I realize that we piss away [wikipedia.org] a huge amount of money here on Earth and I've heard that used as a justification, but that frankly strikes me as just stupid - Wasting $$ on 1 endeavor does not justify wasting $$ on another. I ask sincerely - Can anyone tell me why it makes good long- or short-term financial sense to put human beings on Mars?
Technology. Look at the technology that has grown from sending men to the moon and building a space shuttle. Long-term, that's the main benefit, apart from the bragging rights that is.;)
Returning to the moon is a dry-run for going to Mars.
Yeah. I've wondered about that. Going to the moon is a A LOT easier than going to Mars. Mars is wayyyyyy far away compared to the moon (you can see this for yourself in Google Sky or Stellarium). It'll take many months to get there. Also Mars is a far more hostile an environment than the moon ever thought of being. Violent dust storms, high amounts of solar radiation, sand dunes that cover up large crevasses that could swallow a man.
I dunno. Do they really think that returning to the moon is going to be a lot like going to Mars?
Then there's the fact that you won't always have exposure to the sun wherever your moon base is. I don't know what the longest period of "night" is on the various parts of the moon, but I'm sure it's significant to the point that batteries won't cut it.
Right. Two weeks. They can't even come up with a decent gaming laptop that lasts for more than 1.5 hours, what makes anyone think that they could up with a battery to run for TWO WEEKS!
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, scene where Scotty describes transparent aluminium in exchange for the plastics company in question building a large tank made out of it for him.
And to prove the existence of a conspiracy you would have to bring arguments that can't be explained without one.
Which, admittedly, following this criteria, there is at best circumstantial evidence that points to the possibility, but nothing that points to it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Oh, I'm not dismissing everyone who dismiss the conspiracy theories as nonsense. I'm still very much on the fence. The oddities and timeline questions leave a lot open to discussion, definitely. OTOH, pulling off a conspiracy this large would be difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. If David Copperfield can make a large crowd of people believe he made the Statue of Liberty disappear into thin air, certainly some of the best and brightest can create the appearance that a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center was really the result of a terrorist attack.
Stop shooting the messenger. I'm merely relaying what the conspiracy theories state. I'm not necessarily saying that it's 100% 'gospel truth'.
OTOH, as someone else pointed out, WTC 7 was NOT hit by a plane, and IT imploded right after its new owner was overheard on a cell phone by several people and a television news crew saying the words 'pull it', which is construction industry jargon for 'ignite the explosives'.
Again, I don't know whether I believe the conspiracy theorists or not, but I will say that I do think that there is more to 9/11 than meets the eye. If you look at it objectively as I do, it does definitely have the appearance of being staged.
Yeah. The Twin Towers should have toppled over, but instead, they blew up like a building that was being imploded for demolition. Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.
The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.
Re:Is word processing not using a computer?
on
24 Hour Laptops From HP?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Ignoring the fact that many developers will do a partial build from time to time, an IDE is doing a lot more in the background that a word processor. It's checking your syntax, suggesting functions, performing auto-completion. All of this work is more complex that the automatic spell checker and grammar checker.
Who said anything about an IDE? And do you have any idea how necessarily complex grammar checkers are? English is a LOT harder for a computer to parse than Python, Java, C or (insert your favorite here).
Re:More than scientific learning
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 1
NASA has already spent billions on the development of Orion. Do you suppose Congress is going to vote to throw all that work away rather than continue development.
No, you don't lose your copyright, but it doesn't necessarily apply only in that one particular instance. It could apply to similar instances as well. An example is USL v. Berkeley Software Design. Since AT&T had allowed copyright infringement by the University of California and others for decades on the Unix source code, the judge in that case was prepared to rule that USL was estopped from suing BSDi and others for copyright infringement. The judge never had to so, since the parties eventually settled out of court, but that was one of the things brought up in SCO v. IBM.
You're confusing 'standing to sue' with 'losing a trademark'.
In the U.S. (and probably in the U.K., too), if you become financially damaged in a given situation, and you knowingly allowed that situation to occur, you lose your standing to sue by failing to mitigate your own damages. This is called the 'doctrine of laches' and is a form of estoppel.
