I mean how many artists slap something together without much research or thought and then call it "art".
So, what does the amount of effort exerted by the artist have to do with whether or not it's art?
Ok, it appeals to our capitalist value system to think that people should be rewarded for hard work, but I personally don't believe that the intentions of an artist have anything to do with the artistic value of what that artist creates.
So, what would you consider evidence of global warming?
I mean, I assume you don't dispute that the global average temperature has been increasing over the past few decades. So would you say that climatologists haven't proven that this is outside the bounds of normal climate variation? If so, what sort of evidence would satisfy you in this regard? Can you offer any data to show that this trend isn't significant?
There isn't anything in this world today where everyone says it's good for you and nobody is saying it will kill you - just look at diets and mobile phones.
Yeah, but there are many things that everyone says are bad for you, and no one thinks are good. Lead is one.
With recycling companies breaking-up computers and other electronic devices into their constituent materials and reselling "raw" materials this should become less and less of an issue.
BTW, How many computer recycling companies are accepting computers from your area? Maybe I'm just uninformed, but I haven't heard of any that would take my old computer parts.
Ok, if we're giving out props, I think big ups need to be given to my boys Gaston Julia, Benoit Mandelbrot, Georg Cantor, and Aleksandr Lyapunov. Lately Stephen Wolfram has been doing similar work.
Well, you're close. I can.zip a file but, without the program to unzip it, I can't recreate its contents. Now, if you create a self-extracting executable, then you can call it an algorithm that creates the file.
Also, you are using a very generalized definition of 'compression'. As a mathematical argument, I think its great. Most people here however are probably thinking of programming land, where protected mode processors enforce strict separation between 'code' and 'data'.
On further review, I think this quote is spurious. Searching the text, I can't find the words 'witless' or 'stupid' in either of the two opinions filed.
Dude, I gotta step up on this one. The name of the case is:
LUTHER R. CAMPBELL aka LUKE SKYYWALKER, et al., PETITIONERS v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.
according to Cornell's Legal Information Institute. I point this out because (1) it is funny, and (2) while I could care less about 2 live crew, to mangle the name of Roy Acuff's music company is something of a sin in where I come from.
So, in your first link, the words "proposed hyperplane" suggest to me that their plane, unlike NASA's, doesn't exist yet. The rest of the article, as far as I could tell, is about ballistic missles powered by rockets and 'regular' jets.
The second link is from NewsMax. Since I assume you're not from the U.S., you may not know that this is not a reputable news site. They are actually ultra-right scandal-mongers. I didn't see a single source cited in that entire article, but it appears they took the news from a Washington Times article (the Times is another right-leaning paper, not to be confused with the reputable Washington Post). The Russians denied the report as can be seen here. So if you want to believe that the Russians have scramjet-powered BM warheads, you go ahead. I won't say that they don't, but to ignore such rumors when discussing real hypersonic research doesn't make one "US centric"
India has announced a program that will test a similar plane in a few years. Australia tested a scramjet mounted on the front of a rocket, and it was falling straight down towards earth at the time the jet achieved combustion. I couldn't tell you about Russia. Fortinately, I don't really have to, since you just tossed some names out without even attempting to make a case. Maybe you should try to get some facts before you go making unfounded accusations?
I think they're using it because its cheaper than designing a whole new rocket just for three flights.
Plus, the plane is the subject of the experiment, so you want to minimize the number of possible failure points in all the other systems. Using a booster thats already proven is a great way to do this. Of course, in flight one it was the booster that failed...
Well, labor disputes are frequently subject to arbitration, which is a similar process to what you propose.
You can't actually file a lawsuit against your employer just because you want better annual raises or a lower dental co-pay. Even in our land of litigation, one is only supposed to file a lawsuit when laws are actually broken.
Well, Police and Firefighters are government employees (except the volunteers), and government employees are not allowed to strike. These people, as government contractors, may, technically, be allowed to strike, but I'm with you in thinking that they shouldn't.
I would like to point out, though, that this is yet another downside of the privatization so touted by politicians these days.
