Most states in the US void this section too. They have to prove that he could make the same kind of money, close to his house, in his trade, elsewhere for it to stick. Chances are, it will be tossed out.
Considering the PostgreSQL guys have rewritten significant portions of PostgreSQL, even in the last couple of years, I wouldn't hold my breath for there being very much common code left.
Actually, the tools have aged fairly well, which, IMO, is what they are really talking about. Furthermore, the graphics are not all that bad. Granted, they could use some more polygons, but over all, they are not bad. Crank your display above 800x600 and you'll notice things look way better. Enable AA on 1024x768 and you'll be down right happy.
Now then, if they can increase the poly count (easy) and improve the tools (easy) and add more content (easy), and add more spells and effects (most easy), then they should have a real winner on their hands. Please don't assume "easy" translates into quickly. Easy means just what the definition implies. It says nothing about the duration it will take to complete.
Even the link you provide proves human error. Even pilots that fly in IMC, rely on primary and secondary instruments (or more), in case of primary failure. In the link you provide, non of that matters because there was a significant HUMAN error before they ever left the ground.
You're an insulting moron. Not only did you not answer my question, but you inject your opinion as fact. Bible thumpers? You're an ignorant zealot. With any luck, someone will come along and mod you for the troll you are. I said nothing which would indicate that I'm a "bible thumper". I asked a legitimate question, following a valid and great exchange. Yet, according to you, anyone that asks a question is a "bible thumper". That, flatly, makes you out to be one of the biggest idiots of all time. Please remit your parents address so that we can send them flowers with our pitty for having had you.
Monkies who get used to walking upright will not find it uncomfortable, and their offspring will naturally be that way too within a short time.
Actually, monkeys that walk upright, in the wild, for any duration, usually wind up dead. It's not a measure of comfort, it's a measure of survivability. If a monkey is walking up right, they are not in a tree. Monkeys that are not in trees are at the highest risk of preditorial death. Beyond that, simply walking upright is not going to change their genetics to change their anatomy. It may cause the bones to wear oddy compared with others of their species, but genetics, will not be changed.
First, let me say, great counter. I'll now profess my ignorance and allow you to edumacate me.;)
Unless of course, bipedalism arose not from a genetic change but from behaviour change.
So how does a behavior change cause our genetics to change? Our anatomy is clearly geared to bipedal locomotion. Primates, are clearly geared toward quadripedal locomotion. How does a species wishing it, make it so, without a genetic mutation? In otherwords, let us say that this monkey is a great socioligist and gets all monkeys of his species to start walking up right. How is that going to cause his anatomy to evolove into a bipedally biased anatomy? Seems to me, mutation has to play a role somewhere.
I think when I said that, pretty well covers it. I am NOT anything close to an anthropologist. I have, however, watched two documentaries on the subject. I believe one was on PBS and I don't recall where I saw the other one. So, now that we're clear that I'm ignoratly parroting, I'll continue.;)
The most recent documentary I saw, followed a feral child for many, many years and refered back to many studies and various tidbits of research throughout the show. Obviously, I can not judge the validity of the referenced material, so I simply took it at face value.
Along those lines, the documentaries made it very, very clear that lanugage skills are a "use it or lose it" developmental aspect of our brain. The one child which stared throughout, could develop very simple word associations but was never able to develop language skills. They went to great pains to explain and document that the language portion of these feral children never developed, and was in fact, more or less dormant. Which, they supported by showing scans or normal children and scans of ferel children.
Most likely the reports of feral children not developing language skills is more along the lines of them not developing the skill to speak any OTHER languages than the made up one they will naturally create, which is perfectly reasonable.
Well, I see and ackowledge the distinction that you're making. I'm just not sure that I agree that animal grunts and movements constitutes a full blown language, at least not more so than it simply being a basic behavioral pattern. Again, referring back to what I watched, they made it clear that their own "language" did not activate nor stimulate the human language core. And thusly, never develop that portion of their brain. Are we saying the same thing but differently? Which, *TO ME*, means that what you're calling, their own language (I guess), originates from some other place in the brain than from where human language and expression originates.