Bingo. Coppying excerpts for purposes of ccommentary and criticism of a work is generally an acceptable practice that is considered fair use. Compiling a bunch of excerpts and publishing them as a lexicon without adding anything original and of value is a clear case of infringement.
Yes, of course law still stands, but applying it makes her greedy and looking stupid.
If she doesn't enforce it, though, she could lose her standing to sue in court. A valid affirmative defense in a copyright suit is to say that the copyright holder knew that infringement was taking place and failed to do anything about it.
Re:More than scientific learning
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
Yeah, but if the world is destroyed, wouldn't money be pretty pointless?
Correct. In the United States and in any country honoring the Berne Convention, unless someone signs a agreement specifically stating what works are being transferred, how much they are being compensated for transferring the work, and then files that with the Copyright Office of jurisdiction, it doesn't matter what Google and their army of 'dimwitted lawyers' think they can get away with. There's no way to 'automatically transfer' all your works to Google by a click-through agreement that you most likely have not even read.
Re:More than scientific learning
on
LHC Success!
·
· Score: 5, Funny
will the doomsayers ever learn for the next time?
Well, they still haven't made the black hole yet. Just wait. When you get sucked in don't come crying to me. I'll be many, many light years away.
The article's point is about push e-mail, though. Push e-mail is the problem, not the solution, because it just pops up on your screen.
BTW, if you want push e-mail, you don't need a Blackberry. Even if you don't want to run your own external mail server, you can just use fetchmail, which pretty much gives you the feel of push e-mail at home.
Slashdot Mirror
I realize that we piss away [wikipedia.org] a huge amount of money here on Earth and I've heard that used as a justification, but that frankly strikes me as just stupid - Wasting $$ on 1 endeavor does not justify wasting $$ on another. I ask sincerely - Can anyone tell me why it makes good long- or short-term financial sense to put human beings on Mars?
Technology. Look at the technology that has grown from sending men to the moon and building a space shuttle. Long-term, that's the main benefit, apart from the bragging rights that is. ;)
Returning to the moon is a dry-run for going to Mars.
Yeah. I've wondered about that. Going to the moon is a A LOT easier than going to Mars. Mars is wayyyyyy far away compared to the moon (you can see this for yourself in Google Sky or Stellarium). It'll take many months to get there. Also Mars is a far more hostile an environment than the moon ever thought of being. Violent dust storms, high amounts of solar radiation, sand dunes that cover up large crevasses that could swallow a man.
I dunno. Do they really think that returning to the moon is going to be a lot like going to Mars?
Then there's the fact that you won't always have exposure to the sun wherever your moon base is. I don't know what the longest period of "night" is on the various parts of the moon, but I'm sure it's significant to the point that batteries won't cut it.
Right. Two weeks. They can't even come up with a decent gaming laptop that lasts for more than 1.5 hours, what makes anyone think that they could up with a battery to run for TWO WEEKS!
Quite a bit harder to do so if it's on it's way to Pluto.
Why would they want to send it to Pluto? It's a Mickey Mouse planet!
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, scene where Scotty describes transparent aluminium in exchange for the plastics company in question building a large tank made out of it for him.
And to prove the existence of a conspiracy you would have to bring arguments that can't be explained without one.
Which, admittedly, following this criteria, there is at best circumstantial evidence that points to the possibility, but nothing that points to it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Hence, it will forever remain debated.
Oh, I'm not dismissing everyone who dismiss the conspiracy theories as nonsense. I'm still very much on the fence. The oddities and timeline questions leave a lot open to discussion, definitely. OTOH, pulling off a conspiracy this large would be difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. If David Copperfield can make a large crowd of people believe he made the Statue of Liberty disappear into thin air, certainly some of the best and brightest can create the appearance that a controlled demolition of the World Trade Center was really the result of a terrorist attack.
Oh, piddle.
Stop shooting the messenger. I'm merely relaying what the conspiracy theories state. I'm not necessarily saying that it's 100% 'gospel truth'.
