You should also check out Brane theory which is one of the top 3 cosmology theories of the day. Interestingly, the Brane theory and string theory are not mutually exclusive. Here's a simplified take on cosmology from the Popular Science web site.
You are using Newtonian velocity addition which is wrong. You have to use relativistic velocity addition. If A and B are both moving away from Q as 0.9c in opposite direction, A is not moving away from B at 1.8 c! They are really travelling at 0.994475c with respect to each other.
NOTHING is traveling faster than light. The expansion of the universe is not motion, so special relativity does not apply.
Also, this expansion is not like plate tectonics on earth where there are a couple different areas that are expanding (while there are a couple that are receding). This expansion is happening everywhere at once. So rather than all of the extra space just appearing between New York and London somewhere in the Atlantic, it is as though the earth's diameter started to increase and New York became farther away from Neward and Philidelphia and Boston all at the same time (that could be a good thing).
I would think that Hydrogen is reasonable. The chances of an explosion are probably pretty low. It's not like we need to have people on this. Having not RTFA, if it currently requires a crew, I'm sure it could be automated (or at least outsourced for cheap labor;). The risk associated with losing cargo could be weighed against the commercial cost of hydrogen vs. helium. That's what insurance is for.
Besides Hydrogen is cheap and easy to produce. Helium is expensive and nonrenewable (unless it becomes a commercial byproduct of successful fusion plants).
We should save the helium for things that we can't use hydrogen for, like getting/keeping things really cold, blowing up balloons, and talking like chipmunks.
Oh, VB.NET is great. It's just C# for the VB people (which I ain't [sic]). It's VB6 that I hate.
Re:Why would you pay for it anyways?
on
Hardcore Java
·
· Score: 1
Really, there's no need to flame me over this. I actually prefer C# over Java because of the.NET IDE. I haven't tried any of the free IDEs or compilers yet, but I am glad that they exist.
Which IDE is the best? Does it have a compiler? If it is as easy to build forms in as.NET is, then I will finally uninstall VisualStudio 6.0. Is VB.NET supported too, or do I need to port over any of my VB.NET code to C# before trying to improve it in one of these? I have wanted to get.NET at home, but I didn't want to spend money when I had heard of mono.
Hardcore java is when you bomb the Microsoft headquarters for inventing C#.
Invent: to produce (as something useful) for the first time through the use of the imagination or of ingenious thinking and experiment
While many/.ers would jump on the first bit, I was thinking more along the lines of C# being MS's clone of Java. Don't get me wrong, I like them both. I would never pay for C#, but if my boss gives it to me and tells me to use it, I'll count my blessings that it wasn't VB.
Hey, I was wrong, and I don't mind admitting it. Check this out:
[An example of] Fair use. In a lawsuit commonly known as the Betamax case, the Supreme Court determined that the home videotaping of a television broadcast was a fair use. This was one of the few occasions when copying a complete work (for example, a complete episode of the "Kojak" television show) was accepted as a fair use. Evidence indicated that most viewers were "time-shifting" (taping in order to watch later) and not "library-building" (collecting the videos in order to build a video library). Important factors: The Supreme Court reasoned that the "delayed" system of viewing did not deprive the copyright owners of revenue. (Universal City Studios v. Sony Corp., 464 U.S. 417 (1984).)
I was wondering what "time shifting" meant. I think that this strengthens your argument* a bit, eh? (I was going to post this with my "bad" post, but I wanted you to see my retraction.)
...running an election American Idol style. How are they going to prevent stuffing the ballot box? Worse yet, why wouldn't WB want to stuff the ballot box themselves? This just sounds dirty.
Sorry about that. I didn't mean to support myself with bad evidence. I can honestly see both sides to the argument, and well, we know which side is usually taken up here on/. I was just trying to balance out everything a little. You know, Lawful Neutral? It wouldn't be True Neutral would it?
That's a really interesting link. It actually shoots down part of your post from above:
Perhaps a better way of looking at whether something is fixed is whether it can be read or copied at some arbitrary later time, absent some external event that destroys the work. In the case of RAM, it is possible to read the work as long as it hasn't been overwritten or the power hasn't been removed. In the case of a videotape, it can be viewed unless it is erased or otherwise destroyed.
In contrast, the image of a movie on a screen or a television show on a cathode ray tube or bits being transmitted on a wire fade away "automatically" at a predictable time, so that the image can no longer be perceived, and therefore is not fixed. (Although in a dynamic RAM the individual bits also fade away, the memory system has a refreshing component that extends their life, so when the entire memory system is considered, the bits are fixed unless there is some external event such as the removal of power that causes the refreshing to stop.)
