The only solution on the table right now is Yucca; only problem is, we're just extending the parameters of "bury a hole" and "be long gone when it becomes a problem." The stuff in Yucca mountain will be around for 100,000 years. There are serious problems with making stuff last that long, making signs that people will understand even 1,000 years from now, geological changes over just a few thousand years, etc.
The problem is time. Radioactive material is radioactive--it decays into stable elements over time. The most radioactive elements will have decayed in less than a thousand years. Nothing is perfectly safe--crossing the street is a greater hazard to you than Yucca mountain will be to anyone. More on topic, spewing radioactive material into the air is probably a tad less safe than depositing it underground, too. And where do you think we get more stable forms of uranium in the first place? It's been in the ground all over the world for a lot longer than 100,000 years.
They're selling me a TCP/IP connection to a global network with a service level guaranteed to varying degrees of accuracy depending on how much I pay. Unless it's spelled out in the contract, artificial restrictions should not be allowed.
Maybe if you pay an assload for Speakeasy or small business DSL, that's the case. But with most ISPs, they consider that you are paying for the privilege of using a part of their bandwidth. It isn't even analogous to renting--it's more like paying someone money so they let you live in a room in their house, only they can tell you what you can and can't do and you have no recourse if they're an asshole.
I didn't misspell "millennium." I leave that to the editors and humorless people.
Honestly, though, both of these issues involve hard problems for which there are no easy solutions. And both of them involve problems that hardly anyone is qualified to address, yet a whole lot of people have abstract ideas about them that aren't useful because the details are what matter. It isn't as though there are hordes of advanced mathematicians and development experts who are unaware of each other and need the internet to connect. And even if there were, they are overwhelmingly outnumbered by people who think they're experts but aren't.
By the way, I'm pro-UN and pro-MDG. It is embarrassing that only two countries on Earth have contributed as much as they pledged to in the Monterrey Consensus.
You don't have to be an nihilist to be an anarcho-capitalist. Just because people ought to be allowed to do things doesn't mean that they ought to do them. Blizzard ought not to stifle people like this, and people ought to complain about it.
Maybe they associate themselves because they want to end bigotry based on gender and sexuality, rather than seeking to make everyone just a little less bigoted like you so they can accept gay people, too.
Clearly you've never heard of a boycott, picket, or any other similar form of consumer revolt.
You mean those things that have an almost insignificant effect compared to market forces the vast majority of time? Until Intel starts killing dolphins, only a handful of nerds are going to care.
Given that most people didn't write at all, I imagine the average handwriting was much better. Besides, the majority of literate people were monks, who had hours a day to write.
One hand washes the other, but your post is more like both hands waving apprehensively in the air because you weren't sure which one to wave but now you realize that waving both looks stupid but you've already committed to your decision and don't want to look like you did it on accident.
Although obscenity (and during the day, indecency) is banned from broadcast television, there are no laws which require ratings to be applied in such a manner that children may not view programs of a certain rating without parental consent. I don't know what magazine ratings you're speaking of, but I know of no laws which prohibit the sale of magazines to children based on any ratings. Furthermore, the rating system for movies is enforced voluntarily, not by law.
You could argue that pornography cannot be sold to children, but this is not a matter of ratings. Besides, existing laws against pornography can be applied to games as well as other media. However, this case here is that there is an active movement to single out games for ratings-based regulation.
Re:weird perspective for a conflict... and wrong!
on
Sun's Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Don't get me wrong, I hate the RIAA as much as the next guy, and I think they generally work against the better interest of the public as well as artists, but they do have the right to protect their investments.
For once, someone actually is begging the question on/. The assumption here is that DRM significantly deters piracy. This claim is far from obviously true, and I have never seen any solid evidence to support it. However, it is known that people who use media encumbered by DRM if anything have a worse experience than those who use unencumbered media (including pirates). Definitely providing value to the customers is a better idea (and a sounder business decision) than possibly putting a small dent in piracy while inconveniencing legitimate customers.