You answer your own question. Venti is Italian for 20, it comes in a 20 oz cup. What's so ridiculous about that? Espresso is Italian, after all.
They call it "Venti" because in most coffee shops "Large" or "Grande" means 16 oz. Maybe it would make you feel better if they called their 20 oz drink "Extra Large", but it wouldn't necessarily be good marketing.
Ideally you want a line-level output, but I'm pretty sure that even those are amplified by the reciever. Those radio signal levels are pretty low when they come in.;)
I believe that you could achieve the same thing by fixing the volume knob of your radio at a constant low level.
The implication is that the money isn't going straight to SCO, but rather that MS is giving it to people like Baystar to invest to SCO. That's why I said they could just account for it as an investment.
If you're MS, you wouldn't even have to give the VC guys the full amount, just enough to make it an attractive investment for them. A VC firm might look at a $50M investment in SCO and say 'this is too risky', but if MS says to them: 'We'll give you $25M to make that $50M investment', then their risk/reward calculation changes a great deal.
BTW, We're talking about 0.2% of their cash, not 2%.
Actually, this article puts Microsoft's cash (not assets, just cash!) at $49 Billion as of Summer 2003. So yes, $100 million is chump change to them, as appalling as that may sound.
As for accounting, I don't think you'd have to get too creative. Baystar Capital Partners is an investment firm. If MS gives them money, it just looks like money they're investing. Any strings that might be attached to that money wouldn't have to show up in the balance sheet.
Well, if you buy the stock, SCO doesn't get the money, the stockholders do. SCO needs the money to fund its lawsuit.
The real point though, is that MS doesn't want to own them. If MS or an MS owned subsidiary was claiming rights to IP in Linux, everyone would be screaming "Monopoly, Monopoly, Anti-Trust!". Personally, I'll doubt the veracity of this memo until it is turned up in court by a subpoena, but the reason these rumours persist is that funding this under the table would be an ideal position for MS. They get to chill the Linux market without looking like the bad guys.
BTW, Baystar got a 17.5% ownership stake in SCO for its $50M investment so they actually did buy a part of the company, not give the money away.
This is not insightful, it's name-calling and pejorative ranting.
The OP said:
>The sole reason is that Safari's output is
immaculate.
In your haste, you've imputed motives to him that were not in his post.
The reply chastised him for using a browser that, while it may be standards compliant and render beautifully, is used by a small minority web users. The Quirks Mode web site details bugs in the implementation of IE and most other browsers. The fact is that no one piece of software perfectly implements any complex standard. Even if your code is 100% standards compliant it may not display properly in IE due to an IE bug. Thus, to use your numbers, only 5% of people could properly view it. So the sensible course for any serious web author is to check their site, at least once in a while, in the most popular browsers, regardless of their personal feelings about the browsers themselves.
Juse because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are dumb. It doesn't mean that you're dumb either. A little civility isn't such a bad thing.
a bottom line? How exactly do you forsee making a profit from space exploration?
All the other things you mention are not unique to NASA, but exist for every public sector job. It's not necessarily the most cost-efficient way to run an organization, but neither is private enterprise. What many people don't realize, for instance, is that Medicare has a lower per-patient overhead cost than private health insurers (like 10% lower). Yes, even with the fraud perpitrated by doctors, and even with the COLAs for the Medicare beaureaucrats.
As for China, their space program is run by the military, so it's subject to all the same problems you mention, plus additional military BS. All they've accomplished is what NASA did 40 years ago. Get back to me when China is recieving spectrographic data from rocks on Mars, or collecting comet dust and returning it to earth.
Slashdot Mirror
Even the Indians didn't try to change that.
You mean the Native Americans?
I mean how many artists slap something together without much research or thought and then call it "art".
So, what does the amount of effort exerted by the artist have to do with whether or not it's art?
Ok, it appeals to our capitalist value system to think that people should be rewarded for hard work, but I personally don't believe that the intentions of an artist have anything to do with the artistic value of what that artist creates.
