You know, it actually wouldn't be so bad if they were split such that one page really was only a single page. In other words, if they kept their article and cruft down to fit a single "page" into an average sized browser window with NO scrolling. Then you could hover your mouse over the next page button and click when ready.
Which is actually pretty stupid considering how tiny Hollywood's contribution to GDP really is. Quick google search estimates Hollywood's revenues are somewhere on the order of $10 billion / year. and the music industry has revenues of about $15 billion/ year.
Compare that to Microsoft's revenues last year of 60 billion Microsoft's net profit ($16 billion) is larger than gross revenue of either of the two entire industries...
Obviously, their other customers are far more important to their success than anything the entertainment industry could throw at them, so it stands to reason that if they're introducing fundamentally crippling technology to their OS, they must have some reason in addition to helping Hollywood out.
Seconded. In my personal experience (my laptop, desktop, and a few friends' machines) the wifi recognition on 7.10 live CD has been spot on. In fact, it's been 100%. The only thing I have to do is enter the password more than once for some reason.
Knoppix certainly doesn't match that (as of the latest DVD version as of December, I couldn't figure out how to recognize my card, even though the forums all suggest it should've recognized it automatically).
IMO, getting networking (and wireless networking if it's the only convenient option for that machine) is the most critical thing. Everything else can be adjusted if you have network access and some kind of web browser (even if your "web browser" is wget -O -... | more) but if you can't get web access working, you can't browse the forums for the reason unless you've got another computer handy that's working.
Literacy tests aren't bad because they were used to keep the illiterate from voting, but because they were intended to keep blacks from voting. At a time, I believe, when they were also endeavoring to prevent them from learning to read and using more complicated samples for people they didn't want voting.
The idea of everyone having a say conflicts with the obvious utility of rejecting those who don't understand the issues or don't really care about them. If I had my druthers, I'd run a poll the week before the election and everyone who said they were "undecided" on the main candidate, and couldn't describe any of the referendums would automatically have their voting registration suspended for that year.
It's not a bad example. The cooking shows invite you in to watch.
The question is not whether or not the information would be useful. Undoubtedly, it would be. The question is whether we have the right to demand its recording. And I would say, no, and especially not under false pretenses. The proper way to go about it is to invite our neighbors to review our research into our own culture, and try to impress upon them the benefits of a permanent record. Then, if they decide to record themselves or invite others to do the recording, the critical issue is who does the inviting.
I would gladly sacrifice knowledge of a culture in order to treat its people like human beings.
Maybe the conceit lies in the assumption that we should study them like animals, rather than interact with them like neighbors.
You don't go to your neighbor's house and ask to observe or join in their supper so you can learn about their cooking and dining techniques to compare to your own. You invite your neighbors over for dinner. And they might invite you over as well, but a polite host doesn't expect it.
Who cares if this stuff is lost to the ages. If THEY want to document it, they're free to. Nobody is stopping them from sending member to university for anthropology and doing the studies themselves. Nobody but money, that is, so someone should offer to sponsor a few.
The iPod touch looks like it has a very nice interface. Much better than anything else out there, and making the whole thing the screen is brilliant for a device intended for video & music.
A few things could make iPod touch much better: GPS and internet access. To that end it has wifi, and no GPS, but as far as the wiki knows, the iPhone doesn't have GPS either? (This seems odd, since *all* phones in the past few years have GPS in them as the least hassle way of satisfying e911 requirements, I thought)
An internal graphing calculator also seems like a natural fit. There's no reason that those things should be stuck with basically mid-90s technology when there are now handheld devices with more processing power than early 2000s desktop computers.
Anyway, you're right. Sticking a phone and a crappy camera in an iPod touch just makes a less-than-ideal phone and adds cost to the pocket media player.
Interesting. Did you offer to re-activate her old phone? Or did you just kind of write her off instead of trying to salvage a little company goodwill because she wasn't that bright and/or wanted you to think she wasn't that bright?