You're right--it actually turns out that I was mistaken, and Bungie hasn't announced that they are working on Halo 3 yet, though it's pretty inconceivable that they aren't.
Slashdot Mirror
As for b, Yucca mountain is scheduled to open in 2010.
The problem is time. Radioactive material is radioactive--it decays into stable elements over time. The most radioactive elements will have decayed in less than a thousand years. Nothing is perfectly safe--crossing the street is a greater hazard to you than Yucca mountain will be to anyone. More on topic, spewing radioactive material into the air is probably a tad less safe than depositing it underground, too. And where do you think we get more stable forms of uranium in the first place? It's been in the ground all over the world for a lot longer than 100,000 years.
Maybe if you pay an assload for Speakeasy or small business DSL, that's the case. But with most ISPs, they consider that you are paying for the privilege of using a part of their bandwidth. It isn't even analogous to renting--it's more like paying someone money so they let you live in a room in their house, only they can tell you what you can and can't do and you have no recourse if they're an asshole.
Honestly, though, both of these issues involve hard problems for which there are no easy solutions. And both of them involve problems that hardly anyone is qualified to address, yet a whole lot of people have abstract ideas about them that aren't useful because the details are what matter. It isn't as though there are hordes of advanced mathematicians and development experts who are unaware of each other and need the internet to connect. And even if there were, they are overwhelmingly outnumbered by people who think they're experts but aren't.
By the way, I'm pro-UN and pro-MDG. It is embarrassing that only two countries on Earth have contributed as much as they pledged to in the Monterrey Consensus.
Kofi Annan and Jeffrey Sachs set up a wiki to solve the Millennium Development Goals which mind-bogglingly manages to be even less successful.
I hear that alcohol leads to close dancing and jazz music. Clearly it should be banned.
You don't have to be an nihilist to be an anarcho-capitalist. Just because people ought to be allowed to do things doesn't mean that they ought to do them. Blizzard ought not to stifle people like this, and people ought to complain about it.
Maybe they associate themselves because they want to end bigotry based on gender and sexuality, rather than seeking to make everyone just a little less bigoted like you so they can accept gay people, too.
I'm sure the Chinese would be happy to by classified experimental aircraft from the Air Force.
"Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead."
It's a good thing that Cringely has far more credibility than a random blogger.
You mean those things that have an almost insignificant effect compared to market forces the vast majority of time? Until Intel starts killing dolphins, only a handful of nerds are going to care.
Given that most people didn't write at all, I imagine the average handwriting was much better. Besides, the majority of literate people were monks, who had hours a day to write.
That's what anthropology is for, silly.
One hand washes the other, but your post is more like both hands waving apprehensively in the air because you weren't sure which one to wave but now you realize that waving both looks stupid but you've already committed to your decision and don't want to look like you did it on accident.
Don't be so coy; tell us what you really think.
You could argue that pornography cannot be sold to children, but this is not a matter of ratings. Besides, existing laws against pornography can be applied to games as well as other media. However, this case here is that there is an active movement to single out games for ratings-based regulation.
For once, someone actually is begging the question on /. The assumption here is that DRM significantly deters piracy. This claim is far from obviously true, and I have never seen any solid evidence to support it. However, it is known that people who use media encumbered by DRM if anything have a worse experience than those who use unencumbered media (including pirates). Definitely providing value to the customers is a better idea (and a sounder business decision) than possibly putting a small dent in piracy while inconveniencing legitimate customers.
Sure they are. There is no imminent risk that the sale of TV, movies, books, magazines, or any other kind of media will be regulated by ratings.
I know Jack Thompson is a real nobody, but you don't always have to be so mean to him.
When it comes to trademarks, this is basically the case.
Sorry, but this seems a bit expensive just to read your message.
Yes, but don't worry; this story will be posted again tomorrow.
Also, you really don't have to troll.
Bungie announced a release date for Halo 2, and they released it on that date. What other people say was irrelevant then, and is now.