I have one of these http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=2729 7. Yeah, it's $280, but it comes with everything you need to get started on all kinds of electronics projects.
I can assure you, the absolute top scientists in pharmaceuticals don't make much more than $200K/year, and that's after a long time. The average is in the low $100's.
Developing an idea or process, releasing its details to the public, and patenting it has a negative effect, as it prevents others from disseminating that same idea or process to the public. By denying scientists the ability to build upon previous work, this undermines the very foundation of the field.
That's not entirely true. A patent only prevents use for profit. For example, I have made patented substances for use in non-profit research, this does not violate the patent. If I make the substances and sell them, or use them to make another substance and sell it, I am violating the patent and need to pay royalties for it.
You're not being retarded, but there's a big difference between reading a patent and a journal article. Patents are written in a sort of horrible mishmash of legalese and scientific jargon, and are deliberately as vague as possible because they're trying to prevent something from being used. They're useless for conveying an idea, they're designed to prevent as many similar applications of the idea as possible from being used.
Whenever I do a search for information on something, I only look at patents as an absolute last resort.
I like the idea of an evacuated maglev tunnel. It's still unrealistic (a tunnel from NY to LA would cost $1 trillion), although, the cost is all in the construction.
Most - not all, as they're still working on getting more content approved for subscription service
Yeah, I'll bet. I was almost interested, until I saw that caveat that the subscription service was for "most". I have a feeling that it won't be "most" of what I "want".
Since Apple doesn't make much profit from the store, it doesn't affect their bottom line.
It does when someone with an old iPod and a thousand dollars worth of M4P's that won't play on anything else starts looking for their next music player.
What happens next time the PowerPC architecture pulls ahead?
Well, Apple has done a lot to ensure that processor transitions will be much easier in the future. The current development model allows universal binaries compiled from the same codebase, and as long as developers use the current tools, switching to another processor shouldn't be a big deal. In particular, almost any app written for Intel Mac should compile/run just fine if they decided to go back to PPC.
I've found that as I've gotten older, I also don't have the time to waste dicking around with the PC to keep it operational, and I'm willing to pay more for a machine where I don't have to.
Slashdot Mirror
I have one of these http://www.parallax.com/detail.asp?product_id=2729 7. Yeah, it's $280, but it comes with everything you need to get started on all kinds of electronics projects.
So, learn to make the drugs. It's not illegal to make a patented drug, only to sell it.
I can assure you, the absolute top scientists in pharmaceuticals don't make much more than $200K/year, and that's after a long time. The average is in the low $100's.
Developing an idea or process, releasing its details to the public, and patenting it has a negative effect, as it prevents others from disseminating that same idea or process to the public. By denying scientists the ability to build upon previous work, this undermines the very foundation of the field.
That's not entirely true. A patent only prevents use for profit. For example, I have made patented substances for use in non-profit research, this does not violate the patent. If I make the substances and sell them, or use them to make another substance and sell it, I am violating the patent and need to pay royalties for it.
You're not being retarded, but there's a big difference between reading a patent and a journal article. Patents are written in a sort of horrible mishmash of legalese and scientific jargon, and are deliberately as vague as possible because they're trying to prevent something from being used. They're useless for conveying an idea, they're designed to prevent as many similar applications of the idea as possible from being used.
Whenever I do a search for information on something, I only look at patents as an absolute last resort.
A lot more people probably buy the brand-name Tylenol after they found random metal shards in the generic stuff.
I'm doing my PhD research with grants from Novartis and Pfizer. So yeah, if they didn't have any money, i'd be out on the street.
I'd use it if it wasn't by subscription. I don't have the time to find 30 songs worth listening to every month.
I want your brother-in-law's mom for christmas.
I dunno, but oil pipelines never seem to have that problem.
I like the idea of an evacuated maglev tunnel. It's still unrealistic (a tunnel from NY to LA would cost $1 trillion), although, the cost is all in the construction.
If you have to think about whether it's ethical, it's probably not.
If the music you want isn't available through the Zune subscription, contact the artist and/or label to get them to allow it.
I might as well just ask them to start selling lossless files without DRM.
Most - not all, as they're still working on getting more content approved for subscription service
Yeah, I'll bet. I was almost interested, until I saw that caveat that the subscription service was for "most". I have a feeling that it won't be "most" of what I "want".
Bose is like the Zune to audiophiles, isn't it? I've heard endless diatribes about how much Bose sucks.
I already have music. I want an AM receiver for NPR.
Of course, nobody offers it. Free market fails again.
I have a mac, and the Zune won't work with it.
FLASHING TEXT ads on slashdot's front page didn't make the list...
wtf, seriously.
You can't drive a car without tires, and when you buy a car, you generally don't pick the brand of tires they put on it.
Since Apple doesn't make much profit from the store, it doesn't affect their bottom line.
It does when someone with an old iPod and a thousand dollars worth of M4P's that won't play on anything else starts looking for their next music player.
What happens next time the PowerPC architecture pulls ahead?
Well, Apple has done a lot to ensure that processor transitions will be much easier in the future. The current development model allows universal binaries compiled from the same codebase, and as long as developers use the current tools, switching to another processor shouldn't be a big deal. In particular, almost any app written for Intel Mac should compile/run just fine if they decided to go back to PPC.
They'd never use Linux, they'd use BSD, since they could just take the code and not have to open-source anything.
I've found that as I've gotten older, I also don't have the time to waste dicking around with the PC to keep it operational, and I'm willing to pay more for a machine where I don't have to.
Does anybody really care about radio reception much at all beyond the pre-teen set?
I'd really like AM radio on it. I have no need for FM radio, since my ipod already has music on it. It doesn't however, have news.
Claudius didn't work for Mossad.