The problem is, on the plane you're talking about, the crew did not use the proper data-destruction procedure during the ditch. Perhaps they were overwhelmed by the accident or thought they'd ditch somewhere the plane would be lost, so it wouldn't matter, or had survival related tasks which required all of their attention. In any event, if thermite was part of the destruction procedure, it was not used.
This was, in fact, a matter of some controversy at the time, as was the decision not to bomb the wreckage.
Perhaps, but 30 is adequate. If you don't own at 30 fps, you're not going to do much better at 60. I assume you're using a high-resolution mouse, btw, or your statement would barely even make sense.
You may be too young to remember, but back in the day, we got 10 fps playing Q2, and that's the way we liked it! Ahh, the old days of not having a 3d card and going with full-software graphics...
The problem occurs because you have a high current. In order to avoid welding the projectile to the rails, you must contact the rails with non-trivial area, so every projectile slides along the rails with significant contact. Rail repulsion is a separate, but still important, problem.
Arcing actually replaces the abrasion problem with an ablation problem (and a conductivity problem). Unless you mean arcing between the rails themselves, which shouldn't happen, as the solution is the same as the contact-area and general resistance solution: wider, thicker rails.
Except, you really can't do that. Any fool can homebrew a geiger counter. They're little more than photomultiplier tubes connected to a speaker.*
*ok some have a switch to toggle between photon-counting mode and intensity metering, if your photons are too close together to count, but they're not really geiger counters in that mode.
Except they explicitely stated that they couldn't do anything with the fighter until the motherships arrived days earlier and presumably provided some kind of remote power. Which is very unfortunate for our heros, since after blowing up the mothership, one would think that the remote power would've ceased as well, some time during their descent.
It was a terrible movie, with a few stunning visuals, and quite a few cool-looking matte paintings. It's plausibility pales in comparison to the other space invaders movie that came out that year: Mars Attacks!
Yes, but if he's basically announcing that HE never had authority to distribute via GPL, and therefore everyone downstream has an invalid license, then the announcement is really an attempt to disclaim liability for the actions of people outside of his control.
It may or may not be the case in this instance, but it's certainly possible to imagine scenarios where people distribute code they have written entirely, but whose subject matter was in some way restricted. If they were confused or unaware of restrictions in the initial license and released their code out of altruism, is it really fair to expose them to unlimited liability, with no method of mitigating that liability once they realize their mistake?
The GPL states that if you are restricted from distributing a work due to other encumbrances, you must refrain from distributing under GPL as well. It's not intended to be a rights-laundering license.
So the question is (or rather my question, since I'm sure actual legal scholars have already debated it to death) if it turns out that someone up the chain did not have the right to distribute under GPL, does that propagate down the chain to all those who unknowingly redistributed software for which the authority to actually do so was never transferred to them by someone who had it?
How can you post pictures privately? Isn't that a bit like sending in a letter to the editor and demanding that they put bars over the text when they print it?
124%? That's a pretty slender margin. How many acres are we going to have to devote to ethanol feedstock to supplant oil, at a farm ratio of four times as much land just for running the process to make the fuel for everything else? And are you using fossil-derived fertilizer, or are you synthesizing the fertilizer as part of the energy cycle?
Indeed I don't. I fully expect a new paradigm to kick in before the winner of the "High-def capable optical disk" format war matures. It's just that it seems remarkably premature to declare either of them "winners" when the adoption rate is currently so low.
You know the reason, but you're being obtuse because you want to juice. It's not really about the legality or illegality of steroid use, though your Congressmen (and women) would like you to believe that. It's more about the trade-offs. Like Tyrell symbionts, the star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Using steroids improves performance for the player during his career at the cost of debilitating medical problems down the line. It reduces both quality and quantity of life for the retired player. Since it's a "prisoner's dilemma" of whether or not to juice: players who don't are at a significant disadvantage, it's in the players' best interest to band together and agree not to. Ironically it's probably the most relevant issue for the players' union to handle, much more so than the frequent salary strikes. In a sense, you're on to something: If the players aren't interested in protecting themselves by exercising their existing guild infrastructure, why should any of the rest of us be concerned the performances might be a little too exciting.
