He could always flood the internet with incomplete electronic copies of the same file size. After downloading a few free copies of those people will get frustrated and buy the official e-book.
Most authors are poor as dirt. Short fiction writers make next to nothing. They slave away for the love of it while they actually work in some other field. Do you realise how good you have to be (or perseverant) before people start paying you decent money? At least give us the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
But does it feel like paper, can I casually flick to any page I want? Can I bend it, crease the corner of the page I'm reading or add a marginal note? Does the colour of the paper and it's smell tell me how long ago it was published? Can I look at the spine of an e-book and know the reading habits of the previous owner? Can I put it on my bookshelf when I'm done, have friends notice it and use it as a talking point?
Reading books is an experience, it's not just about assimilating information. That is why we will always have paper books.
Yeah but all he wants to do is buy a part not trade-in the laptop. Any mechanic will sell you a brake pad if you want to buy a brake pad. Maybe if you ask them to fit the brake pad they might check some register but otherwise... Why would he even need to own an Alienware laptop to buy the part?
Ah, but the programs on tests are usually quite simple. If you need to put a loop in you can usually see that before you start writing. The fact that it is difficult to add a loop later means you take longer on the test BUT this is a good thing because it separates the students with good foresight and planning from those who aren't as good.
Yeah, the Norway system sounds much better. I can see it now: 'Um, excuse me miss but my exam won't install.' 'Oh, I'll just call tech support. Which operating system and hardware are you running?'
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought one of the major reasons Linux was more secure than Windows, was because the community worked together in a co-operative way. Their is a lot of good will in the community, writing a worm to hack into a Linux system is not top priority for a hacker, they'd much rather hack into a Windows system: they'd find that more rewarding.
But what if the all the resources of the Chinese government were put into writing worms to infiltrate Linux systems? I would think they would have some success certainly, but I would also anticipate that the Linux community would work together fairly effectively to combat the new challenge.
Hey I'm surprised. I didn't see it coming. The strategy is brilliant! Obama will hire all of the RIAA's top lawyers. Then the RIAA will have no useful lawyers. Soon any fourth rate family lawyer will be able to defend us against the RIAA.
It's completely impossible to follow this discussion. Are you people talking about Mb/s, mb/s, mB/s, MB/s, mb/ps, Mb/ps, MB/ps, mB/ps, mb/Ps, Mb/Ps, MB/Ps, mB/Ps or one of the other combinations I've forgotten about?
So, if you find out a secret that someone is making money off, you can't tell anyone by law? That seems ridiculous. Surely, you are only obliged to keep someone's secret if they have entrusted you with it in some way. If you've discovered it yourself then it's your decision.
In fairness, if you read the article (all the way through), and read between the lines, you'll see that this ('...significant because of his stature and his devotion to the integrity of science.') was meant in comparison to the stature of other Global Warming dissenters. Further, it's his adherence to the scientific method that gives him stature, not his fame as such. And if you read far enough into the article you do see that Dyson HAS published in this area, something like 40 years ago, he's not completely uninformed.
He admits he may be wrong. But if you read between the lines what he objects to most is the culture that any science that questions global warming must be wrong, and the reliance on computer simulations. He feels the models aren't inclusive enough of a broad range of fields that could have something to say on the subject.
In particular, he says biology has been ignored. He asks what is the role of chemistry and biology in determining environmental conditions? He thinks that biology will adjust and correct/mitigate changes we create.
Most recently, we say the result of dumping huge amounts of Iron into the oceans to increase plankton numbers. They were all eaten by other sea creatures! Something that wasn't expected, and importantly was a consequence of biology. The article doesn't mention this, but it's a point in favour of Dyson's position.
He also thinks that the environment is what we make of it, this more than anything I think puts him at odds with modern thinkers who think humans shouldn't go messing with it. Dyson says, we're part of the environment. It is certainly a position that is much more likely to have been held by past generations. We think about preserving the environment the way it is, this seems an alien concept to Dyson, and one I think he thinks is a bit naive. Dyson believes we can't help but change the environment, we should make that change work for us, and it will adapt.
Sorry for the verbosity but it's hard to summarise 8 pages for so many people who haven't read TFA. Even if you read it maybe you didn't really read it. It is subtle in some ways and requires you to pay attention - a rarity, most of the articles we get to read here are net-bites.
Hey, I know it's 8 pages long but the global warming angle was not the most interesting part of the article. I've read Dyson, he writes of the future in such an expansive and imaginative way that only Asimov can be compared to him (You could call some of Dyson's writing science fiction without the fiction). The insight we got into his character from this piece was really good writing.
Australian view (feel free to tune out now): We have an instant-runoff system in our voting precisely to avoid this issue. Voting for someone unlikely to win is not a wasted vote because once they are eliminated your second preference is then your vote and so on. It's a very good system.
However we still have this exact same problem because people don't understand the system. How our voting system works is so poorly publicised that an inordinately large number of people assume it works like the American first-past-the-post system.
If electrons have free will, what to they base their decisions on? It seems to me that free will is only useful if you have some stored experience to call on.