I'm sure you'll rip me apart now, just be kind. And if you must dismember me, please make sure the knife is sharp.;)
This is a matter of perspective. From a visible Internet perspective, you are correct, MS is a minor player. From a corporate mail perspective, I don't think minor is incorrectly applied. For various reasons, MS Exchange servers are commonly used, even if they may not be the front-line mail box which is exposed to the net. It's also important to remember that "minor player" does not really reflect MS in any of their markets. They are a very powerful company with marketing clout second to none. Underestimating MS and their motives is one of the worst things we can ever do. Now then, I'm not crying the sky is falling, but let us give caution as Microsoft's dishonest history requires.
This would actually be an excellent chance for MS' embrace and extend methodolody. But, as long as they follow RFC's and/or make available, patent free, via RFC, any extensions which they incorporate or develop, I have have no objections. As long as they are really providing this at face value, then I think it's good for everyone, including Microsoft.
Most primates are omnivores that get most sustenance from plants, and only supplement it with meat from time to time, and that meat is typically just bugs.
I thought it was becomming increasingly known that many species hunt other monkeys for their source of meat. While not a steady part of their diet, it appears to not be as uncommon as previously believed. In fact, I just watched a documentary last night that showed chimps going in hunting parties to raid a "monkey village" for young to eat.
So, while not real common, it does suggest that both hunting and hunter awareness may both be served by standing up right. Then again, isn't that why monkeys tend to stay in trees?
they'll just munch on it if it tastes good, which it usually does if it's typical high-quality, high-fat "human food".
Cooking food does change it's basic oder and taste characteristics. This is possible. My cat, for example, will not eat any cooked meat but does like raw meat.
As for the window comment, I suppose it's possible that they were broken because it was an unknown.
Also speaking, meaning out loud verbal language, is natural and instinctive in humans. The particular language used may be incomprehensible, but even "feral" children should be speaking just fine.
Much research has gone into the research of feral children and their missing ability of speech. It seems that the require portion of our brain, for speech, does not develop without training. Primal grunts and basic "animal communications", does not appear to stimulate the speech centers of our brains. Accordingly, if that portion of our brain is not stimulated by some early age (something like 2-4 years of age), chances are, it will never properly mature. The closer a ferel child gets to puberty, the less likely speech will ever develop because the speech center of the brain has more or less, been completely turned off. Various brain scans seem to support this conclussion. In other words, use it or lose.
To the best of my knowledge, which is by no means extensive, there has never been a ferel, [post-]pubescent child found, that was able to develop language skills.
This being the case, the chances of the behavior being passed along to others Macaques who are exposed to this one is quite possible.
I agree that what you're saying seems like that logical position to hold. Just the same, I don't believe it's a sustainable position. It's proven that monkeys are capible of thought. Beyond that, it assumes that monkies will discard a better and more effective means of movement for a slower, less agile, and less effective, higher energy requirement mode of transportation. I mention their ability to think because it's not exactly rocket science for a monkey to determine if another monkey is injured or sick or to simply ignore this new, primary mode of transportation, because it is simply contrary to their basic anatomy.
In other words, I think the grandparent poster is correct to say, it's probably best to hope in the bible than wait for the series of generic freaks to mate or for an every future generation to discard what's best to immitate the movements of a sick monkey.
I would say that your theory is much more probable than this supporting the theory of evolution in any significant way.
For this event to have any real meaning, we must accept that: o The monkey will adopt this new trait for life. o The monkey will "train" it's off spring with this new trait. o The monkey's offspring will ignore what's natural, easiest and most effective (statement supported by their basic anatomy) in order to follow their father's "bad habbit." o And it assumes that this bad habbit will become genetically in-grained for all future generations.
So far, the only likely event I see is the first one. I'm not discounting evolution, I just don't believe this is anything other than a one-off, unhealthy, monkey which has little to nothing to say about evolution.
Wow...what a surprise. The loser struck yet again.
I have a hard time imagining how pethetic ones life has to be to moderate/troll like this loser does. It's probably safe to assume that it's spectecjr at this point. As any reasonable mod would of fixed the above mess rather than continue to wrongfully punish me. Since that didn't happen, it seems like a reasonable assumption that we're dealing with a serious idiot. That would appear to define spectecjr's mental state.
I agree. This boils down to punishing someone for exercising their GPL rights. That's clearly a restriction. I'm not sure how anyone can see it any other other way.
You have the right to do X. If you do X, I'll punish you. How is that NOT a restriction being placed on X?
It's a transparent effort to sidestep the spirit of the GPL. Any good attourney would rip these guys a new one.
