Reading the Government is a bit like reading smoke signals in the rain but I am guessing that this snippet in section 3 of the memorandum is pushback:
"Agency plans must also describe, to the extent feasible, procedures the agency will take to help prevent the unauthorized mass redistribution of scholarly publications."
That suggests to me that they do not want to vindicate Aaron Swartz.
That tells me that there is a possibility to use this in hybrid engines. The compressed air could be used to give power for passing cars. The resulting cooling could be used to cool a main gasoline engine. In other cases it could be used in conjunction with electric engines because those have problems when high torque is needed. If compressed air could be when extra torque is needed, maybe this could reduce the need for rare earth magnets.
My feeling is that no true comparison can be made because the costs borne by the company making the mistake are only half the equation. The costs borne by stock holders or computer owners are ignored. By scaling the costs to inflation one gets a feeling that a more precise comparison is being made but it ignores the larger impact of the mistakes. There is no simple comparison to be made. It is all bragging rights.
On the one hand, algorithmic trading can screw up royally and cost hundreds of millions in a matter of hours. On the other hand, human traders can screw up royally and cost billions over a few months.
I'm not sure which is worse. And of course in combination they can crash national economies.
One difference is that a slow moving wreck caused by humans with human consequences is within our toolset of things that we can react to and in some cases mitigate or avoid.
A wreck that destroys things when you blink is on the wrong timescale for prudent reactions.
Oddly Kansas City, home to Google's high fiber regimen is merely 40 miles away. So they will be able to zoom virtually in high speed and then hop in a car to see the real thing in less than an hour.
Next will be the patents on recreational drinking:
95% of your social network prefer to drink beer while watching sunsets but drink wine at candlelit dinners. Are you sure your drinking parameters are correct?
It's a false dichotomy. There is no need to exclude one.
One system for when the driver loses ability to drive.
The other system for when the driver drives badly.
Well on the positive side, because they want software to run on smaller systems means they have a compelling reason to fight code bloat and feature creep. It stinks when new versions are always larger and so slow that they need a recent workstation to use.
"A computer optimized travel method for pedestrians, vehicles and signal communication paths through open access spaces with superior distance and time characteristics than methods that utilize travel over two connected edges of said space."
"Features: Narrow-beam signal transmissions aimed directly from source to destination will automatically utilize all the benefits and features of this patent"
If we could generate some form of anti-gravity machine, it would only work as long as it had gravity to repel it ? And the further away you get, the lesser the effect ? I'm thinking in terms of a method to escape the earth's gravity you understand. It would still require some form of energy input.
Well I was nailed dead-to-rights that if energy was required it didn't mean perpetual motion. Other articles say what I did though: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1111_051111_junk_patent.html/ "Antigravity Machine Patent Draws Physicists' Ire"
The big deal is that as far as we know gravity is always an additive force and as a classical force (my weasel words for avoiding quantum navel gazing) antigravity doesn't exist. Of course, like everything else, this assumption is always subject to testing and refined understanding.
Seriously, there are other legitimate criticisms of the patent office, but saying that it's possible to patent something you don't know how to make isn't one of them.
Perhaps what makes a good virus is one that makes a population sick but doesn't kill too many; selection pressure might then retain a positive (albeit expensive) gene sequences somewhere in the genome that might not otherwise be conserved.
That is if the population is too healthy, expensive gene sequences would be less likely to persist by not being critical to survival often enough to be conserved.
A virus that resulted in conserving important but expensive sequences in the genome could provide enough positive benefit to persist in the population long enough for unlikely but possible circumstances to move portions of its code into the genome.
"Slapping lipstick on a pig does NOT make it Natalie Portman."
Applying hot grits however could marry colloidal and celluloidal properties with no cellulite in sight.
(dunno why I had to do it, but this meme almost fit the article -- this once)
Slashdot Mirror
Reading the Government is a bit like reading smoke signals in the rain but I am guessing that this snippet in section 3 of the memorandum is pushback:
"Agency plans must also describe, to the extent feasible, procedures the agency will take to help prevent the unauthorized mass redistribution of scholarly publications."
That suggests to me that they do not want to vindicate Aaron Swartz.
And peeling scotch tape in vacuum can release X-rays.