I completely agree. If men spent the same amount of time raising the children as women did most of these problems would be solved. I think the problem is that while attitudes to what women can do have changed significantly in the last 50 years, changing attitudes to a man's place have been slower to evolve. We need to encourage men to take a more fundamental role in family life. More paid (or even unpaid) paternity leave is a good start.
More fundamental changes in attitudes can only take place at the grass roots level though - let your son hold the baby, show boys the correct nursing technique at school, they need to be comfortable with the idea of hands on parenting. Being more involved with the family is good for men psychologically, it's good for women in equalling out workforce/academic inequalities and it's good for children because they get 2 parents raising them. I think single parents do a wonderful job under tough circumstances but two good role models has to be better than 1, all other things being equal.
Shorter working weeks are now justified too. Both men and women work now, so lots of families have 2 full-time incomes where in the 60s for example the same size family would have had just the one. As a result parents in general are spending less time raising their children and more time with them in child care. If working parents were offered 4 day weeks this would go a long way to redressing the lost balance between work and home life. If 4 day weeks are offered to *both* parents then this helps accomplish the goal of equality in the work place because both men and women get to spend time with their family.
Most of us who do science at the top level don't do it for the money. The desire to learn and discover new things is paramount to our psychology. People like us are necessary for a healthy (technological) society. Outsourcing STEM is a recipe for reversing your technological status as a nation and dumbing down your society in general.
Everyone deserves the same encouragement to develop their curiosity and contribute to the advances of the human race. This is the reason low numbers of women in the physical sciences is a big deal, because the drivers for men in the field are the same as the drivers for women. The drive to discover is fundamental to our being. If numbers aren't equal it points to social inequalities that need addressing.
It's good to have a variety of different robotics projects. Hopefully then you can interest all the kids, not just those who would traditionally be drawn to robotics. As a bonus, those who are already interested in robotics might develop an interest in botany as well.
These days robots have a wide variety of applications from industry to art and lots in between. I have actually seen robotic origami flowers in an art exhibition, they were pretty cool, I spent 30 minutes at that exhibit.
Maybe I'm a little biased, I consider myself well rounded in my nerdishness, but I always think cross-pollination is good (no pun intended).
Slashdot Mirror
He could always flood the internet with incomplete electronic copies of the same file size. After downloading a few free copies of those people will get frustrated and buy the official e-book.
Yeah, anyone who doesn't decide what to read based on what they read on the internet.
Most authors are poor as dirt. Short fiction writers make next to nothing. They slave away for the love of it while they actually work in some other field. Do you realise how good you have to be (or perseverant) before people start paying you decent money? At least give us the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
But does it feel like paper, can I casually flick to any page I want? Can I bend it, crease the corner of the page I'm reading or add a marginal note? Does the colour of the paper and it's smell tell me how long ago it was published? Can I look at the spine of an e-book and know the reading habits of the previous owner? Can I put it on my bookshelf when I'm done, have friends notice it and use it as a talking point? Reading books is an experience, it's not just about assimilating information. That is why we will always have paper books.
Yeah but all he wants to do is buy a part not trade-in the laptop. Any mechanic will sell you a brake pad if you want to buy a brake pad. Maybe if you ask them to fit the brake pad they might check some register but otherwise... Why would he even need to own an Alienware laptop to buy the part?
Ah, but the programs on tests are usually quite simple. If you need to put a loop in you can usually see that before you start writing. The fact that it is difficult to add a loop later means you take longer on the test BUT this is a good thing because it separates the students with good foresight and planning from those who aren't as good.
Yeah, the Norway system sounds much better. I can see it now: 'Um, excuse me miss but my exam won't install.' 'Oh, I'll just call tech support. Which operating system and hardware are you running?'
Well clearly if they could have made a movie that would make more profit then it wasn't worth making. There is simply no other way to judge a movie.
It is this type of thinking that is wrong with the world.
Yeah, because co-operatively we are doing a great job of maintaining and looking after the current weather patterns.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought one of the major reasons Linux was more secure than Windows, was because the community worked together in a co-operative way. Their is a lot of good will in the community, writing a worm to hack into a Linux system is not top priority for a hacker, they'd much rather hack into a Windows system: they'd find that more rewarding.
But what if the all the resources of the Chinese government were put into writing worms to infiltrate Linux systems? I would think they would have some success certainly, but I would also anticipate that the Linux community would work together fairly effectively to combat the new challenge.
Just so we all know the correct word is libel.
Hey I'm surprised. I didn't see it coming. The strategy is brilliant! Obama will hire all of the RIAA's top lawyers. Then the RIAA will have no useful lawyers. Soon any fourth rate family lawyer will be able to defend us against the RIAA.
Say, how many lawyers do you think they have?
It's completely impossible to follow this discussion. Are you people talking about Mb/s, mb/s, mB/s, MB/s, mb/ps, Mb/ps, MB/ps, mB/ps, mb/Ps, Mb/Ps, MB/Ps, mB/Ps or one of the other combinations I've forgotten about?
... Vampires and Humans can live together in peace.
So, if you find out a secret that someone is making money off, you can't tell anyone by law? That seems ridiculous. Surely, you are only obliged to keep someone's secret if they have entrusted you with it in some way. If you've discovered it yourself then it's your decision.
