1) Non-illegal-monopolistic is not a word. I don't think any double-hyphened English word even exists, not to mention something you made up out of a fit of anti-Microsoft rage.
2) Microsoft is not illegal.
3) Microsoft is monopolistic, I'll agree.
I think you mean they rely on and use technology more (cue self flushing toilets) than America does, not necessarily that they're that much more advanced. However, I do agree that they would more rather put in a few dollars towards research and innovation than American companies, who would just as easily spend those few dollars on a more aggressive marketing campaign.
But don't take anything Britney Spears says for face value - especially if it involves politics of any sort. You know it's actually the work of a team of scriptwriters that can compete with W's.
"How many companies these days are willing to drop money into some technology that may not turn a profit for many years?"
The kind that is already doing very well financially and wants to solidify a reputation of innovation. Similar to Microsoft's $1 billion donation to Africa.
Like all "nutritional supplements" the andro drug that Mark McGuire (apologize ahead of time for spelling) was banned from most sports when he was using it (and now is banned in baseball).
Athletes will use whatever technology is available to enhance their performance, regardless of what the intention of that technology really was. And with the money they make, you don't think they can pay off a sleazy surgeon to give them an added touch of flexibility?
You would assume that these sensors would be used to only "monitor" athletic performance. But admittingly without RTFA I read it as "artificial nerves inside the body" that can stretch and so on. So what does this mean, you can artifically elongate your arm for a slam dunk, or if you're a goalie, do the splits to make a five-hole save? I see "groin injury" written all over that latter case.
That, and negotiations with computer dealers and makers the world over to put Windows on their desktop. The ignorant customer buys Windows without even knowing that competition exists.
It is a troll. It is not off topic. See, the topic concerns Hubble and the new Mars/Moon program. The grandparent post talks about the new Mars/Moon program. Thus it is not off topic.
This post, however, is off topic. It isn't AC either. So I will probably get modded down, but a voice of objectivity is needed between you Bush lovers and haters.
We as self-proclaimed "intellectuals" were also curious during our childhoods. What's that in the sky there? How come I can only see it at night? Did we really send a man up there?
It's always been human nature to be curious, to colonize, to conquer. We've overtaken this planet and use every other species either as a food source or we send them to areas of the world we haven't bothered to deforest yet. The problems "at home" (in the US, I assume you mean) are someone else's problems, they don't apply to us because we're happy as long as we have our internet, our porn, our reality TV shows and our McDonalds.
It's sad, but what can you do? Giving a damn about someone else's problems is not conservative policy.
A Democratic President wouldn't be likely to do this.
I'm a liberal myself, but I will admit this: It is easier to bash a Republican for having ambitions for space programs than it is to bash a Democrat for not having these ambitions.
10 years ago, it was 99% little houses and vegetable carts.
Gradually, there will be more and more high rise apartment buildings to replace these houses. This will make sense as both the population grows and as people slowly gain personal riches to afford better living conditions.
And how is it possible to predict how a console SELLS even before it's completed? You can make accurate predictions on the visual groundbreakings that will be made due to a more powerful engine, but to predict consumer patterns six years into the future on consoles that don't yet exist is bogus.
Math professors have their Ph.D's, so they must all be smart guys. The type of guys who must have slept during class in first year while everyone else was panicking about not keeping up with the lecture material. They type of guys who just can't relate to the learning demands of the average student because they're too smart.
A math professor with a psychology minor, maybe. I'd rather see TA's have their input into the books that their profs write - they have a better understanding of what kinda issues the students are having problems with.
The assignment problems can't be solved with the given examples unless you're intelligent enough to extend your knowledge to the point where you can come up with a solution.
What ended up happening was we usually just copied off this one smart guy who did all the extending.
I guess T.A's are supposed to help you close the gap, but I would honestly have a few more difficult examples than a bunch of gimme exercises, which are always the ones the prof chooses to teach during lecture since they are the easiest and cause the least amount of confusion for the class.
- Lots of clear, thorough examples
- Minimize use of crazy symbols high school kids have never seen before. Or at least have a reference where you can look up what they mean.
Slashdot Mirror
Hello? An AC claiming to work with the author? First post?
Quel naive.
Nothing beats that!
1) Non-illegal-monopolistic is not a word. I don't think any double-hyphened English word even exists, not to mention something you made up out of a fit of anti-Microsoft rage.
2) Microsoft is not illegal. 3) Microsoft is monopolistic, I'll agree.
I think you mean they rely on and use technology more (cue self flushing toilets) than America does, not necessarily that they're that much more advanced. However, I do agree that they would more rather put in a few dollars towards research and innovation than American companies, who would just as easily spend those few dollars on a more aggressive marketing campaign.
