The straight A students who need a bit of a reality check because they suddenly find that they can't spend other peoples' money anymore, like the UK, and Greece? You know, I was friends with a borderline-special-needs kids in school myself, and last I heard the girl's happily married and honestly employed with a modicum of productivity, and pretty happy.... certainly better than some of the really smart straight-A private-college grads who are tens of grands in the hole already and can't figure out how to do much with themselves. (One guy I know who got a biology degree or such at a prestigious private university is now working at Starbucks; at least he gets to meet people, I suppose.)
I seem to recall that when so-and-so did the breakdown of the Apple A4, they calculated that further power savings from the CPU would only be able to achieve limited effects on battery life, as the rest of the system board / the wireless / the display were eclipsing its usage. If Acer can pull off something remotely similar, the "turn shinies off" tactic might be less effective than you would think.
Even in the "real world", where it should be (and is) perfectly fine to use someone else's work to solve a problem its still wrong to take credit for it.
Yes! But just because it's wrong, that doesn't mean we laws against it to send people to jail. Honor code violations, sure, expulsion from your university for egregious and blatant cases, yes. (Though I'd avoid the academic fundamentalists who would kick you out of school for getting the italics wrong on a citation and call that "plagiarism"... okay, I exxagerate, but only slightly.) Public ridicule? Bring it on. (Hey, look, we're bringing it on right now!) As for other things which can be equally "wrong", again: where's the law against lying?
If we have rules for intellectual property, we should have them for intellectual fraud too.
Hey, this is Slashdot, remember? The atmosphere here tends to be seriously skeptical of the stronger notions of legal protection of "intellectual property."
Plagiarism is not illegal in and of itself, except for where it's fraudulent, or an outright violation of copyright as well, and I'm perfectly okay with that. Plagiarism is primarily an academic offense, and by and large The Real World (tm) doesn't need the same level of rigorous academic standards that Academia does.
Also not generally illegal (save for fraud, promissory estoppel, etc): lying.
The glory of your vision may be more widely appreciated when a major vendor can hammer it into the thick skulls of the rest of the world's development community until they come around to appreciate it on their own.:)
(Just sayin'. I mean, otherwise, why would they have even heard of you? Remember that these people aren't necessarily in on the Hot New Stuff in the grassroots developer community, and their employers probably are even worse.)
Crossing the "event horizon" isn't really an interesting event in and of itself. It just marks a point of no escape and no return. Granted, if you're getting close enough to the black hole to be anywhere near the event horizon, the tidal stresses might be pretty intense, but the horizon itself is not a solid object and likely somewhat boring.
On an IBM^H^H^H^H Lenovo laptop, it's a TrackPoint. Much more convenient than the lame touchpads most computers have (with the possible exception of Apple) and can give you much finer control. And you don't need to move your hands from the typing position at all, so it's even more convenient than an external mouse for quick tasks.
The one downside is that it will start to chafe your fingertip if you use it for hours and hours and hours on end.
It should be mentioned that the stable libration points for geostationary satellites are earth-relative (105 deg west, 75 deg east) and are not the same as the Sun-Earth lagrange points (such as those occupied by SOHO and other observation satellites).
Forgive my ignorance in these highly technical matters, but when exactly did we start sending up Small Or Home Office satellites?
Well, he's using a broader figure of unemployment than is the norm. Which might be fair, if we were to talk about the normal levels of that figure even when the economy is well.... the "less than 2% unemployment!" figures from the boom days still included a lot of people who were not in the labor force. How come the GP doesn't drag out those numbers to edify us? Then we can discuss the situation in an informed manner instead of a kneejerk one.
Here's how the Wall Street Journal puts your point:
The implicit claim that scientists are better qualified than nonscientists to answer ethical questions points to the broader problem with the liberal attitude toward science. It seems to be more about asserting the political authority of scientists than adhering to the scientific method. This is very clear in the global-warming debate, in which, as last year's "Climategate" scandal showed, scientists disregarded the scientific method in order to promote an ideologically favored hypothesis. In ignoring the scandal and pushing ahead with its "climate" agenda, the Obama administration has shown that it is more interested in ideology than science.
It then goes on to talk about the recent "americans are bombarded with cancer" report:
"This is an evenhanded approach, and an evenhanded report," Dr. Leffall said. "We didn't make statements that should not be made."
He acknowledged that it was impossible to specify just how many cancers were environmentally caused, because not enough research had been done, but he said he was confident that when the research was done, it would confirm the panel's assertion that the problem had been grossly underestimated.
He is confident that once the research has been done, it will confirm the conclusions that he has already reached--conclusions, by the way, that would seem to point in the direction of a vast expansion of government power, consistent with the administration's ideology. Is this what the president meant when he promised to restore science to its proper place?
(Agreement with or refutation of the specifics of the case being made are left as an exercise to the reader.)
So you're basically saying "sell low, buy high?" I love you, man. I'll be sure to thank you for the killer deals I get on my retirement portfolio next week.
Here's my question: How come something like this hasn't happened before naturally, as the result of an earthquake or something? (Or has it, and we just weren't paying attention that century?)
When I toured the local wastewater treatment plant about, oh, nine years ago or so, they told us about how they could extract methane from the plant and generate their own electricity.
They didn't. Buying power from the local electric utility was cheaper.
I mean, it's kind of "released" on the sea bed already. Presumably it could drift off to other parts of the ocean if it were worthwhile for it to do so.