So, what would you consider evidence of global warming?
I mean, I assume you don't dispute that the global average temperature has been increasing over the past few decades. So would you say that climatologists haven't proven that this is outside the bounds of normal climate variation? If so, what sort of evidence would satisfy you in this regard? Can you offer any data to show that this trend isn't significant?
There isn't anything in this world today where everyone says it's good for you and nobody is saying it will kill you - just look at diets and mobile phones.
Yeah, but there are many things that everyone says are bad for you, and no one thinks are good. Lead is one.
With recycling companies breaking-up computers and other electronic devices into their constituent materials and reselling "raw" materials this should become less and less of an issue.
BTW, How many computer recycling companies are accepting computers from your area? Maybe I'm just uninformed, but I haven't heard of any that would take my old computer parts.
Ok, if we're giving out props, I think big ups need to be given to my boys Gaston Julia, Benoit Mandelbrot, Georg Cantor, and Aleksandr Lyapunov. Lately Stephen Wolfram has been doing similar work.
Seriously, this concept did not originate in CS.
Well, you're close. I can .zip a file but, without the program to unzip it, I can't recreate its contents. Now, if you create a self-extracting executable, then you can call it an algorithm that creates the file.
Also, you are using a very generalized definition of 'compression'. As a mathematical argument, I think its great. Most people here however are probably thinking of programming land, where protected mode processors enforce strict separation between 'code' and 'data'.
On further review, I think this quote is spurious. Searching the text, I can't find the words 'witless' or 'stupid' in either of the two opinions filed.
Dude, I gotta step up on this one. The name of the case is:
LUTHER R. CAMPBELL aka LUKE SKYYWALKER, et al., PETITIONERS v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.
according to Cornell's Legal Information Institute. I point this out because (1) it is funny, and (2) while I could care less about 2 live crew, to mangle the name of Roy Acuff's music company is something of a sin in where I come from.
So, in your first link, the words "proposed hyperplane" suggest to me that their plane, unlike NASA's, doesn't exist yet. The rest of the article, as far as I could tell, is about ballistic missles powered by rockets and 'regular' jets.
The second link is from NewsMax. Since I assume you're not from the U.S., you may not know that this is not a reputable news site. They are actually ultra-right scandal-mongers. I didn't see a single source cited in that entire article, but it appears they took the news from a Washington Times article (the Times is another right-leaning paper, not to be confused with the reputable Washington Post). The Russians denied the report as can be seen here. So if you want to believe that the Russians have scramjet-powered BM warheads, you go ahead. I won't say that they don't, but to ignore such rumors when discussing real hypersonic research doesn't make one "US centric"
India has announced a program that will test a similar plane in a few years. Australia tested a scramjet mounted on the front of a rocket, and it was falling straight down towards earth at the time the jet achieved combustion. I couldn't tell you about Russia. Fortinately, I don't really have to, since you just tossed some names out without even attempting to make a case. Maybe you should try to get some facts before you go making unfounded accusations?
I think they're using it because its cheaper than designing a whole new rocket just for three flights.
Plus, the plane is the subject of the experiment, so you want to minimize the number of possible failure points in all the other systems. Using a booster thats already proven is a great way to do this. Of course, in flight one it was the booster that failed...
They used to be bigger, but had to shrink cira 1995 to accomodate the Windows keys.
I think he's counting that as one of the "two just outside Washington DC", although I have no clue what the other one would be.
Yeah, clearly this dude has not read the CAIB report, or any substantial news about that accident.
/. main page.
Just another example of the quality sensationalism that too frequently makes the
Well, labor disputes are frequently subject to arbitration, which is a similar process to what you propose.
You can't actually file a lawsuit against your employer just because you want better annual raises or a lower dental co-pay. Even in our land of litigation, one is only supposed to file a lawsuit when laws are actually broken.
Well, Police and Firefighters are government employees (except the volunteers), and government employees are not allowed to strike. These people, as government contractors, may, technically, be allowed to strike, but I'm with you in thinking that they shouldn't.
