulterated for decades.
By the same token, I see no reason for providing copyright and royalties for musicians who cover someone else's work or sample the crap out of it. Where is the artistry in that?
My wife works for Prudential's former mortgage business unit (since acquired by a certain stagecoach company). Judging from the interface and performance (or lack thereof), I think I can say without equivocation that Prudential's UNIVAC is still in service.
The other giveaway is the large coal chute on the back side of the building.
Rather than ask amongst Slashdot users "What keeps you off of Windows?", perhaps we should ask the rest of the computing public a much more interesting question.
What keeps you off of Linux?
The first question merely allows us to puff out our collective chests and bleat for the rest of the assmbled throng. Then we nod appreciatively at our confirmation of the "obvious". Tell it brother!
But why don't more people use Linux or BSD (and their collective assortment of redheaded step-children)? What aren't we doing right that there isn't greater acknowlegement of the beneifts outlined in countless posts here. The question is not that far removed from the ease with which some snake oil salesman from the land of de Tocqueville is able to con the masses about Linux and Open Source.
Open Source and Linux need a really good PR guru that can get our voice heard. A few shouts in the wilderness ain't doing the job.
Then again, maybe we need to spend more time on improving this mouse trap so the world will beat a path to our door.
China keeps showing more and more signs that it wants to be a big player in the world despite being communist. If they could just smooth over the human rights people (I suppose they should actually improve the human rights thing in general), they could very well become a very important figure in the world economy (not that they're not already).
... for everything.
China has the largest population on the planet with 1.3+ Billion people. The USA, including all states, protectorates, territories and New Jersey, is not quite 300 million (2000 census). That would make China four times the size in population. But you don't think they're very important.
News Flash: With only the most minor of exceptions, the governments of the world obviously don't care about China's human rights policies. Even the US, under the Clinton administration, gave in. Why? Because China already IS an economic power.
Do you stand in front of mountain and insist that it come to you? Think of economic power in terms of kinetic energy. KE = 0.5 * mass * velocity^2. Right now, China's economy doesn't have much velocity, but it sure as hell has mass. Let's apply that to the most fundamental priciple of economics: Supply and Demand. When demand rises while supply stays the same or goes down, price rises. China is untapped demand potential. That demand potential is unmatched. And as that demand changes from potential to realized, we'll all pay more
What happens to Java for that matter?
IF, Microsoft were to acquire Sun... (given that I find this a remote possibility)
1) Star Office would be officially pronounced (as in Medical Examiner) within days.
2) Open Office would continue more or less unaffected
3) Java on the other hand, in the form we currently know it, might also die for entirely BS reasons provided by Microsoft:
Here's the big question, though: why would having an artist spend time to do facial expressions be more cheap and convenient than simply having an actor doing them?
Cost.
Actors cost more than digital animators. Both gross pay and overhead. Some even get a cut of the "profits" though we've seen how Hollywood loathes the officially declare a profit for just that reason. Need to re-shoot a scene? You've got to work with the actor's schedule. Multiply that by the number of actors. Then there are the support staff (lighting, grip, gaffers, caterers, etc). Don't need those either.
Am I alone in wanting a completely computer-generated movie that looks real instead of cartoony and actually has a good plot?
... geeks?
I think you can safely say that, as a union, SAG (Screen Actor's Guild) is less than thrilled about the prospect. In the not too distant future, there may not be a need for human actors. Believable human animation may be to live acting, what sound was to silent movies. It's not the crowd scenes that are the problem. Weta proved that. Being able to model actors closeup will be the milestone. At that point, who do you give the Academy Award for Best Actor to when Shrek is brought to life by a cast of
Does Shrek have a voice coach? Stunt double? Agent? Someone to teach him to mix concrete and sign complicated insurance forms?
Meet Brood X of the 17-year Periodical Cicada.
Snap! crackle! pop!
Why waste such a monster on mere ants. I realize there are some of you out who would think of a certain movie and popcorn (lots of popcorn), but you've got to agree this is more unique.
Meanwhile, the US Congress has been grilling folks lately for not finding a couple of needles in a global haystack.