So much for the image on the screen being a "copy." The more I read, the more I am convinced that analog copies of TV/radio broadcasts are not legal....
Actually I hadn't. I was hoping that you would have included your link in with the assertion. I assume that you agree that it is preposterous. Thanks for putting the link up. I'm going to go read it now. Check out Stanford's take though.
I see that the posters to this parent are starting to throw poo around without any supporting links. Take a look at Measuring Fair Use: The Four Factors (while you're at it, keep reading). I would hope that we can agree that Stanford is a trustworthy source. I would think that they would prefer "Information to be free," so using their explanations should be acceptable when I am criticizing the misuse [IMO] of "Fair Use."
I don't think that you can't count the image on my TV as a copy. You can't access it or save it. And, I'm sorry, but I think that the "loading software into RAM" bit is loopier than the rest.
As far as making copies, I think that you are allowed to make [limited?] copies for backup purposes IF you have a legit license. So it is legal to make a backup of a movie, if you bought your own copy. It is not legal to copy a video you rented from BlockBuster, nor keep a copy after you sold the original to a friend. I don't think that it is actually legal to tape off the TV/radio, but it is so unenforcable that people forget. Kind of like "Abandonware."
Once again, sorry for being the devil's advocate, but...
This country was not founded on Fair Use. It is not an inalienable right. Since Fair Use is established by copyright law, doesn't it make sense that if it conflicts with* other copyright laws, that there Fair Use does not necessarily trump the rest. I don't think that the poor college student is that solid of an argument (although I hear it a lot on/.).
* IANAL, so here's my context: Enables/encourages others to circumvent or just outright trivializes.
What rights do you have over the analog version? You have a right to listen/watch to the broadcast, but I don't think that you have the right to make an analog copy and do as you wish with it. Just because it is nearly impossible to catch/prevent people copying off the radio or TV doesn't mean that you have rights to it.
I know that information wants to be free, but I am talking about legal rights.
I thought the movie was brilliantly animated. The "New and Improved" Shrek's hair flip [like in Breck commercials] was very funny. And pretty good, since hair is one of the biggest animating hurdles.
However, the movements of the "New and Improved" Donkey when he was prancing around seemed so unrealistic that it kind of broke the spell.
A very funny movie, probably on par with the first, but maybe a little less suited for the kids.
Archon. Man that was a great game. I'll search for it later. If nothing else, I'm sure that I can find a ROM for my C64 emulator. Any sequals?
I am a little on the young side for a C64 user. My older brother was probably right in the middle. It was his, but he "sold" it to my dad sometime during/after college. Basically, he wanted to get rid of it and my dad needed an excuse to give him some money ($300 for an old C64???) - yeah, he's cheap and we're independent.
Slashdot Mirror
- The universe could be:
- Finite
- Infinite with a closed topology (would this actually be a special case under finite?)
- Infinite with an open topology
Sorry if I massacred the distinctions between what is still plausible based on this discovery.You should also check out Brane theory which is one of the top 3 cosmology theories of the day. Interestingly, the Brane theory and string theory are not mutually exclusive. Here's a simplified take on cosmology from the Popular Science web site.
You are using Newtonian velocity addition which is wrong. You have to use relativistic velocity addition. If A and B are both moving away from Q as 0.9c in opposite direction, A is not moving away from B at 1.8 c! They are really travelling at 0.994475c with respect to each other.
NOTHING is traveling faster than light. The expansion of the universe is not motion, so special relativity does not apply.
Also, this expansion is not like plate tectonics on earth where there are a couple different areas that are expanding (while there are a couple that are receding). This expansion is happening everywhere at once. So rather than all of the extra space just appearing between New York and London somewhere in the Atlantic, it is as though the earth's diameter started to increase and New York became farther away from Neward and Philidelphia and Boston all at the same time (that could be a good thing).
I will then. Thanks.
I would think that Hydrogen is reasonable. The chances of an explosion are probably pretty low. It's not like we need to have people on this. Having not RTFA, if it currently requires a crew, I'm sure it could be automated (or at least outsourced for cheap labor;). The risk associated with losing cargo could be weighed against the commercial cost of hydrogen vs. helium. That's what insurance is for.
Besides Hydrogen is cheap and easy to produce. Helium is expensive and nonrenewable (unless it becomes a commercial byproduct of successful fusion plants).