I would like to point out, though, that this is yet another downside of the privatization so touted by politicians these days.
You answer your own question. Venti is Italian for 20, it comes in a 20 oz cup. What's so ridiculous about that? Espresso is Italian, after all.
They call it "Venti" because in most coffee shops "Large" or "Grande" means 16 oz. Maybe it would make you feel better if they called their 20 oz drink "Extra Large", but it wouldn't necessarily be good marketing.
Ideally you want a line-level output, but I'm pretty sure that even those are amplified by the reciever. Those radio signal levels are pretty low when they come in. ;)
I believe that you could achieve the same thing by fixing the volume knob of your radio at a constant low level.
The implication is that the money isn't going straight to SCO, but rather that MS is giving it to people like Baystar to invest to SCO. That's why I said they could just account for it as an investment.
If you're MS, you wouldn't even have to give the VC guys the full amount, just enough to make it an attractive investment for them. A VC firm might look at a $50M investment in SCO and say 'this is too risky', but if MS says to them: 'We'll give you $25M to make that $50M investment', then their
risk/reward calculation changes a great deal.
BTW, We're talking about 0.2% of their cash, not 2%.
Actually, this article puts Microsoft's cash (not assets, just cash!) at $49 Billion as of Summer 2003. So yes, $100 million is chump change to them, as appalling as that may sound.
As for accounting, I don't think you'd have to get too creative. Baystar Capital Partners is an investment firm. If MS gives them money, it just looks like money they're investing. Any strings that might be attached to that money wouldn't have to show up in the balance sheet.
Well, if you buy the stock, SCO doesn't get the money, the stockholders do. SCO needs the money to fund its lawsuit.
The real point though, is that MS doesn't want to own them. If MS or an MS owned subsidiary was claiming rights to IP in Linux, everyone would be screaming "Monopoly, Monopoly, Anti-Trust!". Personally, I'll doubt the veracity of this memo until it is turned up in court by a subpoena, but the reason these rumours persist is that funding this under the table would be an ideal position for MS. They get to chill the Linux market without looking like the bad guys.
BTW, Baystar got a 17.5% ownership stake in SCO for its $50M investment so they actually did buy a part of the company, not give the money away.
Well, if one takes the density of the fuel to be constant, there's no difference between measuring weight and measuring volume.
Just to further confuse you, we measure thrust in pounds (of force) too.
This is not insightful, it's name-calling and pejorative ranting.
The OP said:
>The sole reason is that Safari's output is immaculate.
In your haste, you've imputed motives to him that were not in his post.
The reply chastised him for using a browser that, while it may be standards compliant and render beautifully, is used by a small minority web users. The Quirks Mode web site details bugs in the implementation of IE and most other browsers. The fact is that no one piece of software perfectly implements any complex standard. Even if your code is 100% standards compliant it may not display properly in IE due to an IE bug. Thus, to use your numbers, only 5% of people could properly view it. So the sensible course for any serious web author is to check their site, at least once in a while, in the most popular browsers, regardless of their personal feelings about the browsers themselves.
Juse because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are dumb. It doesn't mean that you're dumb either. A little civility isn't such a bad thing.
Personally, I don't understand the comma between 'arms' and 'shall' at all.
..."
I believe the part you're curious about, however, is the
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
part. Of course, writing the entire sentence is both gramatically and politically awkward.
a bottom line? How exactly do you forsee making a profit from space exploration?
All the other things you mention are not unique to NASA, but exist for every public sector job. It's not necessarily the most cost-efficient way to run an organization, but neither is private enterprise. What many people don't realize, for instance, is that Medicare has a lower per-patient overhead cost than private health insurers (like 10% lower). Yes, even with the fraud perpitrated by doctors, and even with the COLAs for the Medicare beaureaucrats.
As for China, their space program is run by the military, so it's subject to all the same problems you mention, plus additional military BS. All they've accomplished is what NASA did 40 years ago. Get back to me when China is recieving spectrographic data from rocks on Mars, or collecting comet dust and returning it to earth.