If you're using a service being run by a profit making entity in a public capacity, their rights to exploit their assets for profit are fettered by the public rights to the extent that their asset has become a public facility. This is a very old and well established legal principle.
You can't open a restaurant and then lock the doors once people are eating, saying anyone who walked in has to pay an exit toll due to a retroactive change in the conditions of entry.
Or we could create environments where children are encouraged to learn and behave in a mutually co-operative manner! These institutions could perhaps replace schools...
Troll? Why is that marked troll? He muses what an impressive show it must be an then expresses concern for his fellow man.
Finally! Incontrovertible proof that the Slashdot moderators are secretly encouraging members to express their disdain and apathy towards their kin thus creating an antisocial and disjointed population which would increase their control over them and facilitate the establishment of their New Global Order! Wake up sheeple! The Slashdot mods are taking over!
What? What do you mean I have to lower my morphine dose?
Well in addition to that I hope that this teaches us to respect the Earth's natural resources, the subtle ones as well as the bubbling black and shiny gold ones that we currently fight over like a bunch of heavily armed 5 year olds.
There are very few things that the GIMP can't do that Adobe PS. Granted, PS is a more polished product, but non-professionals are unlikely ever to notice a difference in feature set. Furthermore, the GIMP interface has been improving, and I now think that they are equally good, only very different which is why it is relatively difficult to switch from one to the other when you are very familiar with one. Such a scenario favors the incumbent. Hello, Windows vs Linux.
Yea, these alarmists just like scaring people. The biosphere will evolve to deal with any problems we create today. This means that there's hope for our great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grand children after all.
If it's subsonic, then it *will* give a warning. It won't give a warning if the rounds are supersonic, which most long range rifles are designed to deliver. Subsonic rounds are limited in range, and slower rounds have to be heavier, leading to a reduction in kinetic energy.
Before someone goes off half cocked (heh heh), kinetic energy is proportional to mass and the square of velocity. So a reduction in velocity requires a much larger proportional increase in mass if kinetic energy is not to be lost.
IOW, trading speed for mass is bad. Lighter rounds at higher speeds are better in sniper rifles.
You see, Wikipedia fails. The article is saying that the following are both correct: "There are myriad people" "There is myriad people"
While syntactically correct, both statements really do diverge from the typical use of the word myriad; it usually refers to a large number of objects, whose number greatly exceeds the numbers that we usually see people in. Furthermore, there are far more suitable collective nouns for referring to large groups of people, which makes the use of myriad in this context seem unconventional at best.
E.g., "There are myriad ways in which the word myriad can be used, but only a few of them are correct."
The fact that I've been modded down and that Wikipedia gets it wrong is a fantastic illustration of where the internet fails; the collective vomit that Wikipedia often degenerates into is no substitute for expertise in a given field.
The only time that myriad can be followed by the word "of" is when it is used in plural. E.g., "The myriads of linguistic amateurs on Slashdot".
I would encourage you (and the mods presumably) to look this up in a reputable English dictionary
And the difference between electrostatic and electromagnetic forces would be what? There is no reason to keep them apart, it's the same phenomenon.
Totally, utterly wrong. I'm not going to explain it, because you're obviously too self-righteous. Go ask your year 10 science teacher.
And what would that other force be that matter is interacting with outside of atoms, other than gravity?
I believe the fundamental forces are magnetic, electrostatic, gravity, weak nuclear force and strong nuclear force. Any quantum physicists in the house may feel free to prompt me if I'm forgetting any.
That is correct of course, as of now, but the parent poster made it look like it would be fundamentally impossible.
I am the parent poster, and (outside the realm of science fiction) it is impossible to project an electrostatic force.
At the end of the day, the universe that we live in has rules. Just because these rules can be disregarded in fiction does not mean that we will one day invent technology that can do that. Before the technoculture that we currently live in, science fiction did not rely on technology as a plot device, but magic wands and crystal balls. No, I can't say for certain that in 10,000 years we won't invent a deflector shield, but it violates so much of what we currently understand and what we can do, that such technology goes into the same basket as Harry Potter's magic wand.
Obviously we are referring to the loose kind of journalism one would find in Der Spiegel. The point that the GP was getting at, that you so flippantly deride, is that too many "researchers" these days are willing to use the first three results from a Google search as the sum total of their research into a topic. While Der Spiegel may be a reputable news outlet, one cannot generally take its articles as primary sources, and certainly not for the purposes of engaging in encyclopedic grade research.