OTOH, as someone else pointed out, WTC 7 was NOT hit by a plane, and IT imploded right after its new owner was overheard on a cell phone by several people and a television news crew saying the words 'pull it', which is construction industry jargon for 'ignite the explosives'.
Again, I don't know whether I believe the conspiracy theorists or not, but I will say that I do think that there is more to 9/11 than meets the eye. If you look at it objectively as I do, it does definitely have the appearance of being staged.
Oh, great. That's just what I need an image of in my head. That guy with the horn-rimmed glass saying "You have been so very bad!"
*gag*
Now please excuse me while I go wash my brain out!
Thx.
Yeah. The Twin Towers should have toppled over, but instead, they blew up like a building that was being imploded for demolition. Also, the melting point of the steel used in the Twin Towers is actually about 400 degrees HOTTER than the temperature at which jet fuel burns.
The Twin Towers would also be the first example in history of a steel building where the steel failed due to fire.
Ignoring the fact that many developers will do a partial build from time to time, an IDE is doing a lot more in the background that a word processor. It's checking your syntax, suggesting functions, performing auto-completion. All of this work is more complex that the automatic spell checker and grammar checker.
Who said anything about an IDE? And do you have any idea how necessarily complex grammar checkers are? English is a LOT harder for a computer to parse than Python, Java, C or (insert your favorite here).
back at ya
NASA has already spent billions on the development of Orion. Do you suppose Congress is going to vote to throw all that work away rather than continue development.
You should really try reading all the posts in a thread before replying.
No, you don't lose your copyright, but it doesn't necessarily apply only in that one particular instance. It could apply to similar instances as well. An example is USL v. Berkeley Software Design. Since AT&T had allowed copyright infringement by the University of California and others for decades on the Unix source code, the judge in that case was prepared to rule that USL was estopped from suing BSDi and others for copyright infringement. The judge never had to so, since the parties eventually settled out of court, but that was one of the things brought up in SCO v. IBM.
You're confusing 'standing to sue' with 'losing a trademark'.
In the U.S. (and probably in the U.K., too), if you become financially damaged in a given situation, and you knowingly allowed that situation to occur, you lose your standing to sue by failing to mitigate your own damages. This is called the 'doctrine of laches' and is a form of estoppel.
Bingo. Coppying excerpts for purposes of ccommentary and criticism of a work is generally an acceptable practice that is considered fair use. Compiling a bunch of excerpts and publishing them as a lexicon without adding anything original and of value is a clear case of infringement.
Yes, of course law still stands, but applying it makes her greedy and looking stupid.
If she doesn't enforce it, though, she could lose her standing to sue in court. A valid affirmative defense in a copyright suit is to say that the copyright holder knew that infringement was taking place and failed to do anything about it.
Yeah, but if the world is destroyed, wouldn't money be pretty pointless?
SWF advertisements in a web browser take CPU time. So is it 24 hours of AbiWord, or 24 hours of AbiWord plus Firefox showing GIF or SWF ads?
One word: NoScript.
Not the same. Fetchmail even works if the mail client isn't running.
Correct. In the United States and in any country honoring the Berne Convention, unless someone signs a agreement specifically stating what works are being transferred, how much they are being compensated for transferring the work, and then files that with the Copyright Office of jurisdiction, it doesn't matter what Google and their army of 'dimwitted lawyers' think they can get away with. There's no way to 'automatically transfer' all your works to Google by a click-through agreement that you most likely have not even read.
will the doomsayers ever learn for the next time?
Well, they still haven't made the black hole yet. Just wait. When you get sucked in don't come crying to me. I'll be many, many light years away.
The article's point is about push e-mail, though. Push e-mail is the problem, not the solution, because it just pops up on your screen.
BTW, if you want push e-mail, you don't need a Blackberry. Even if you don't want to run your own external mail server, you can just use fetchmail, which pretty much gives you the feel of push e-mail at home.
No. Unless you have 256MB of RAM. I assume this machine have more.
Or Vista. Which I assume this machine will be running.