Hard to justify the cost as reasonable when game companies include distribution, packaging, documentation, and IP/game content, for the same same price or less. Add in the fact that they consider $10 to be reasonable for binary distribution. Especially when you can use service companies that do this for a living, which can burn and mail much, much cheaper than that. Including packaging and mailing, and a reasonable volume, they could outsource it for something around $15.00 per disk, or less.
The problem is, the law only allows for what's reasonable. Your example is not reasonable. Therefore, it would be argued that if it costs them the unreasonable cost of $1000 to distribute the source, then they should find another path. As such, it would be argued that they should offer access via the Internet or some other such means so as to provide for reasonable costs associated with distribution.
Not exactly true. Try thinking of it like this. You are required to subscribe to get the source. That's a restriction. The GPL requires that the source be available if you have the binaries. Thusly, adding the restriction of requring a subscription is in violation of he GPL. At which point, it no longer matters if additional restrictions are placed on the subscription because it's already in violation of the GPL.
That means they are in violation of the GPL. They are placing additional restrictions on access to the code. They can't do that and comply with the terms of the GPL.
Re:Changed the view of the US?
on
Bobby Fischer Found
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Wow. The idiot mods must move in heards. Idiot struck again. I wonder if it's spectecjr doing this. He certainly seems the type. Not only is he dumb, but he acted childish enough to hold a grudge for being wrong. I'd place a modest bet that he's the brainless troll moderator. None of the troll mods started until right after he acted like a complete idiot and we came into conflict.
All I know is, you have to be one serious loser to brainlessly hold a grudge to constantly troll me like what this person is doing. It's obvious that they are following the posts via my profile. Which means, I am specifically being targeted. One can only hope that meta moderation will address the mods being done by this idiot-loser troll.
...and while we have butted heads in the past, I still have a *great* measure of respect for him. He is as brillant a guy as he is complex. I'm not easily impressed and Tom does impress me. I say all this because, Tom is great at spotting trends. He's great at analysis. Best of all, he actually has enough business contacts to get the results of his analysis into the right hands to make it reality.
Slashdot Mirror
Most states in the US void this section too. They have to prove that he could make the same kind of money, close to his house, in his trade, elsewhere for it to stick. Chances are, it will be tossed out.
At 3m, won't they still be in "ground effect"?
Correction! It's a Crusoe-Missile!!!
;)
Make sure you keep that straight!
Considering the PostgreSQL guys have rewritten significant portions of PostgreSQL, even in the last couple of years, I wouldn't hold my breath for there being very much common code left.
Actually, the tools have aged fairly well, which, IMO, is what they are really talking about. Furthermore, the graphics are not all that bad. Granted, they could use some more polygons, but over all, they are not bad. Crank your display above 800x600 and you'll notice things look way better. Enable AA on 1024x768 and you'll be down right happy.
Now then, if they can increase the poly count (easy) and improve the tools (easy) and add more content (easy), and add more spells and effects (most easy), then they should have a real winner on their hands. Please don't assume "easy" translates into quickly. Easy means just what the definition implies. It says nothing about the duration it will take to complete.
Even the link you provide proves human error. Even pilots that fly in IMC, rely on primary and secondary instruments (or more), in case of primary failure. In the link you provide, non of that matters because there was a significant HUMAN error before they ever left the ground.
You're an insulting moron. Not only did you not answer my question, but you inject your opinion as fact. Bible thumpers? You're an ignorant zealot. With any luck, someone will come along and mod you for the troll you are. I said nothing which would indicate that I'm a "bible thumper". I asked a legitimate question, following a valid and great exchange. Yet, according to you, anyone that asks a question is a "bible thumper". That, flatly, makes you out to be one of the biggest idiots of all time. Please remit your parents address so that we can send them flowers with our pitty for having had you.
Monkies who get used to walking upright will not find it uncomfortable, and their offspring will naturally be that way too within a short time.
Actually, monkeys that walk upright, in the wild, for any duration, usually wind up dead. It's not a measure of comfort, it's a measure of survivability. If a monkey is walking up right, they are not in a tree. Monkeys that are not in trees are at the highest risk of preditorial death. Beyond that, simply walking upright is not going to change their genetics to change their anatomy. It may cause the bones to wear oddy compared with others of their species, but genetics, will not be changed.
Bluntly, you are an idiot.
First, let me say, great counter. I'll now profess my ignorance and allow you to edumacate me. ;)
Unless of course, bipedalism arose not from a genetic change but from behaviour change.