The same cannot be said of eye surgery. It just doesn't have the same risk of chronic, long-term side effects. It's almost all up-side.
If only 20k/week (1 million / year) are being sold, and assuming that aside from PS3s it's been a relatively smooth ramp-up, then the format war has been decided before any of us have had a chance to weigh in at all. That's what, a fiftieth of the population pretty much decided for everybody?
Did you notice that the country that took place in was not the US? I don't see how you can expect Australia to follow the fourth and second amendments to the United States constitution, unless they specifically have analogous rules in their founding legal documents. Either way, it still doesn't have any bearing on US law.
Some of those questions (assuming that was the form they took on the survey) don't actually have true/false answers.
For instance, I would have answered, "The oxygen we breathe comes from plants" with false if I had only two options, since the vast majority of it comes from cyanobacteria in the oceans.
And as for radioactive milk, while the statement in general is false, One can imagine some conditions under which boiling would reduce "radioactivity" albeit at the risk of contaminating the are with volatile isotopes. So it hinges on just how loosely you play with the word "can".
And what about "Antibiotics kill viruses as well as Bacteria." At first look, the answer seems obvious, but, like those face/chalice drawings, it all hinges on the fragment, "as well as." Do they mean that they are as good at killing viruses as they are at killing bacteria? Easily enough declared false: if they killed both with equal efficacy, we'd probably have a better name than antibiotics
But what about the other interpretation: In addition to killing bacteria, antibiotics also kill viruses. That one is harder to answer. You'd have to establish a threshold of efficacy, and you'd need to be a molecular biologist to even understand the question! The correct answer under this interpretation should for most people be, "I don't know"
Slashdot Mirror
You know, it actually wouldn't be so bad if they were split such that one page really was only a single page. In other words, if they kept their article and cruft down to fit a single "page" into an average sized browser window with NO scrolling. Then you could hover your mouse over the next page button and click when ready.
Which is actually pretty stupid considering how tiny Hollywood's contribution to GDP really is. Quick google search estimates Hollywood's revenues are somewhere on the order of $10 billion / year. and the music industry has revenues of about $15 billion/ year.
Compare that to Microsoft's revenues last year of 60 billion Microsoft's net profit ($16 billion) is larger than gross revenue of either of the two entire industries...
Obviously, their other customers are far more important to their success than anything the entertainment industry could throw at them, so it stands to reason that if they're introducing fundamentally crippling technology to their OS, they must have some reason in addition to helping Hollywood out.
Seconded. In my personal experience (my laptop, desktop, and a few friends' machines) the wifi recognition on 7.10 live CD has been spot on. In fact, it's been 100%. The only thing I have to do is enter the password more than once for some reason.
... | more) but if you can't get web access working, you can't browse the forums for the reason unless you've got another computer handy that's working.
Knoppix certainly doesn't match that (as of the latest DVD version as of December, I couldn't figure out how to recognize my card, even though the forums all suggest it should've recognized it automatically).
IMO, getting networking (and wireless networking if it's the only convenient option for that machine) is the most critical thing. Everything else can be adjusted if you have network access and some kind of web browser (even if your "web browser" is wget -O -
The army is interested in what they have to say, since certain kinds of color "blindness" result in the ability to easily spot camouflage.
Great movie, but the title.. Arg.. just ONE letter too many.
Literacy tests aren't bad because they were used to keep the illiterate from voting, but because they were intended to keep blacks from voting. At a time, I believe, when they were also endeavoring to prevent them from learning to read and using more complicated samples for people they didn't want voting.
The idea of everyone having a say conflicts with the obvious utility of rejecting those who don't understand the issues or don't really care about them. If I had my druthers, I'd run a poll the week before the election and everyone who said they were "undecided" on the main candidate, and couldn't describe any of the referendums would automatically have their voting registration suspended for that year.
