What worries me the most is that so many people were so cooperative in trying to find "the thief". You go to Denny's, show them a credit card, and they give you a description of the person who used the credit card? That's the scary part.
I think you have "thief" confused with thief. They really stole his money. And why wouldn't the people at Denny's help him? He has his credit card and ID to prove that he is who he says he is. If someone else used the same card number they obviously weren't supposed to.
That some kid stole a couple thousand dollars from Discover Card and some Visa merchant - so what? This guy acts like they were stealing the money from him.
If someone stole your car, would you say, "So what? They're only stealing from the insurance company."? A defrauded man, his credit card companies, restaurant & hotel employees, and the police come together to arrest two thieves and somehow this is a bad thing? This is the way things should work, people taking responsibility and looking after their own interests and those of others.
This opens up questions around the legal ownership of contributions, and could even open an avenue for a "disgruntled employee" to give away company secrets by contributing them to open-source projects, the report argues.
He makes it sound like open source suddenly gives disgruntled employees an avenue to hurt their former employer when none existed before. Let's evaluate the choice of a disgruntled employee:
A) Give IP to Open Source Project
Company finds IP because, well, it's an open source project
Company forces project to remove IP
Project at the very least is considerably set back if not closed
Everyone on project hates me, possibly sued by former company for releasing IP
B) Quit and work for the competition
Get a raise
Watch former company lose market share to new employer
Make insulting jokes about former employer with new co-workers
C) Burn down employers building
Go to prison
Your results may vary, but you get the idea. Contributing IP to an open-source is hardly the best option for a vindictive person.
you don't get love from a whorehouse.
likewise, you don't get spirituality from a church/ temple/ mosque.
You're not clear as to why a whorehouse is like a religious building. The simplest interpretation is that physical buildings can not provide intangeable things like love or spirituality; however, you probably meant something more along the lines that acting out the expressions of deeper desires and emotions cannot in itself produce those desires and emotions. In the same way that having sex cannot provide love, neither can performing religious rites and ceremonies produce spirituality.
but that is ok, because just as there are some who will never know real love due to intellectual or character issues, and therefore need whorehouses to sake their lust that would otherwise drive them insane or drive them to commit horrendous crimes on the street,
Which are we talking about, love or lust? If we are talking about love then we already agreed that a whorehouse cannot provide love and therefore would not be needed by someone lacking love. If we are talking about lust, then why the pretense of love? And to which are we now comparing spirituality? I also don't think that we can accept as fact that those who are unable to satify their lust would be necessarily driven to insanity or criminal activities.
so to are their spiritual pinheads in this world who need churches/ temples/ mosques to give answer to their doubts and fears, so they don't commit horrible atrocities of spiritual void.
Following your arguement that those who cannot experience love must at least satisfy their lust in order keep their sanity am I to understand that those who cannot experience spirituality must at least satisfy their spiritual pinheadedness in order to keep from desecrating the spiritual void? Because if that's what you're saying, it doesn't make a lot of sense. I would say there is some truth that all people have a desire for love as well as for some form of spirituality, but I don't know what goes with spirituality as lust goes with love. It's also not clear why the lack of either love or spirituality would necessitate any type of attrocity.
so the lowest common denominator empty pap we call organized religion is vile,
I don't see how we got here. You say "so" only as a form of implying that you've made some point when in fact you haven't. I also don't think you understand the meaning of "lowest common denominator". Organised religion goes with church/temples/mosques but not with whorehouses (strictly speaking). The lowest common denominator should apply to both things we are comparing.
but still necessary. just like whorehouses.
Yes, you do make a point as to why they are necessary, but not as to why organised religion is vile.
we don't want ugly or crude men raping women on the streets
We don't want anyone raping anyone else anywhere.
and we don't want small-spirited people walking around without a sense of morality or a human conscience.
I'm not sure what you mean by small-spirited people, but the person you describe is a sociopath, and we definitely don't want them walking around, even if it may be their right to do so.
if they don't have the spiritual backbone to decide right or wrong, or find the basic goodness in human existence on their own,
...generally true of sociopaths
well then please, let the church turn them into sheep.
You started out rather negative about religion and now it sounds like you are suggesting that Christians should be rehabilitating sociopaths. I'm not sure that you can apply this statement to all religions since, although Christians readily identify themselves with sheep other religions do not and would probably be offended by the idea.
better sheep than demons without a sense of social responsibility or a clue as to their relationship to human society and the idea
I think the question most businesses ask is how long will it take to get a return on investment.
The manufacturer specifies 38 W/m^2 or about 3.5 W/ft^2. Used as a window, the orientation would be fixed and I think you would be lucky to get four hours of good light to get something close to full efficiency.
So 3.5*4 = 14 Wh per day.
If electricity is 15 cents/kWh, you could buy 300 kWh for $45 (the cost per square foot of window).
To produce 300 kWh from a square foot of window would take 300 000/14 = 21 428 days or roughly 59 years.