But don't take anything Britney Spears says for face value - especially if it involves politics of any sort. You know it's actually the work of a team of scriptwriters that can compete with W's.
"How many companies these days are willing to drop money into some technology that may not turn a profit for many years?"
The kind that is already doing very well financially and wants to solidify a reputation of innovation. Similar to Microsoft's $1 billion donation to Africa.
I would guess it's because garbage just ain't as purty as gold is.
Like all "nutritional supplements" the andro drug that Mark McGuire (apologize ahead of time for spelling) was banned from most sports when he was using it (and now is banned in baseball).
Athletes will use whatever technology is available to enhance their performance, regardless of what the intention of that technology really was. And with the money they make, you don't think they can pay off a sleazy surgeon to give them an added touch of flexibility?
You would assume that these sensors would be used to only "monitor" athletic performance. But admittingly without RTFA I read it as "artificial nerves inside the body" that can stretch and so on. So what does this mean, you can artifically elongate your arm for a slam dunk, or if you're a goalie, do the splits to make a five-hole save? I see "groin injury" written all over that latter case.
"The wires can stretch over half their original length."
"Wiring like this could be woven into stretchy sports clothing and used to connect up sensors that monitor athletic performance."
With the tight restriction on performance enhancing drugs in the Olympics and now mainstream sports, how will this possibly be allowed?
And even if it was legalized, how much stretching can the body take before succumbing to injury?
That idea sounds pretty shitty if you ask me.
Is anyone else losing their appetite while reading this thread? Damn...
I didn't know we ran out of oil already!
That, and negotiations with computer dealers and makers the world over to put Windows on their desktop. The ignorant customer buys Windows without even knowing that competition exists.
It is a troll. It is not off topic. See, the topic concerns Hubble and the new Mars/Moon program. The grandparent post talks about the new Mars/Moon program. Thus it is not off topic.
This post, however, is off topic. It isn't AC either. So I will probably get modded down, but a voice of objectivity is needed between you Bush lovers and haters.
We as self-proclaimed "intellectuals" were also curious during our childhoods. What's that in the sky there? How come I can only see it at night? Did we really send a man up there?
It's always been human nature to be curious, to colonize, to conquer. We've overtaken this planet and use every other species either as a food source or we send them to areas of the world we haven't bothered to deforest yet. The problems "at home" (in the US, I assume you mean) are someone else's problems, they don't apply to us because we're happy as long as we have our internet, our porn, our reality TV shows and our McDonalds.
It's sad, but what can you do? Giving a damn about someone else's problems is not conservative policy.
We don't need Mars.
We don't need the Moon either.
But Bush needs the votes of the geek community.
A Democratic President wouldn't be likely to do this.
I'm a liberal myself, but I will admit this: It is easier to bash a Republican for having ambitions for space programs than it is to bash a Democrat for not having these ambitions.
10 years ago, it was 99% little houses and vegetable carts.
Gradually, there will be more and more high rise apartment buildings to replace these houses. This will make sense as both the population grows and as people slowly gain personal riches to afford better living conditions.
And how is it possible to predict how a console SELLS even before it's completed? You can make accurate predictions on the visual groundbreakings that will be made due to a more powerful engine, but to predict consumer patterns six years into the future on consoles that don't yet exist is bogus.
gaming: Top 40 (90's, 2000's)
coding: Nothing (can't concentrate otherwise)
Browsing: Top 40 (90's, 2000's)
General computer activities: Top 40 (90's 2000's)
Sorry for the boring answers.
You're going to get a lot of improperly interpreted grammar, but the overall meaning will be dicipherable.
When it comes to keeping peace in Iraq, creative thinking needs to be involved. They may as well try this.
Math professors have their Ph.D's, so they must all be smart guys. The type of guys who must have slept during class in first year while everyone else was panicking about not keeping up with the lecture material. They type of guys who just can't relate to the learning demands of the average student because they're too smart.
A math professor with a psychology minor, maybe. I'd rather see TA's have their input into the books that their profs write - they have a better understanding of what kinda issues the students are having problems with.
The assignment problems can't be solved with the given examples unless you're intelligent enough to extend your knowledge to the point where you can come up with a solution.
What ended up happening was we usually just copied off this one smart guy who did all the extending.
I guess T.A's are supposed to help you close the gap, but I would honestly have a few more difficult examples than a bunch of gimme exercises, which are always the ones the prof chooses to teach during lecture since they are the easiest and cause the least amount of confusion for the class.
- Lots of clear, thorough examples
- Minimize use of crazy symbols high school kids have never seen before. Or at least have a reference where you can look up what they mean.
That's all.