It's not a bad example. The cooking shows invite you in to watch.
The question is not whether or not the information would be useful. Undoubtedly, it would be. The question is whether we have the right to demand its recording. And I would say, no, and especially not under false pretenses. The proper way to go about it is to invite our neighbors to review our research into our own culture, and try to impress upon them the benefits of a permanent record. Then, if they decide to record themselves or invite others to do the recording, the critical issue is who does the inviting.
I would gladly sacrifice knowledge of a culture in order to treat its people like human beings.
Maybe the conceit lies in the assumption that we should study them like animals, rather than interact with them like neighbors.
You don't go to your neighbor's house and ask to observe or join in their supper so you can learn about their cooking and dining techniques to compare to your own. You invite your neighbors over for dinner. And they might invite you over as well, but a polite host doesn't expect it.
Who cares if this stuff is lost to the ages. If THEY want to document it, they're free to. Nobody is stopping them from sending member to university for anthropology and doing the studies themselves. Nobody but money, that is, so someone should offer to sponsor a few.
The iPod touch looks like it has a very nice interface. Much better than anything else out there, and making the whole thing the screen is brilliant for a device intended for video & music.
A few things could make iPod touch much better: GPS and internet access. To that end it has wifi, and no GPS, but as far as the wiki knows, the iPhone doesn't have GPS either? (This seems odd, since *all* phones in the past few years have GPS in them as the least hassle way of satisfying e911 requirements, I thought)
An internal graphing calculator also seems like a natural fit. There's no reason that those things should be stuck with basically mid-90s technology when there are now handheld devices with more processing power than early 2000s desktop computers.
Anyway, you're right. Sticking a phone and a crappy camera in an iPod touch just makes a less-than-ideal phone and adds cost to the pocket media player.
Interesting. Did you offer to re-activate her old phone? Or did you just kind of write her off instead of trying to salvage a little company goodwill because she wasn't that bright and/or wanted you to think she wasn't that bright?
The problem is, on the plane you're talking about, the crew did not use the proper data-destruction procedure during the ditch. Perhaps they were overwhelmed by the accident or thought they'd ditch somewhere the plane would be lost, so it wouldn't matter, or had survival related tasks which required all of their attention. In any event, if thermite was part of the destruction procedure, it was not used.
This was, in fact, a matter of some controversy at the time, as was the decision not to bomb the wreckage.
Perhaps, but 30 is adequate. If you don't own at 30 fps, you're not going to do much better at 60. I assume you're using a high-resolution mouse, btw, or your statement would barely even make sense.
You may be too young to remember, but back in the day, we got 10 fps playing Q2, and that's the way we liked it! Ahh, the old days of not having a 3d card and going with full-software graphics...
The problem occurs because you have a high current. In order to avoid welding the projectile to the rails, you must contact the rails with non-trivial area, so every projectile slides along the rails with significant contact. Rail repulsion is a separate, but still important, problem.
Arcing actually replaces the abrasion problem with an ablation problem (and a conductivity problem). Unless you mean arcing between the rails themselves, which shouldn't happen, as the solution is the same as the contact-area and general resistance solution: wider, thicker rails.
Except, you really can't do that. Any fool can homebrew a geiger counter. They're little more than photomultiplier tubes connected to a speaker.*
*ok some have a switch to toggle between photon-counting mode and intensity metering, if your photons are too close together to count, but they're not really geiger counters in that mode.
Except they explicitely stated that they couldn't do anything with the fighter until the motherships arrived days earlier and presumably provided some kind of remote power. Which is very unfortunate for our heros, since after blowing up the mothership, one would think that the remote power would've ceased as well, some time during their descent.
It was a terrible movie, with a few stunning visuals, and quite a few cool-looking matte paintings. It's plausibility pales in comparison to the other space invaders movie that came out that year: Mars Attacks!
Yes, but if he's basically announcing that HE never had authority to distribute via GPL, and therefore everyone downstream has an invalid license, then the announcement is really an attempt to disclaim liability for the actions of people outside of his control.