Of course that doesn't take into account connecting your windows into the buildings power and the loss of effieciency there. And I also didn't take into account what the cost of regular windows are to begin with, since that should be reduced from the price, but I would guess they would be a few dollars and might take 10 years off the total.
Once electricy prices increase to $1.50/kWh these babies should be selling like hotcakes.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you have "thief" confused with thief. They really stole his money. And why wouldn't the people at Denny's help him? He has his credit card and ID to prove that he is who he says he is. If someone else used the same card number they obviously weren't supposed to.
That some kid stole a couple thousand dollars from Discover Card and some Visa merchant - so what? This guy acts like they were stealing the money from him.If someone stole your car, would you say, "So what? They're only stealing from the insurance company."? A defrauded man, his credit card companies, restaurant & hotel employees, and the police come together to arrest two thieves and somehow this is a bad thing? This is the way things should work, people taking responsibility and looking after their own interests and those of others.
He makes it sound like open source suddenly gives disgruntled employees an avenue to hurt their former employer when none existed before. Let's evaluate the choice of a disgruntled employee:
A) Give IP to Open Source Project
B) Quit and work for the competition
C) Burn down employers building
Your results may vary, but you get the idea. Contributing IP to an open-source is hardly the best option for a vindictive person.
you don't get love from a whorehouse. likewise, you don't get spirituality from a church/ temple/ mosque.
You're not clear as to why a whorehouse is like a religious building. The simplest interpretation is that physical buildings can not provide intangeable things like love or spirituality; however, you probably meant something more along the lines that acting out the expressions of deeper desires and emotions cannot in itself produce those desires and emotions. In the same way that having sex cannot provide love, neither can performing religious rites and ceremonies produce spirituality.
but that is ok, because just as there are some who will never know real love due to intellectual or character issues, and therefore need whorehouses to sake their lust that would otherwise drive them insane or drive them to commit horrendous crimes on the street,
Which are we talking about, love or lust? If we are talking about love then we already agreed that a whorehouse cannot provide love and therefore would not be needed by someone lacking love. If we are talking about lust, then why the pretense of love? And to which are we now comparing spirituality? I also don't think that we can accept as fact that those who are unable to satify their lust would be necessarily driven to insanity or criminal activities.
so to are their spiritual pinheads in this world who need churches/ temples/ mosques to give answer to their doubts and fears, so they don't commit horrible atrocities of spiritual void.
Following your arguement that those who cannot experience love must at least satisfy their lust in order keep their sanity am I to understand that those who cannot experience spirituality must at least satisfy their spiritual pinheadedness in order to keep from desecrating the spiritual void? Because if that's what you're saying, it doesn't make a lot of sense. I would say there is some truth that all people have a desire for love as well as for some form of spirituality, but I don't know what goes with spirituality as lust goes with love. It's also not clear why the lack of either love or spirituality would necessitate any type of attrocity.
so the lowest common denominator empty pap we call organized religion is vile,
I don't see how we got here. You say "so" only as a form of implying that you've made some point when in fact you haven't. I also don't think you understand the meaning of "lowest common denominator". Organised religion goes with church/temples/mosques but not with whorehouses (strictly speaking). The lowest common denominator should apply to both things we are comparing.
but still necessary. just like whorehouses.
Yes, you do make a point as to why they are necessary, but not as to why organised religion is vile.
we don't want ugly or crude men raping women on the streets
We don't want anyone raping anyone else anywhere.
and we don't want small-spirited people walking around without a sense of morality or a human conscience.
I'm not sure what you mean by small-spirited people, but the person you describe is a sociopath, and we definitely don't want them walking around, even if it may be their right to do so.
if they don't have the spiritual backbone to decide right or wrong, or find the basic goodness in human existence on their own,
...generally true of sociopaths
well then please, let the church turn them into sheep.
You started out rather negative about religion and now it sounds like you are suggesting that Christians should be rehabilitating sociopaths. I'm not sure that you can apply this statement to all religions since, although Christians readily identify themselves with sheep other religions do not and would probably be offended by the idea.
better sheep than demons without a sense of social responsibility or a clue as to their relationship to human society and the idea
I think the question most businesses ask is how long will it take to get a return on investment.
The manufacturer specifies 38 W/m^2 or about 3.5 W/ft^2. Used as a window, the orientation would be fixed and I think you would be lucky to get four hours of good light to get something close to full efficiency.
So 3.5*4 = 14 Wh per day.
If electricity is 15 cents/kWh, you could buy 300 kWh for $45 (the cost per square foot of window).
To produce 300 kWh from a square foot of window would take 300 000/14 = 21 428 days or roughly 59 years.
Of course that doesn't take into account connecting your windows into the buildings power and the loss of effieciency there. And I also didn't take into account what the cost of regular windows are to begin with, since that should be reduced from the price, but I would guess they would be a few dollars and might take 10 years off the total.
Once electricy prices increase to $1.50/kWh these babies should be selling like hotcakes.
purves