So how does a behavior change cause our genetics to change? Our anatomy is clearly geared to bipedal locomotion. Primates, are clearly geared toward quadripedal locomotion. How does a species wishing it, make it so, without a genetic mutation? In otherwords, let us say that this monkey is a great socioligist and gets all monkeys of his species to start walking up right. How is that going to cause his anatomy to evolove into a bipedally biased anatomy? Seems to me, mutation has to play a role somewhere.
which is by no means extensive
;)
;)
I think when I said that, pretty well covers it. I am NOT anything close to an anthropologist. I have, however, watched two documentaries on the subject. I believe one was on PBS and I don't recall where I saw the other one. So, now that we're clear that I'm ignoratly parroting, I'll continue.
The most recent documentary I saw, followed a feral child for many, many years and refered back to many studies and various tidbits of research throughout the show. Obviously, I can not judge the validity of the referenced material, so I simply took it at face value.
Along those lines, the documentaries made it very, very clear that lanugage skills are a "use it or lose it" developmental aspect of our brain. The one child which stared throughout, could develop very simple word associations but was never able to develop language skills. They went to great pains to explain and document that the language portion of these feral children never developed, and was in fact, more or less dormant. Which, they supported by showing scans or normal children and scans of ferel children.
Most likely the reports of feral children not developing language skills is more along the lines of them not developing the skill to speak any OTHER languages than the made up one they will naturally create, which is perfectly reasonable.
Well, I see and ackowledge the distinction that you're making. I'm just not sure that I agree that animal grunts and movements constitutes a full blown language, at least not more so than it simply being a basic behavioral pattern. Again, referring back to what I watched, they made it clear that their own "language" did not activate nor stimulate the human language core. And thusly, never develop that portion of their brain. Are we saying the same thing but differently? Which, *TO ME*, means that what you're calling, their own language (I guess), originates from some other place in the brain than from where human language and expression originates.
I'm sure you'll rip me apart now, just be kind. And if you must dismember me, please make sure the knife is sharp.
This does not work if you are a minor player.
This is a matter of perspective. From a visible Internet perspective, you are correct, MS is a minor player. From a corporate mail perspective, I don't think minor is incorrectly applied. For various reasons, MS Exchange servers are commonly used, even if they may not be the front-line mail box which is exposed to the net. It's also important to remember that "minor player" does not really reflect MS in any of their markets. They are a very powerful company with marketing clout second to none. Underestimating MS and their motives is one of the worst things we can ever do. Now then, I'm not crying the sky is falling, but let us give caution as Microsoft's dishonest history requires.
This would actually be an excellent chance for MS' embrace and extend methodolody. But, as long as they follow RFC's and/or make available, patent free, via RFC, any extensions which they incorporate or develop, I have have no objections. As long as they are really providing this at face value, then I think it's good for everyone, including Microsoft.
Most primates are omnivores that get most sustenance from plants, and only supplement it with meat from time to time, and that meat is typically just bugs.
I thought it was becomming increasingly known that many species hunt other monkeys for their source of meat. While not a steady part of their diet, it appears to not be as uncommon as previously believed. In fact, I just watched a documentary last night that showed chimps going in hunting parties to raid a "monkey village" for young to eat.
So, while not real common, it does suggest that both hunting and hunter awareness may both be served by standing up right. Then again, isn't that why monkeys tend to stay in trees?
Especially when anatomy is geared toward quadipedal locomotion, such as in the case of monkies.
they'll just munch on it if it tastes good, which it usually does if it's typical high-quality, high-fat "human food".
Cooking food does change it's basic oder and taste characteristics. This is possible. My cat, for example, will not eat any cooked meat but does like raw meat.
As for the window comment, I suppose it's possible that they were broken because it was an unknown.
Also speaking, meaning out loud verbal language, is natural and instinctive in humans. The particular language used may be incomprehensible, but even "feral" children should be speaking just fine.
Much research has gone into the research of feral children and their missing ability of speech. It seems that the require portion of our brain, for speech, does not develop without training. Primal grunts and basic "animal communications", does not appear to stimulate the speech centers of our brains. Accordingly, if that portion of our brain is not stimulated by some early age (something like 2-4 years of age), chances are, it will never properly mature. The closer a ferel child gets to puberty, the less likely speech will ever develop because the speech center of the brain has more or less, been completely turned off. Various brain scans seem to support this conclussion. In other words, use it or lose.