It's not really PCs that they're predicting will die per se I think. It's the ability of companies like Dell and HP (and Apple, for that matter) and the like to make tons of cash selling PCs. People who use the PCs will have it great, though, since everything will be ever-so-cheap!
Solar-thermal is most effective for a big plant. But big plants don't solve the power problems of developing third-world nations. Small plants without miles and miles of power-line infrastructure are more effective.
If you look at the history of the developed world you'll see a lot of small (non-electric) power sources bootstrapping the process. Long before you had big centralized power plants, there were plenty windmills and water mills, at first just for agriculture but later for things like manufacturing (textiles). Abundant water power was one of the reasons New England was a center of industry and the South wasn't.
Slashdot Mirror
The straight A students who need a bit of a reality check because they suddenly find that they can't spend other peoples' money anymore, like the UK, and Greece? You know, I was friends with a borderline-special-needs kids in school myself, and last I heard the girl's happily married and honestly employed with a modicum of productivity, and pretty happy.... certainly better than some of the really smart straight-A private-college grads who are tens of grands in the hole already and can't figure out how to do much with themselves. (One guy I know who got a biology degree or such at a prestigious private university is now working at Starbucks; at least he gets to meet people, I suppose.)
I seem to recall that when so-and-so did the breakdown of the Apple A4, they calculated that further power savings from the CPU would only be able to achieve limited effects on battery life, as the rest of the system board / the wireless / the display were eclipsing its usage. If Acer can pull off something remotely similar, the "turn shinies off" tactic might be less effective than you would think.
Yes! But just because it's wrong, that doesn't mean we laws against it to send people to jail. Honor code violations, sure, expulsion from your university for egregious and blatant cases, yes. (Though I'd avoid the academic fundamentalists who would kick you out of school for getting the italics wrong on a citation and call that "plagiarism"... okay, I exxagerate, but only slightly.) Public ridicule? Bring it on. (Hey, look, we're bringing it on right now!) As for other things which can be equally "wrong", again: where's the law against lying?
Hey, this is Slashdot, remember? The atmosphere here tends to be seriously skeptical of the stronger notions of legal protection of "intellectual property."
Plagiarism is not illegal in and of itself, except for where it's fraudulent, or an outright violation of copyright as well, and I'm perfectly okay with that. Plagiarism is primarily an academic offense, and by and large The Real World (tm) doesn't need the same level of rigorous academic standards that Academia does.
Also not generally illegal (save for fraud, promissory estoppel, etc): lying.
The glory of your vision may be more widely appreciated when a major vendor can hammer it into the thick skulls of the rest of the world's development community until they come around to appreciate it on their own. :)
(Just sayin'. I mean, otherwise, why would they have even heard of you? Remember that these people aren't necessarily in on the Hot New Stuff in the grassroots developer community, and their employers probably are even worse.)
The strippers favor a pole tax, actually.
Self-absorbed schmucks like the xkcd fans who think that Wikipedia needs an article on yet another joke about Wikipedia?
Crossing the "event horizon" isn't really an interesting event in and of itself. It just marks a point of no escape and no return. Granted, if you're getting close enough to the black hole to be anywhere near the event horizon, the tidal stresses might be pretty intense, but the horizon itself is not a solid object and likely somewhat boring.
Also, supermassive black holes generally have remarkably low densities. A 6.5-billion-Sun black hole has a density of about "0.5 mg/cm3, less than half the density of earth's atmosphere at sea level."
the download page.
The one downside is that it will start to chafe your fingertip if you use it for hours and hours and hours on end.
Tip: The last couple hundred of years included Pearl Harbor. Good luck next time!
Forgive my ignorance in these highly technical matters, but when exactly did we start sending up Small Or Home Office satellites?
Well, he's using a broader figure of unemployment than is the norm. Which might be fair, if we were to talk about the normal levels of that figure even when the economy is well.... the "less than 2% unemployment!" figures from the boom days still included a lot of people who were not in the labor force. How come the GP doesn't drag out those numbers to edify us? Then we can discuss the situation in an informed manner instead of a kneejerk one.
And the wise one will listen to both the "yes" and "no" and find balance.
(ooh look i'm being all eastern/Zen-y! :b)
It then goes on to talk about the recent "americans are bombarded with cancer" report:
(Agreement with or refutation of the specifics of the case being made are left as an exercise to the reader.)
So you're basically saying "sell low, buy high?" I love you, man. I'll be sure to thank you for the killer deals I get on my retirement portfolio next week.
No; that's Planescape.
Here's my question: How come something like this hasn't happened before naturally, as the result of an earthquake or something? (Or has it, and we just weren't paying attention that century?)
They had all the equipment installed, and had used it in the past, so I believe it was because of the maintenance costs.
They didn't. Buying power from the local electric utility was cheaper.
Clearly you are unfamiliar with Microsoft's implementation style.
I mean, it's kind of "released" on the sea bed already. Presumably it could drift off to other parts of the ocean if it were worthwhile for it to do so.
It would be difficult, if not impossible, for it be much worse than introducing a few million gallons of crude oil into the same environment.
It's not really PCs that they're predicting will die per se I think. It's the ability of companies like Dell and HP (and Apple, for that matter) and the like to make tons of cash selling PCs. People who use the PCs will have it great, though, since everything will be ever-so-cheap!
If you look at the history of the developed world you'll see a lot of small (non-electric) power sources bootstrapping the process. Long before you had big centralized power plants, there were plenty windmills and water mills, at first just for agriculture but later for things like manufacturing (textiles). Abundant water power was one of the reasons New England was a center of industry and the South wasn't.