I haven't heard of this team of 12 system, but it's obvious that introducing insurance is always going to increase the overall cost, hence reduce efficiency.
The difference in cost can be found in the net revenue of the insurance companies.
Like the gambling industry, the insurance industry is based on redistribution while keeping a share for itself.
In a proper naval battle, one side's ships will be sunk in any case. It doesn't make much difference to the environment whether a particular ship is sunk by a particular torpedo, since the ship that's saved will now go and sink some of the enemy's ships.
I was thinking of downloading it, hacking it up a bit in a video editor and releasing a new movie of my own, much better than the original. This would have cost them millions, since nobody would have bothered with the inferior version after that.
Unfortunately, my operating system is unsupported, so they are safe this time.
If you find errors in Wikipedia in subjects you know something about, then even if you fix them it doesn't give much confidence that it won't have errors in subjects that you don't know anything about.
For this reason, when you are actually looking for reliable information instead of just killing time playing on the web,
then going to a specialised website may be a better option.
This is true for any encyclopedia. The first best thing an encyclopedia article can do is give a list of other sources of information. Then perhaps it's not completely useless.
You may think it's just funny, but these duplicates are making it hard to read slashdot. Lets say you start at the front page and read the articles until you see one that looks familiar. So have you read all the new stuff and reached the stuff you were reading yesterday, or is it a dup?
For safety, you could take a look at the next article too, but maybe there were just two dups in a row?
How many articles do you need to check before you are sure you have reached yesterday's stuff?
You seem to be forgetting about the other, and safer, strategy for small companies, which is to register patents and later sell the ones that turn out to be valuable. There isn't any need to make and sell any products under the patent system, rather it seems to be actively discouraged.
I don't think the courts should be involved at all, unless there is a genuine contract between a buyer and seller and the seller has claimed that the software is more reliable than it really is.
When there isn't any contract, such as when someone finds a flaw in software they downloaded for free from a website, then I don't see that they should have much scope for legal action.
It's also a freedom of speech issue. If I can say what I like in a personal capacity, regardless of accuracy or provability, then I should be able to distribute software, regardless of whether it works or not. Of course in practice there are all sorts of limitations of freedom of speech, even in so-called free countries, but I don't think any additional restrictions should apply just to software.
If a nuclear power facility uses my software and it doesn't work, I don't see that this is any different to if they had taken my value for the mass of a proton and it turned out to be wrong.
This is not very clear to me. So the card has a processor and DRM key and can decrypt the data itself, but what makes it possible for the "trusted" device to request the unecrypted data, so that it can actually play the music or whatever, while preventing the "untrusted" device, if it has a compatible card reader and copies the protocols, from doing the same thing?
But they also say "It provides independence from the host, offering consumers true freedom to enjoy the content they own on their cards in numerous host players." which presumably doesn't just involve players developed specifically for the memory card. Maybe it's only software in the device?
From their press release "TrustedFlash cards also function as regular cards in non-secure host devices." and the card has "an on-board processor, a high-performance cryptographic engine and tamper-resistant technology". Presumably it requires the cooperation of "trusted" devices to restrict access to the unencrypted data, and untrusted devices won't have the decryption keys.
If bandwidth is down to $1 per GB now (about 0.385GPB at current exchange rates) then it's perhaps not such a big factor as it used to be. I seem to remember a $1 per MB figure in the distant past.
You are right, "unlimited" bandwidth that isn't unlimited should draw an advertising standards complaint (if such complaining hasn't already failed previously).
I've lived in NZ, but before the ADSL era. If I wasn't already familiar with its bandwidth problems I would have assumed that a cap of 1GB was a typo, or a joke. I could use that in one day. The extra cost of bandwidth is like an extra tax on the cost of living in NZ.
I wonder why the emphasise "OS Independent" in one sentence and require "Windows 98SE / Mac OS 8.6 or higher" in an other. Do those OSes even cover "Xbox with Live", that they also mention?
Yeah, I guessed after I posted that someone would point that out. But given that SDSL doesn't seem to be priced competitively (last time I checked), ADSL is often used in applications where uplink capacity is of interest.
It doesn't take that much to take it down, but there seem to be plenty of people who can get it back up again. You would have to assume that they were all killed, or something.
You can't write good scientific articles if the terms you use don't have precise definitions. It would make the whole article imprecise and open to interpretation depending on different interpretation of the terms.
In this case the question is about whether astronomers can give a precise definition of the word "planet", or whether they have to abandon the term.
I could agree with it from the point of view that it's roughly a statement of the current situation and what may actually happen, but I don't think it's a very good situation.