To the best of my knowledge, which is by no means extensive, there has never been a ferel, [post-]pubescent child found, that was able to develop language skills.
This being the case, the chances of the behavior being passed along to others Macaques who are exposed to this one is quite possible.
I agree that what you're saying seems like that logical position to hold. Just the same, I don't believe it's a sustainable position. It's proven that monkeys are capible of thought. Beyond that, it assumes that monkies will discard a better and more effective means of movement for a slower, less agile, and less effective, higher energy requirement mode of transportation. I mention their ability to think because it's not exactly rocket science for a monkey to determine if another monkey is injured or sick or to simply ignore this new, primary mode of transportation, because it is simply contrary to their basic anatomy.
In other words, I think the grandparent poster is correct to say, it's probably best to hope in the bible than wait for the series of generic freaks to mate or for an every future generation to discard what's best to immitate the movements of a sick monkey.
I would say that your theory is much more probable than this supporting the theory of evolution in any significant way.
For this event to have any real meaning, we must accept that:
o The monkey will adopt this new trait for life.
o The monkey will "train" it's off spring with this new trait.
o The monkey's offspring will ignore what's natural, easiest and most effective (statement supported by their basic anatomy) in order to follow their father's "bad habbit."
o And it assumes that this bad habbit will become genetically in-grained for all future generations.
So far, the only likely event I see is the first one. I'm not discounting evolution, I just don't believe this is anything other than a one-off, unhealthy, monkey which has little to nothing to say about evolution.
Wow...what a surprise. The loser struck yet again.
I have a hard time imagining how pethetic ones life has to be to moderate/troll like this loser does. It's probably safe to assume that it's spectecjr at this point. As any reasonable mod would of fixed the above mess rather than continue to wrongfully punish me. Since that didn't happen, it seems like a reasonable assumption that we're dealing with a serious idiot. That would appear to define spectecjr's mental state.
I agree. This boils down to punishing someone for exercising their GPL rights. That's clearly a restriction. I'm not sure how anyone can see it any other other way.
You have the right to do X.
If you do X, I'll punish you. How is that NOT a restriction being placed on X?
It's a transparent effort to sidestep the spirit of the GPL. Any good attourney would rip these guys a new one.
Hard to justify the cost as reasonable when game companies include distribution, packaging, documentation, and IP/game content, for the same same price or less. Add in the fact that they consider $10 to be reasonable for binary distribution. Especially when you can use service companies that do this for a living, which can burn and mail much, much cheaper than that. Including packaging and mailing, and a reasonable volume, they could outsource it for something around $15.00 per disk, or less.
I was unaware of that detail. Thanks! The faq pretty well spells it out. They are clearly in violation of the GPL.
The problem is, the law only allows for what's reasonable. Your example is not reasonable. Therefore, it would be argued that if it costs them the unreasonable cost of $1000 to distribute the source, then they should find another path. As such, it would be argued that they should offer access via the Internet or some other such means so as to provide for reasonable costs associated with distribution.
Not exactly true. Try thinking of it like this. You are required to subscribe to get the source. That's a restriction. The GPL requires that the source be available if you have the binaries. Thusly, adding the restriction of requring a subscription is in violation of he GPL. At which point, it no longer matters if additional restrictions are placed on the subscription because it's already in violation of the GPL.
That means they are in violation of the GPL. They are placing additional restrictions on access to the code. They can't do that and comply with the terms of the GPL.
Wow. The idiot mods must move in heards. Idiot struck again. I wonder if it's spectecjr doing this. He certainly seems the type. Not only is he dumb, but he acted childish enough to hold a grudge for being wrong. I'd place a modest bet that he's the brainless troll moderator. None of the troll mods started until right after he acted like a complete idiot and we came into conflict.
All I know is, you have to be one serious loser to brainlessly hold a grudge to constantly troll me like what this person is doing. It's obvious that they are following the posts via my profile. Which means, I am specifically being targeted. One can only hope that meta moderation will address the mods being done by this idiot-loser troll.
Fair enough.
...and while we have butted heads in the past, I still have a *great* measure of respect for him. He is as brillant a guy as he is complex. I'm not easily impressed and Tom does impress me. I say all this because, Tom is great at spotting trends. He's great at analysis. Best of all, he actually has enough business contacts to get the results of his analysis into the right hands to make it reality.
Don't underestimate what this man says.