I feel that Wikipedia needs to put in place policies that start selecting out those contributors who are unable to either engage in this level of research and those who are unable to produce encyclopedia grade writing. Many of the Wikipedia articles are, while informative and good as an introduction into a topic, very superficial and poorly written. Unsophisticated use of language is not a problem per se, however it can lead to ambiguity. The ability of a writer to consistently ensure that there is no other way their text could be interpreted is the difference between a mediocre researcher and a true scholar.
Oh, and for the record, an interview with direct quotes in a newspaper is *not* a primary source unless the newspaper states that the printed interview is the unabridged transcript of the interview. That is almost never the case. Newspapers almost always edit their interviews for brevity, language style and sometimes even content policy.
So your self-righteous indignation at his teaching standards are misplaced. It's not that he's unfair or too strict, its just that kids these days have become so spoiled by the easy access to lots of junk information that they have lost all understanding of what real research is.
Science has been open source since before you were born. Peer reviewed journals have been the way research (at least non private sector research) gets spread between universities and peer reviewed.
Industry shills like yourself may be learning to be a bit more subtle in the ways of FUDcasting, but know that there will always be people smarter than you who will call you on your BS.
Am I the only one here who thinks that there's more to the web app vs desktop app dichotomy than Google vs Microsoft and that people who boil it down to that are morons of the highest (or is it lowest?) degree?
To all you Google loving idiots out there: Google is no less evil than Microsoft. The profit motive doesn't apply any less to them, and having "Don't Be Evil" as a corporate slogan doesn't make it company policy.
Slashdot Mirror
False.
If you're using a service being run by a profit making entity in a public capacity, their rights to exploit their assets for profit are fettered by the public rights to the extent that their asset has become a public facility. This is a very old and well established legal principle.
You can't open a restaurant and then lock the doors once people are eating, saying anyone who walked in has to pay an exit toll due to a retroactive change in the conditions of entry.
Like a what?! Dude, seriously, what's wrong with a car analogy?
Or we could create environments where children are encouraged to learn and behave in a mutually co-operative manner! These institutions could perhaps replace schools...
Troll? Why is that marked troll? He muses what an impressive show it must be an then expresses concern for his fellow man.
Finally! Incontrovertible proof that the Slashdot moderators are secretly encouraging members to express their disdain and apathy towards their kin thus creating an antisocial and disjointed population which would increase their control over them and facilitate the establishment of their New Global Order! Wake up sheeple! The Slashdot mods are taking over!
What? What do you mean I have to lower my morphine dose?
Well then they'll have the upper type III secretory protein.
Smart ass.
Well in addition to that I hope that this teaches us to respect the Earth's natural resources, the subtle ones as well as the bubbling black and shiny gold ones that we currently fight over like a bunch of heavily armed 5 year olds.
There are very few things that the GIMP can't do that Adobe PS. Granted, PS is a more polished product, but non-professionals are unlikely ever to notice a difference in feature set. Furthermore, the GIMP interface has been improving, and I now think that they are equally good, only very different which is why it is relatively difficult to switch from one to the other when you are very familiar with one. Such a scenario favors the incumbent. Hello, Windows vs Linux.
Yea, that Debian patch Tuesday is *such* a pain in the ass.
Yea, these alarmists just like scaring people. The biosphere will evolve to deal with any problems we create today. This means that there's hope for our great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great great grand children after all.
If it's subsonic, then it *will* give a warning. It won't give a warning if the rounds are supersonic, which most long range rifles are designed to deliver. Subsonic rounds are limited in range, and slower rounds have to be heavier, leading to a reduction in kinetic energy.
Before someone goes off half cocked (heh heh), kinetic energy is proportional to mass and the square of velocity. So a reduction in velocity requires a much larger proportional increase in mass if kinetic energy is not to be lost.
IOW, trading speed for mass is bad. Lighter rounds at higher speeds are better in sniper rifles.
You see, Wikipedia fails. The article is saying that the following are both correct:
"There are myriad people"
"There is myriad people"
While syntactically correct, both statements really do diverge from the typical use of the word myriad; it usually refers to a large number of objects, whose number greatly exceeds the numbers that we usually see people in. Furthermore, there are far more suitable collective nouns for referring to large groups of people, which makes the use of myriad in this context seem unconventional at best.