That tells me that there is a possibility to use this in hybrid engines. The compressed air could be used to give power for passing cars. The resulting cooling could be used to cool a main gasoline engine. In other cases it could be used in conjunction with electric engines because those have problems when high torque is needed. If compressed air could be when extra torque is needed, maybe this could reduce the need for rare earth magnets.
My feeling is that no true comparison can be made because the costs borne by the company making the mistake are only half the equation. The costs borne by stock holders or computer owners are ignored. By scaling the costs to inflation one gets a feeling that a more precise comparison is being made but it ignores the larger impact of the mistakes. There is no simple comparison to be made. It is all bragging rights.
Why ignore inflation? [...] (ignoring adjustments for inflation)"
On the one hand, algorithmic trading can screw up royally and cost hundreds of millions in a matter of hours. On the other hand, human traders can screw up royally and cost billions over a few months.
I'm not sure which is worse. And of course in combination they can crash national economies.
One difference is that a slow moving wreck caused by humans with human consequences is within our toolset of things that we can react to and in some cases mitigate or avoid. A wreck that destroys things when you blink is on the wrong timescale for prudent reactions.
Oddly Kansas City, home to Google's high fiber regimen is merely 40 miles away. So they will be able to zoom virtually in high speed and then hop in a car to see the real thing in less than an hour.
What other songs could the virus rock out with?
How about rickrolling?
Next will be the patents on recreational drinking: 95% of your social network prefer to drink beer while watching sunsets but drink wine at candlelit dinners. Are you sure your drinking parameters are correct?
So who the fuck enters "McDonalds" into Google every week/months?
Someone traveling. One day I really wanted to be home. The McDonald's breakfast I ate was consolation.
What the hell is a Gigawatt?
= Gigawhere / Gigawhen
It's a false dichotomy. There is no need to exclude one. One system for when the driver loses ability to drive. The other system for when the driver drives badly.
+1 Posting here to delete my mod down. An irony detector finally pinged.
Not only that. Since when is helping people relate to people living elsewhere a bad thing?
They want to know if the cylons are preparing a strike.
So they have labor unions too?
Suckerborg is ripe to be perfectly mimetic. Let's hope it infects the memepool!
The shallow end of the pool, please.
Well on the positive side, because they want software to run on smaller systems means they have a compelling reason to fight code bloat and feature creep. It stinks when new versions are always larger and so slow that they need a recent workstation to use.
Clearly then, we need to line our ICBMs with fruit cake. I knew that stuff was tough.
"A computer optimized travel method for pedestrians, vehicles and signal communication paths through open access spaces with superior distance and time characteristics than methods that utilize travel over two connected edges of said space." "Features: Narrow-beam signal transmissions aimed directly from source to destination will automatically utilize all the benefits and features of this patent"
Well I was nailed dead-to-rights that if energy was required it didn't mean perpetual motion. Other articles say what I did though: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/11/1111_051111_junk_patent.html/ "Antigravity Machine Patent Draws Physicists' Ire" The big deal is that as far as we know gravity is always an additive force and as a classical force (my weasel words for avoiding quantum navel gazing) antigravity doesn't exist. Of course, like everything else, this assumption is always subject to testing and refined understanding.
No one can build it. It is an antigravity propulsion system, which also makes it a perpetual motion machine. "The spacetime curvature imbalance, the spacetime curvature being the same as gravity, provides for the space vehicle's propulsion." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Patent_and_Trademark_Office#Controversial_patents
So we are good with "Space vehicle propelled by the pressure of inflationary vacuum state?" http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT6960975
The first two paragraphs of parent are relevant and incredibly ironic;
wish I had mod points to hoist up for better notice.
Perhaps what makes a good virus is one that makes a population sick but doesn't kill too many; selection pressure might then retain a positive (albeit expensive) gene sequences somewhere in the genome that might not otherwise be conserved.
That is if the population is too healthy, expensive gene sequences would be less likely to persist by not being critical to survival often enough to be conserved.
A virus that resulted in conserving important but expensive sequences in the genome could provide enough positive benefit to persist in the population long enough for unlikely but possible circumstances to move portions of its code into the genome.
"Slapping lipstick on a pig does NOT make it Natalie Portman." Applying hot grits however could marry colloidal and celluloidal properties with no cellulite in sight. (dunno why I had to do it, but this meme almost fit the article -- this once)