Art has to be evaluated in context! Campbell's Soup Can anyone?
In fairness, if you read the article (all the way through), and read between the lines, you'll see that this ('...significant because of his stature and his devotion to the integrity of science.') was meant in comparison to the stature of other Global Warming dissenters. Further, it's his adherence to the scientific method that gives him stature, not his fame as such. And if you read far enough into the article you do see that Dyson HAS published in this area, something like 40 years ago, he's not completely uninformed.
He admits he may be wrong. But if you read between the lines what he objects to most is the culture that any science that questions global warming must be wrong, and the reliance on computer simulations. He feels the models aren't inclusive enough of a broad range of fields that could have something to say on the subject.
In particular, he says biology has been ignored. He asks what is the role of chemistry and biology in determining environmental conditions? He thinks that biology will adjust and correct/mitigate changes we create.
Most recently, we say the result of dumping huge amounts of Iron into the oceans to increase plankton numbers. They were all eaten by other sea creatures! Something that wasn't expected, and importantly was a consequence of biology. The article doesn't mention this, but it's a point in favour of Dyson's position.
He also thinks that the environment is what we make of it, this more than anything I think puts him at odds with modern thinkers who think humans shouldn't go messing with it. Dyson says, we're part of the environment. It is certainly a position that is much more likely to have been held by past generations. We think about preserving the environment the way it is, this seems an alien concept to Dyson, and one I think he thinks is a bit naive. Dyson believes we can't help but change the environment, we should make that change work for us, and it will adapt.
Sorry for the verbosity but it's hard to summarise 8 pages for so many people who haven't read TFA. Even if you read it maybe you didn't really read it. It is subtle in some ways and requires you to pay attention - a rarity, most of the articles we get to read here are net-bites.
Hey, I know it's 8 pages long but the global warming angle was not the most interesting part of the article. I've read Dyson, he writes of the future in such an expansive and imaginative way that only Asimov can be compared to him (You could call some of Dyson's writing science fiction without the fiction). The insight we got into his character from this piece was really good writing.
I've been a bot for years.
Australian view (feel free to tune out now): We have an instant-runoff system in our voting precisely to avoid this issue. Voting for someone unlikely to win is not a wasted vote because once they are eliminated your second preference is then your vote and so on. It's a very good system.
However we still have this exact same problem because people don't understand the system. How our voting system works is so poorly publicised that an inordinately large number of people assume it works like the American first-past-the-post system.
There are many differences between Microsoft and Apple but Balmer does have a point. Apple really make you pay for their branding.
How much is it really worth to have a white laptop for instance?
Note: Maybe this is flamebait, but if so the article/Balmer is/are trolling.
If electrons have free will, what to they base their decisions on? It seems to me that free will is only useful if you have some stored experience to call on.
You must be kidding. Hands up everyone here who became a nerd to impress girls.
I would go so far as to say that a large portion, if not the majority, of scientists are the antithesis of your thesis.
I completely agree. If men spent the same amount of time raising the children as women did most of these problems would be solved. I think the problem is that while attitudes to what women can do have changed significantly in the last 50 years, changing attitudes to a man's place have been slower to evolve. We need to encourage men to take a more fundamental role in family life. More paid (or even unpaid) paternity leave is a good start.
More fundamental changes in attitudes can only take place at the grass roots level though - let your son hold the baby, show boys the correct nursing technique at school, they need to be comfortable with the idea of hands on parenting. Being more involved with the family is good for men psychologically, it's good for women in equalling out workforce/academic inequalities and it's good for children because they get 2 parents raising them. I think single parents do a wonderful job under tough circumstances but two good role models has to be better than 1, all other things being equal.
Shorter working weeks are now justified too. Both men and women work now, so lots of families have 2 full-time incomes where in the 60s for example the same size family would have had just the one. As a result parents in general are spending less time raising their children and more time with them in child care. If working parents were offered 4 day weeks this would go a long way to redressing the lost balance between work and home life. If 4 day weeks are offered to *both* parents then this helps accomplish the goal of equality in the work place because both men and women get to spend time with their family.
Most of us who do science at the top level don't do it for the money. The desire to learn and discover new things is paramount to our psychology. People like us are necessary for a healthy (technological) society. Outsourcing STEM is a recipe for reversing your technological status as a nation and dumbing down your society in general.
Everyone deserves the same encouragement to develop their curiosity and contribute to the advances of the human race. This is the reason low numbers of women in the physical sciences is a big deal, because the drivers for men in the field are the same as the drivers for women. The drive to discover is fundamental to our being. If numbers aren't equal it points to social inequalities that need addressing.
It's good to have a variety of different robotics projects. Hopefully then you can interest all the kids, not just those who would traditionally be drawn to robotics. As a bonus, those who are already interested in robotics might develop an interest in botany as well.
These days robots have a wide variety of applications from industry to art and lots in between. I have actually seen robotic origami flowers in an art exhibition, they were pretty cool, I spent 30 minutes at that exhibit.
Maybe I'm a little biased, I consider myself well rounded in my nerdishness, but I always think cross-pollination is good (no pun intended).