E.g.,
"There are myriad ways in which the word myriad can be used, but only a few of them are correct."
The fact that I've been modded down and that Wikipedia gets it wrong is a fantastic illustration of where the internet fails; the collective vomit that Wikipedia often degenerates into is no substitute for expertise in a given field.
The only time that myriad can be followed by the word "of" is when it is used in plural. E.g.,
"The myriads of linguistic amateurs on Slashdot".
I would encourage you (and the mods presumably) to look this up in a reputable English dictionary
"myriad other" NOT "myriad of other"
The word "myriad" is not used in the same way collective nouns are.
If the "25 Things" meme was akin to a light flu, then the damn Soviet Russia meme must be like the virus from 28 Days Later.
I only hope that it too causes the host to eventually die of starvation.
Correction:
"just an electric magnet that gives off a normal magnetic field"
Typo. Sorry.
Totally, utterly wrong. I'm not going to explain it, because you're obviously too self-righteous. Go ask your year 10 science teacher.
I believe the fundamental forces are magnetic, electrostatic, gravity, weak nuclear force and strong nuclear force. Any quantum physicists in the house may feel free to prompt me if I'm forgetting any.
I am the parent poster, and (outside the realm of science fiction) it is impossible to project an electrostatic force.
At the end of the day, the universe that we live in has rules. Just because these rules can be disregarded in fiction does not mean that we will one day invent technology that can do that. Before the technoculture that we currently live in, science fiction did not rely on technology as a plot device, but magic wands and crystal balls. No, I can't say for certain that in 10,000 years we won't invent a deflector shield, but it violates so much of what we currently understand and what we can do, that such technology goes into the same basket as Harry Potter's magic wand.
That analogy makes sense like baked clams on a toilet seat.
You could assassinate him, and then check his tombstone. I'm pretty sure they'd get it right there.
Obviously we are referring to the loose kind of journalism one would find in Der Spiegel. The point that the GP was getting at, that you so flippantly deride, is that too many "researchers" these days are willing to use the first three results from a Google search as the sum total of their research into a topic. While Der Spiegel may be a reputable news outlet, one cannot generally take its articles as primary sources, and certainly not for the purposes of engaging in encyclopedic grade research.
I feel that Wikipedia needs to put in place policies that start selecting out those contributors who are unable to either engage in this level of research and those who are unable to produce encyclopedia grade writing. Many of the Wikipedia articles are, while informative and good as an introduction into a topic, very superficial and poorly written. Unsophisticated use of language is not a problem per se, however it can lead to ambiguity. The ability of a writer to consistently ensure that there is no other way their text could be interpreted is the difference between a mediocre researcher and a true scholar.
Oh, and for the record, an interview with direct quotes in a newspaper is *not* a primary source unless the newspaper states that the printed interview is the unabridged transcript of the interview. That is almost never the case. Newspapers almost always edit their interviews for brevity, language style and sometimes even content policy.
So your self-righteous indignation at his teaching standards are misplaced. It's not that he's unfair or too strict, its just that kids these days have become so spoiled by the easy access to lots of junk information that they have lost all understanding of what real research is.
I'm looking for a place to stay at the moment. What's the rent like in security, and is it a pet-friendly area?
Man, don't you hate forgetting to tick "Post Anonymously" ?
Are you, by any chance, a web designer from Melbourne, Australia?
Science has been open source since before you were born. Peer reviewed journals have been the way research (at least non private sector research) gets spread between universities and peer reviewed.
Industry shills like yourself may be learning to be a bit more subtle in the ways of FUDcasting, but know that there will always be people smarter than you who will call you on your BS.
I doubt Palin is in Microsoft's interests.
She uses Yahoo! Mail, remember?
Am I the only one here who thinks that there's more to the web app vs desktop app dichotomy than Google vs Microsoft and that people who boil it down to that are morons of the highest (or is it lowest?) degree?
To all you Google loving idiots out there: Google is no less evil than Microsoft. The profit motive doesn't apply any less to them, and having "Don't Be Evil" as a corporate slogan doesn't make it company policy.
Xfce is your friend.
I use Xubuntu. Plain, clear, simple and *fast*. 8.10 runs out of the box everything on my ThinkPad laptop including Bluetooth. Get it.