It may or may not be the case in this instance, but it's certainly possible to imagine scenarios where people distribute code they have written entirely, but whose subject matter was in some way restricted. If they were confused or unaware of restrictions in the initial license and released their code out of altruism, is it really fair to expose them to unlimited liability, with no method of mitigating that liability once they realize their mistake?
Actually, there's a good question in there.
The GPL states that if you are restricted from distributing a work due to other encumbrances, you must refrain from distributing under GPL as well. It's not intended to be a rights-laundering license.
So the question is (or rather my question, since I'm sure actual legal scholars have already debated it to death) if it turns out that someone up the chain did not have the right to distribute under GPL, does that propagate down the chain to all those who unknowingly redistributed software for which the authority to actually do so was never transferred to them by someone who had it?
How can you post pictures privately? Isn't that a bit like sending in a letter to the editor and demanding that they put bars over the text when they print it?
124%? That's a pretty slender margin. How many acres are we going to have to devote to ethanol feedstock to supplant oil, at a farm ratio of four times as much land just for running the process to make the fuel for everything else? And are you using fossil-derived fertilizer, or are you synthesizing the fertilizer as part of the energy cycle?
Indeed I don't. I fully expect a new paradigm to kick in before the winner of the "High-def capable optical disk" format war matures. It's just that it seems remarkably premature to declare either of them "winners" when the adoption rate is currently so low.
You know the reason, but you're being obtuse because you want to juice. It's not really about the legality or illegality of steroid use, though your Congressmen (and women) would like you to believe that. It's more about the trade-offs. Like Tyrell symbionts, the star that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Using steroids improves performance for the player during his career at the cost of debilitating medical problems down the line. It reduces both quality and quantity of life for the retired player. Since it's a "prisoner's dilemma" of whether or not to juice: players who don't are at a significant disadvantage, it's in the players' best interest to band together and agree not to. Ironically it's probably the most relevant issue for the players' union to handle, much more so than the frequent salary strikes. In a sense, you're on to something: If the players aren't interested in protecting themselves by exercising their existing guild infrastructure, why should any of the rest of us be concerned the performances might be a little too exciting.
The same cannot be said of eye surgery. It just doesn't have the same risk of chronic, long-term side effects. It's almost all up-side.
Assuming this isn't a joke, did you ask why? That's a lot of money to spend on not using something that's not going to be worth anything in 3-5 years.
If only 20k/week (1 million / year) are being sold, and assuming that aside from PS3s it's been a relatively smooth ramp-up, then the format war has been decided before any of us have had a chance to weigh in at all. That's what, a fiftieth of the population pretty much decided for everybody?
Did you notice that the country that took place in was not the US? I don't see how you can expect Australia to follow the fourth and second amendments to the United States constitution, unless they specifically have analogous rules in their founding legal documents. Either way, it still doesn't have any bearing on US law.
Some of those questions (assuming that was the form they took on the survey) don't actually have true/false answers.
For instance, I would have answered, "The oxygen we breathe comes from plants" with false if I had only two options, since the vast majority of it comes from cyanobacteria in the oceans.
And as for radioactive milk, while the statement in general is false, One can imagine some conditions under which boiling would reduce "radioactivity" albeit at the risk of contaminating the are with volatile isotopes. So it hinges on just how loosely you play with the word "can".
And what about "Antibiotics kill viruses as well as Bacteria." At first look, the answer seems obvious, but, like those face/chalice drawings, it all hinges on the fragment, "as well as." Do they mean that they are as good at killing viruses as they are at killing bacteria? Easily enough declared false: if they killed both with equal efficacy, we'd probably have a better name than antibiotics
But what about the other interpretation: In addition to killing bacteria, antibiotics also kill viruses. That one is harder to answer. You'd have to establish a threshold of efficacy, and you'd need to be a molecular biologist to even understand the question! The correct answer under this interpretation should for most people be, "I don't know"