We should save the helium for things that we can't use hydrogen for, like getting/keeping things really cold, blowing up balloons, and talking like chipmunks.
FYI - before you flame me, I posted a a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=108838&c id=9251990">rebuttal to myself further up the thread.
Oh, VB.NET is great. It's just C# for the VB people (which I ain't [sic]). It's VB6 that I hate.
Really, there's no need to flame me over this. I actually prefer C# over Java because of the .NET IDE. I haven't tried any of the free IDEs or compilers yet, but I am glad that they exist.
.NET is, then I will finally uninstall VisualStudio 6.0. Is VB.NET supported too, or do I need to port over any of my VB.NET code to C# before trying to improve it in one of these? I have wanted to get .NET at home, but I didn't want to spend money when I had heard of mono.
Which IDE is the best? Does it have a compiler? If it is as easy to build forms in as
Hardcore java is when you bomb the Microsoft headquarters for inventing C#.
/.ers would jump on the first bit, I was thinking more along the lines of C# being MS's clone of Java. Don't get me wrong, I like them both. I would never pay for C#, but if my boss gives it to me and tells me to use it, I'll count my blessings that it wasn't VB.
Invent: to produce (as something useful) for the first time through the use of the imagination or of ingenious thinking and experiment
While many
* that it is okay to copy the analog signals.
...running an election American Idol style. How are they going to prevent stuffing the ballot box? Worse yet, why wouldn't WB want to stuff the ballot box themselves? This just sounds dirty.
Sorry about that. I didn't mean to support myself with bad evidence. I can honestly see both sides to the argument, and well, we know which side is usually taken up here on /. I was just trying to balance out everything a little. You know, Lawful Neutral? It wouldn't be True Neutral would it?
Actually I hadn't. I was hoping that you would have included your link in with the assertion. I assume that you agree that it is preposterous. Thanks for putting the link up. I'm going to go read it now. Check out Stanford's take though.
I see that the posters to this parent are starting to throw poo around without any supporting links. Take a look at Measuring Fair Use: The Four Factors (while you're at it, keep reading). I would hope that we can agree that Stanford is a trustworthy source. I would think that they would prefer "Information to be free," so using their explanations should be acceptable when I am criticizing the misuse [IMO] of "Fair Use."
I don't think that you can't count the image on my TV as a copy. You can't access it or save it. And, I'm sorry, but I think that the "loading software into RAM" bit is loopier than the rest.
As far as making copies, I think that you are allowed to make [limited?] copies for backup purposes IF you have a legit license. So it is legal to make a backup of a movie, if you bought your own copy. It is not legal to copy a video you rented from BlockBuster, nor keep a copy after you sold the original to a friend. I don't think that it is actually legal to tape off the TV/radio, but it is so unenforcable that people forget. Kind of like "Abandonware."
Once again, sorry for being the devil's advocate, but...
/.).
This country was not founded on Fair Use. It is not an inalienable right. Since Fair Use is established by copyright law, doesn't it make sense that if it conflicts with* other copyright laws, that there Fair Use does not necessarily trump the rest. I don't think that the poor college student is that solid of an argument (although I hear it a lot on
* IANAL, so here's my context: Enables/encourages others to circumvent or just outright trivializes.
(I hope that I'm wrong about this, but...)
What rights do you have over the analog version? You have a right to listen/watch to the broadcast, but I don't think that you have the right to make an analog copy and do as you wish with it. Just because it is nearly impossible to catch/prevent people copying off the radio or TV doesn't mean that you have rights to it.
I know that information wants to be free, but I am talking about legal rights.
...an Anonymous Coward.
All your car are belong to us?
Oh shit! Fell asleep at the keyboard again.
I thought the movie was brilliantly animated. The "New and Improved" Shrek's hair flip [like in Breck commercials] was very funny. And pretty good, since hair is one of the biggest animating hurdles.
However, the movements of the "New and Improved" Donkey when he was prancing around seemed so unrealistic that it kind of broke the spell.
A very funny movie, probably on par with the first, but maybe a little less suited for the kids.
Archon. Man that was a great game. I'll search for it later. If nothing else, I'm sure that I can find a ROM for my C64 emulator. Any sequals?
I am a little on the young side for a C64 user. My older brother was probably right in the middle. It was his, but he "sold" it to my dad sometime during/after college. Basically, he wanted to get rid of it and my dad needed an excuse to give him some money ($300 for an old C64???) - yeah, he's cheap and we're independent.
Um, passive device + active device = you know where it is.