He has a personal attorney already. He's clearly upset.
Hardly - he's the kind of person who both has one or two on staff, and who almost certainly counts more than one among his friends. Finding out what can be done costs nothing, starting the ball rolling costs money or calling in a favour, something he was clearly not into doing.
Similarly writing an editorial might seem like a big step to some people, but he used to be (at least) on the USA Today board - he was just sounding off...
Actually when the case is libel, he doesn't have to merely put up with it or change it
No, he doesn't have to change it directly, but as I understand it, he does personally and actively have to pursue a court order, usually in conjunction with an action for damages. Normally, correct me if I'm wrong, this would be a cease and desist order on distributors, I don't know how a judge would tackle something like Wikipedia where it could simply be changed back.
In any case, no amount of indignant editorials or feet-stamping make anyone else responsible for changing the article.
From what I can discern, the "bubble" is a pie menu [...] That sounds lame, on the verge to stupid.
What? They've taken a long-standing problem and found a solution to it... Don't you ever find that there are just just many items you can fit on a traditional menu? And what's the point in buying a high-resolution monitor if the applications aren't going to use it up?
Seriously, though, am I being stupid with this interface? I created 'containers' for photos and for music and cannot drag'n'drop into either... (In Firefox it does nothing, in IE - with drag'n'drop enabled - it opens the file locally)
why on earth should I give [David Pogue] opinon any creedance when its ovbious he does not even know what an OS does
Thank goodness someone said it because I thought I was going mad!
If I'd read him say that in the NYT, I'd have dismissed it as a stupid comment... but someone here quoted him, and an 'editor' let him, leading me to spend an extra five minutes of my life trying to figure out exactly what this thing is.
Seriously, what is the point writing summaries if it's less clear after you've read it what the story is...
That's all I'm saying - since water is only a hypothesis, adding evidence is the right approach (though I take your point about wanting to match the areas scanned).
I'm an engineer - I take the data I'm given and draw the most logical conclusion
Sun crosses the sky and emerges on the other horizon half a day later... the most likely explanation is that it circles the Earth. (Being facetious, but you know what I mean...)
You have a very black and white world view. Either Spectrometry or RADAR must be the only useful evidence. I must either accept the speculative conclusion or believe there's no water (and provide an alternate explanation).
At risk of repeating myself - NASA's evidence was compelling, but their conclusion cannot be accepted as proven. ESA's evidence adds something because their RADAR-like approach says more about the depth of whatever is there. (And NASA want to conclude not just water, but a significant amount of it.)
For what it's worth, I am personally reasonably convinced, but I'm also a scientist...
NASA did not "find water" years ago... or ever! They found the gamma-ray spectrometry signature for hydrogen and proposed this was likely locked up in ice. Now a different means has been used to measure the subsurface (much more effectively in terms of depth, if less conclusively in terms of composition) and also found results not inconsistent with ice. We will probably not 'find ice' until someone goes there and drills. Until then, different means of measurement are a good idea (even though the media, and worse the bottom-feeding pseudo-journalism of sites like Slashdot, will misinterpret the conclusions that can be drawn).
These might have been cool (well, the Oakleys) while cycling in Summer (don't worry - on the cycle network in Milton Keynes, not on the road), but when it's dark by 17h00 and pouring with rain, I think I'll stick with 'street style' headphones and a cheaper player hung inside my jacket!
No seriously, what exactly are the "ethical considerations" of a face transplant?
And the "psychological impact" to the patient of looking different?
It's about having, to some degree, someone else's face.
This is also why they're at pains to point out that the recipient does not look exactly like their donor.
Just as people look back and can't understand why people were uncomfortable with the idea of someone else's blood running around their veins, or someone else's heart beating in their chest, so people might get over this idea - you apparently have.
Have some imagination, though, and see why people have (it's true, and well-documented, not just sensationalism) been creeped out by this idea for decades...
We understand that imitation and derivation are part of any healthy industry. Patents protect truly novel innovations (or they're supposed to), but only for a limited period to protect investment in R&D, not because copying is bad and means you have to stand in the corner and face the wall!
That graph shows two previous 'levelling offs' with the subsequent rate of change (and local maximum) being greater each time - what are we supposed to learn from that?
Anyone else have trouble signing in with a Hotmail account-based Passport?
(I know, I know, but I'm not about to use any other address...)
If I try to sign in directly, it says I have to register (but only allows this from a @microsoft.com address), and if I register separately it disallows @hotmail.com (and @msn.com and @passport.com).