If the definition of "planet" isn't specific enough that astronomers can use it, then I don't think it should be used when teaching children either. Astronomers still need to be able to communicate with the general public.
It should be possible to give an object a name, describing what it is, regardless of what orbit it's in. A star is still a star when it orbits another star.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference in cost can be found in the net revenue of the insurance companies.
Like the gambling industry, the insurance industry is based on redistribution while keeping a share for itself.
In a proper naval battle, one side's ships will be sunk in any case. It doesn't make much difference to the environment whether a particular ship is sunk by a particular torpedo, since the ship that's saved will now go and sink some of the enemy's ships.
I don't think a DNA analysis of the tail would prove anything either, since it could have been obtained elsewhere.
Unfortunately, my operating system is unsupported, so they are safe this time.
Yeah, for some reason I had always thought of "switch" as a conditional, not a type of goto.
int main ()
{
int test = 11;
switch (test)
{
if (test == 10)
{
case 11:
test = 12;
}
}
return test;
}
For this reason, when you are actually looking for reliable information instead of just killing time playing on the web, then going to a specialised website may be a better option.
This is true for any encyclopedia. The first best thing an encyclopedia article can do is give a list of other sources of information. Then perhaps it's not completely useless.
In social science, it all depends on context and point of view.
In history, it all depends on which old documents you can find and who you choose to believe.
I use it as a personal notepad. In case somebody deletes my notes, I can still get them back from the history.
The more states the better. No nation deserves to be stuck with a monopoly government.
Yes, and anybody who isn't an idiot is put on a committee.
For safety, you could take a look at the next article too, but maybe there were just two dups in a row?
How many articles do you need to check before you are sure you have reached yesterday's stuff?
You seem to be forgetting about the other, and safer, strategy for small companies, which is to register patents and later sell the ones that turn out to be valuable. There isn't any need to make and sell any products under the patent system, rather it seems to be actively discouraged.
When there isn't any contract, such as when someone finds a flaw in software they downloaded for free from a website, then I don't see that they should have much scope for legal action.
It's also a freedom of speech issue. If I can say what I like in a personal capacity, regardless of accuracy or provability, then I should be able to distribute software, regardless of whether it works or not. Of course in practice there are all sorts of limitations of freedom of speech, even in so-called free countries, but I don't think any additional restrictions should apply just to software.
If a nuclear power facility uses my software and it doesn't work, I don't see that this is any different to if they had taken my value for the mass of a proton and it turned out to be wrong.
This is not very clear to me. So the card has a processor and DRM key and can decrypt the data itself, but what makes it possible for the "trusted" device to request the unecrypted data, so that it can actually play the music or whatever, while preventing the "untrusted" device, if it has a compatible card reader and copies the protocols, from doing the same thing?
But they also say "It provides independence from the host, offering consumers true freedom to enjoy the content they own on their cards in numerous host players." which presumably doesn't just involve players developed specifically for the memory card. Maybe it's only software in the device?
From their press release "TrustedFlash cards also function as regular cards in non-secure host devices." and the card has "an on-board processor, a high-performance cryptographic engine and tamper-resistant technology". Presumably it requires the cooperation of "trusted" devices to restrict access to the unencrypted data, and untrusted devices won't have the decryption keys.
If bandwidth is down to $1 per GB now (about 0.385GPB at current exchange rates) then it's perhaps not such a big factor as it used to be. I seem to remember a $1 per MB figure in the distant past.
I've lived in NZ, but before the ADSL era. If I wasn't already familiar with its bandwidth problems I would have assumed that a cap of 1GB was a typo, or a joke. I could use that in one day. The extra cost of bandwidth is like an extra tax on the cost of living in NZ.
I wonder why the emphasise "OS Independent" in one sentence and require "Windows 98SE / Mac OS 8.6 or higher" in an other. Do those OSes even cover "Xbox with Live", that they also mention?
Yeah, I guessed after I posted that someone would point that out. But given that SDSL doesn't seem to be priced competitively (last time I checked), ADSL is often used in applications where uplink capacity is of interest.
At least the uplink capacity is higher than usual for ADSL, although still no match for the downlink.
It doesn't take that much to take it down, but there seem to be plenty of people who can get it back up again. You would have to assume that they were all killed, or something.
In this case the question is about whether astronomers can give a precise definition of the word "planet", or whether they have to abandon the term.
If the definition of "planet" isn't specific enough that astronomers can use it, then I don't think it should be used when teaching children either. Astronomers still need to be able to communicate with the general public.
It should be possible to give an object a name, describing what it is, regardless of what orbit it's in. A star is still a star when it orbits another star.