Sure a bad strap is worse than no strap at all. It's not that the people are trying to throw it, they are using the strap to hold it in their hand, leaving their fingers free to move more quickly on the buttons. That's what the strap is for. They are using it as designed, then the strap breaks, and it has a consequence that should have been foreseen by Nintendo.
If somebody were selling deep-fry units, and included handles on the side, but the handles occasionally broke off if the unit were lifted while full of hot grease, that would be far worse than including no handles at all, right? Putting them there implies that they can reasonably be expected to work.
Finally, there is the question of hiding complaints from the court in the first suit. Even if the suit were completely stupid, you can't just hide evidence. They should have known that.
In one recent case, using fingerprints this way, the FBI arrested someone from Oregon for the Madrid train bombing. After 17 days in jail, he was released because Spanish police found the real source of the fingerprint. FBI apology here: http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel04/mayfield052404.htm
The evidence they presented was that his fingerprint partially matched one found on another continent. I don't think reports said he is known even to have left Oregon. What would have happened if the Spanish police had not been so successful? That's why it's dangerous to have these databases in place. Not because they can't be useful, but because they will be used incorrectly.
Yes, according to the CIA, the US purchases a little under 1/5 of Chinese exports. The thing is that exports account for about 1/5 of "everything they sell" (GDP), which means that U.S. exports are less than 5% of the Chinese GDP. Still a lot, but not quite as impressive.
The Chinese domestic economy has been growing like crazy, and you won't be surprised to learn that Chinese companies have risen to that demand even more than has the influx of foreign companies that you have been hearing about. Chinese industry does not depend on exports (to the U.S., or to anyone else) to the extent that it used to.
Asking for the debts all at once is unlikely, but they could stop accepting new U.S. dollar bonds, and start asking for security in Euros (for example) if the dollar were to start looking risky. This wouldn't be "the nuclear option," but would reduce worldwide demand for U.S. dollars, make life that little bit more difficult for U.S. companies, and reduce the power of the U.S. central bank to control inflation.
There are so many potential cost savings opportunities with a P equals NP proof that they would all add up to billions or even trillions of total dollars saved.
Even if we assume that's true, how much of that money would the mathematician see? The solution is worth a place in history, a couple of million in the international punditry & lecture business, and whatever the cash value is for a Turing award. Divided by the number of researchers involved.
Still, it would be something to tell your grandkids.
Sure. I imagine they could have tried to share this publicly-useful information in a second language. I also suspect enough people in New York have learned Spanish that the "Campaign for New York's Future" site could have been written in in that language. This would let people show off how much they learned in high school, but might not be the most effective tool for the campaign to use.
If you want to convince people about something, don't start by forcing them to read a foreign language, even if you think most of them are capable. People who are not comfortable reading French are a minority of voters in Quebec.
Given the quality of TED conferences, it's not a criticism to say the quality of the process is reflected in the program. The strength of TED is that it shows a broad cross-section of what's out there, rather than the more usual scheme of presenting and reinforcing the interests and prejudices of some clique of "experts" who think they know the subject well enough that they don't need to ask the community at large.
It's not about having too limited an understanding to come up with something to say; it's about being willing to consider that somebody else in the world (outside your usual group of contacts) might have a good idea that's worth hearing -- and then sharing.
I agree with you, but I think the timing of the US's scientific stagnation is also uncanny. It's been several generations since the last influx of extremely bright and educated scientists (and philosophers) from conquered lands. Iraq, I have to say, hasn't netted anything of the sort (with all due respect to Iraqis).
Last I heard (September 2007, UNHCR) Germany, Netherlands, U.K., and Sweden had all taken in more refugees from Iraq than the U.S. (leaving aside the larger numbers in nearby countries). If you're hoping for the Wernher von Braun of 2008, INS policy and practice might also have something to do with it.
I agree with the importance of equal access to education. The problem is not just that people who want to stay in school can't afford it, but that people who don't even know what they want to study or why they are there use up space in university lecture halls. At the moment, people with intelligence who don't particularly like classes can make a sound financial decision to get a job that doesn't need university. (They do exist, and do not all involve asking if people want "fries with that.") If the number of students is to go up, then the country needs either a lot more universities and professors, or a culturally-acceptable career path for clever people who don't want to stay in school.
Sorry, should have quoted there. The line that got my attention was "All IP is this way."
I agree that IP on crops has a whole mess of problems all of its own, but patents in general do not block people from continuing to use their existing technology.
The farmers can still use those seeds they have shared for thousands of years.
People have ridden bicycles for ages, and you can make and sell a bicycle if you like. If you want to include a fancy new gearing mechanism that was patented five years ago, you either license the right to that IP, wait for the patent to expire, or build a frame ready to work with a mechanism made by somebody else who licensed the right to make and distribute it.
An important quality of patents is that they eventually expire, and cannot be applied to existing technology.
My understanding of the Gates foundation priorities has been that measurable success is an important condition to funding. Sprinkling money around like salt on chips means you will certainly underfund some good ideas and let some hopeless ones drag on too long, while picking some promising approaches and concentrating on them should make it easier to track success. Concentrate on a few areas, ensure that you will identify the bad ideas promptly, and be willing to change directions in response.
You can disagree with the strategy, but I don't think it can be called a conspiracy.