Agreed, Google Base is like everything2, but aren't you taking it to much for granted that Fremont is a 'Google Base killer'?
Despite eWeek's headline and speculation, what Microsoft have actually said - 'online marketplace', 'localised listings and maps' - doesn't really make it sound like everything2, but rather like a hopeful 'Craigslist killer' (with an eye on eBay)...
Slashdot Mirror
Similarly writing an editorial might seem like a big step to some people, but he used to be (at least) on the USA Today board - he was just sounding off...
In any case, no amount of indignant editorials or feet-stamping make anyone else responsible for changing the article.
He doesn't understand why corrections are normally made "within minutes" - it's because in the majority of articles someone gives a shit!
If he's the only person that cares then it's clearly up to him to put or right or to live with it...
Seriously, though, am I being stupid with this interface? I created 'containers' for photos and for music and cannot drag'n'drop into either... (In Firefox it does nothing, in IE - with drag'n'drop enabled - it opens the file locally)
If I'd read him say that in the NYT, I'd have dismissed it as a stupid comment... but someone here quoted him, and an 'editor' let him, leading me to spend an extra five minutes of my life trying to figure out exactly what this thing is.
Seriously, what is the point writing summaries if it's less clear after you've read it what the story is...
With a name like Yonah (aka Jonah), what are they saying about their motherboards?!
I can never finish a Mars bar without a glass of milk... I hope there's some of that up there!
The BBC repeatedly fail to distinguish speculation from proof, but at least they stopped short of making things up!
At risk of repeating myself - NASA's evidence was compelling, but their conclusion cannot be accepted as proven. ESA's evidence adds something because their RADAR-like approach says more about the depth of whatever is there. (And NASA want to conclude not just water, but a significant amount of it.)
For what it's worth, I am personally reasonably convinced, but I'm also a scientist...
NASA did not "find water" years ago... or ever! They found the gamma-ray spectrometry signature for hydrogen and proposed this was likely locked up in ice. Now a different means has been used to measure the subsurface (much more effectively in terms of depth, if less conclusively in terms of composition) and also found results not inconsistent with ice. We will probably not 'find ice' until someone goes there and drills. Until then, different means of measurement are a good idea (even though the media, and worse the bottom-feeding pseudo-journalism of sites like Slashdot, will misinterpret the conclusions that can be drawn).
These might have been cool (well, the Oakleys) while cycling in Summer (don't worry - on the cycle network in Milton Keynes, not on the road), but when it's dark by 17h00 and pouring with rain, I think I'll stick with 'street style' headphones and a cheaper player hung inside my jacket!
So what I really needed on the night of the 31st October 1993 was a head transplant?
This is also why they're at pains to point out that the recipient does not look exactly like their donor.
Just as people look back and can't understand why people were uncomfortable with the idea of someone else's blood running around their veins, or someone else's heart beating in their chest, so people might get over this idea - you apparently have.
Have some imagination, though, and see why people have (it's true, and well-documented, not just sensationalism) been creeped out by this idea for decades...
// 30-11-2005 16:08 GMT Fixes a type checking error when no value is returned
if (Account.Tarrif == null)
return false;
// Redundant.comment while(story = slashdot.getStory()) { story.read(); eyes.roll(); }
What had mean you over? *grin*
"Miss! Miss! He's cooooopyiiiiing! That's bad, isn't it, Miss?"
We understand that imitation and derivation are part of any healthy industry. Patents protect truly novel innovations (or they're supposed to), but only for a limited period to protect investment in R&D, not because copying is bad and means you have to stand in the corner and face the wall!
That graph shows two previous 'levelling offs' with the subsequent rate of change (and local maximum) being greater each time - what are we supposed to learn from that?
... wait, 'glimpses' are the one screen about needing to register with a @microsoft.com account?
This (eWeek) article is really misleading!
Anyone else have trouble signing in with a Hotmail account-based Passport?
(I know, I know, but I'm not about to use any other address...)
If I try to sign in directly, it says I have to register (but only allows this from a @microsoft.com address), and if I register separately it disallows @hotmail.com (and @msn.com and @passport.com).
Agreed, Google Base is like everything2, but aren't you taking it to much for granted that Fremont is a 'Google Base killer'?
Despite eWeek's headline and speculation, what Microsoft have actually said - 'online marketplace', 'localised listings and maps' - doesn't really make it sound like everything2, but rather like a hopeful 'Craigslist killer' (with an eye on eBay)...