"What do you mean you're not all knowing? Whack!"
"What do you mean, you're profiling? Whack whack!"
So which is it going to be? Shall we pillory law enforcement and the intelligence community for not anticipating which flights on which days would be turned into guided missiles? OR, shall we now instead beat them more for doing the kind of pro-active investigation that faulted them for not doing before? How politically correct to have them be at fault no matter how we sway in the wind.
Notice how in all the finger pointing at everyone else, Congress has never pointed the finger at themselves?
It's heartwarming to know there are still people who believe that anything a Union does must be good.
Did you know that there's an exemption from prosecution in the case of union violence committed in the name of "legitimate union objectives" such as higher wages? Take a look at the 1973 US Supreme Court ruling in the Emmons case.
What would work is for everyone to carpool one day a week, or otherwise find a way to drive less than you otherwise would have. That would cut demand and have a huge impact on prices.
... virtually no impact. We would have to do that on a massive scale and for a long period of time.
That would have
Even then, that would have at best a temporary impact. Faster growing countries like China and India are going to have a greater impact on the price of crude in the future than anything the US is likely to do.
And I laugh at those single drivers in their giant trucks and SUVs.
From their perch high above you they don't care. They stopped caring at the moment they bought those high-priced behemoths in the first place.
Gary Kildall anyone? First, on his own merits (see PL/M, CP/M, BIOS and Digital Research). Then because he wasn't available when IBM came calling to use CP/M. In the end, the world got MS-DOS because Bill Gates licensed a CP/M clone and re-licensed it to IBM.
I grabbed the following from Kurzweill Technologies: Ray Kurzweil was the principal developer of
I had two disparate thoughts about this article. First, looking at the exterior made me think that the designer had made the initial sketches under the influence of something like LSD. Architecture meets Jell-O(tm). But wait, I've seen that kind of hurts-my-head-to-look-at-it design before. Sure enough, Frank Gehry strikes again with a repeat of his design for the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain. It would seem that this time he's added color to give an even more cartoon-ish appearance.
Then again, we have the petulant RMS who threatens to make "the big sacrifice" of leaving MIT because they used RFID badges for building security. Please. Grow the heck up. Don't threaten, leave or shut up.
I will concede your point. However, the majority of the American public will consider any other manual system as, at best, a step sideways rather than a step forward. Hence the push for something based on a computer.
By the way, how do the blind and legally blind complete the felt marker ballot without assistance? Everyone else has the advantage of submitting a private ballot.
Remember, these are the same people that will be developing the ulcers on election night when their systems start shitting out garbage
Remember a few years ago? There was this national election. One side did not get the outcome they wanted from a few counties in one state. Something about not being able to determine whether a card was punched or not... No one really cared about problems or lack thereof in any other town. Just the ones in Florida.
Anyone in a position of authority in Florida was tarred with a very big brush over a very common voting machine that a) has been in use for years, and b) was in use in other areas of the US on the same night with little or no complaint.
So now, having publicly condemned these individuals, you are surprised that their compatriots in other jurisdictions are eager to put into use anything that is new and bears no resemblance to a punch card system.
Essentially, this crowd will damn them NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO. And while I'm at it, to those of you filing lawsuits. If only you would put half as much effort into designing, developing and delivering a voting system that would satisfy everyone. Seems to be a lot easier to bitch about the current state than to actually try and fix it. And a lawsuit is not a fix.
We have a fiduciary obligation to our shareholders to do something about this.
So, like SCO, Rambus' answer to problems of their own making is to sue their more successful competition. Perhaps Rambus' chief legal eagle has been reading Darl's book: "Waah, nobody likes me so I'm going to take your toys and go home."
And after years of saying the Windows is the way and the light, they're finally acknowledging that poor security costs money. It's recommendations like this, more than anything else, that will move companies from Windows to Linux.
Because we all know there's no such thing as viruses, worms, trojan horses, etc in the Linux world. Right?
Poor security costs money. Period.
So does flawed thinking. This is not a Windows-only issue. And if you think it is, you are as guilty of myopia as the PHBs you cite. Gartner said jump, and you jumped. You're just jumping in a different direction.