Isn't this how the great library at Alexandria was created? They had a tax on all books brought through the port that required the owners to let local scribes make a copy. Finally, a positive-spin comparison between the current administration and the Ptolemaic dynasty of ancient Egypt. If it was good enough for the third century B.C., it's good enough for today.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure a bad strap is worse than no strap at all. It's not that the people are trying to throw it, they are using the strap to hold it in their hand, leaving their fingers free to move more quickly on the buttons. That's what the strap is for. They are using it as designed, then the strap breaks, and it has a consequence that should have been foreseen by Nintendo.
If somebody were selling deep-fry units, and included handles on the side, but the handles occasionally broke off if the unit were lifted while full of hot grease, that would be far worse than including no handles at all, right? Putting them there implies that they can reasonably be expected to work.
Finally, there is the question of hiding complaints from the court in the first suit. Even if the suit were completely stupid, you can't just hide evidence. They should have known that.
In one recent case, using fingerprints this way, the FBI arrested someone from Oregon for the Madrid train bombing. After 17 days in jail, he was released because Spanish police found the real source of the fingerprint. FBI apology here: http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel04/mayfield052404.htm
News coverage here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5053007/ (or do a search; there's enough out there).
The evidence they presented was that his fingerprint partially matched one found on another continent. I don't think reports said he is known even to have left Oregon. What would have happened if the Spanish police had not been so successful? That's why it's dangerous to have these databases in place. Not because they can't be useful, but because they will be used incorrectly.
Yes, according to the CIA, the US purchases a little under 1/5 of Chinese exports. The thing is that exports account for about 1/5 of "everything they sell" (GDP), which means that U.S. exports are less than 5% of the Chinese GDP. Still a lot, but not quite as impressive.
The Chinese domestic economy has been growing like crazy, and you won't be surprised to learn that Chinese companies have risen to that demand even more than has the influx of foreign companies that you have been hearing about. Chinese industry does not depend on exports (to the U.S., or to anyone else) to the extent that it used to.
Asking for the debts all at once is unlikely, but they could stop accepting new U.S. dollar bonds, and start asking for security in Euros (for example) if the dollar were to start looking risky. This wouldn't be "the nuclear option," but would reduce worldwide demand for U.S. dollars, make life that little bit more difficult for U.S. companies, and reduce the power of the U.S. central bank to control inflation.
There are so many potential cost savings opportunities with a P equals NP proof that they would all add up to billions or even trillions of total dollars saved.
Even if we assume that's true, how much of that money would the mathematician see? The solution is worth a place in history, a couple of million in the international punditry & lecture business, and whatever the cash value is for a Turing award. Divided by the number of researchers involved.
Still, it would be something to tell your grandkids.
Sure. I imagine they could have tried to share this publicly-useful information in a second language. I also suspect enough people in New York have learned Spanish that the "Campaign for New York's Future" site could have been written in in that language. This would let people show off how much they learned in high school, but might not be the most effective tool for the campaign to use.
If you want to convince people about something, don't start by forcing them to read a foreign language, even if you think most of them are capable. People who are not comfortable reading French are a minority of voters in Quebec.
Given the quality of TED conferences, it's not a criticism to say the quality of the process is reflected in the program. The strength of TED is that it shows a broad cross-section of what's out there, rather than the more usual scheme of presenting and reinforcing the interests and prejudices of some clique of "experts" who think they know the subject well enough that they don't need to ask the community at large.
It's not about having too limited an understanding to come up with something to say; it's about being willing to consider that somebody else in the world (outside your usual group of contacts) might have a good idea that's worth hearing -- and then sharing.
Last I heard (September 2007, UNHCR) Germany, Netherlands, U.K., and Sweden had all taken in more refugees from Iraq than the U.S. (leaving aside the larger numbers in nearby countries). If you're hoping for the Wernher von Braun of 2008, INS policy and practice might also have something to do with it.
I agree with the importance of equal access to education. The problem is not just that people who want to stay in school can't afford it, but that people who don't even know what they want to study or why they are there use up space in university lecture halls. At the moment, people with intelligence who don't particularly like classes can make a sound financial decision to get a job that doesn't need university. (They do exist, and do not all involve asking if people want "fries with that.") If the number of students is to go up, then the country needs either a lot more universities and professors, or a culturally-acceptable career path for clever people who don't want to stay in school.
Sorry, should have quoted there. The line that got my attention was "All IP is this way."
I agree that IP on crops has a whole mess of problems all of its own, but patents in general do not block people from continuing to use their existing technology.
The farmers can still use those seeds they have shared for thousands of years.
People have ridden bicycles for ages, and you can make and sell a bicycle if you like. If you want to include a fancy new gearing mechanism that was patented five years ago, you either license the right to that IP, wait for the patent to expire, or build a frame ready to work with a mechanism made by somebody else who licensed the right to make and distribute it.
An important quality of patents is that they eventually expire, and cannot be applied to existing technology.
My understanding of the Gates foundation priorities has been that measurable success is an important condition to funding. Sprinkling money around like salt on chips means you will certainly underfund some good ideas and let some hopeless ones drag on too long, while picking some promising approaches and concentrating on them should make it easier to track success. Concentrate on a few areas, ensure that you will identify the bad ideas promptly, and be willing to change directions in response. You can disagree with the strategy, but I don't think it can be called a conspiracy.
Isn't this how the great library at Alexandria was created? They had a tax on all books brought through the port that required the owners to let local scribes make a copy. Finally, a positive-spin comparison between the current administration and the Ptolemaic dynasty of ancient Egypt. If it was good enough for the third century B.C., it's good enough for today.