You don't know for sure what Telstra was doing. My own interpretation is that they were negociating in good faith and were considering Linux seriously. Most probably they are already using some kind of Microsoft desktop and they had put a dollar value to the task of switching to Linux, but that it was lower than the deal Microsoft was offering initially. Had Microsoft not lowered their prices, Telstra would have gone ahead with their Linux option. Once Microsoft offer was lower than the cost of switching Telstra just took that option purely on financial ground.
Here in Australia a dated lab notebook with the signature of your line manager is enough evidence of prior art admissible in court. Of course in the proceedings they'll look for evidence that corroborate the date, but it's a good start.
The US/Australia talks were started about nine months ago, as a "reward" for Australia's involvement in the Iraq war. Both Bush and Howard (Australia's PM) are big fans of bilateral talks & deals and don't believe in large multilateral rounds like those of the WTO, Kyoto, etc.
My toddler has yet to destroy a CD or a DVD despite plenty of opportunities. She does like the shiny stuff but I can just give her an AOL disk, she's none the wiser. These disks are unbreakable anyway (for a toddler). We did make the microwave unreachable (for many reasons, not just CDs cooking).
On the other hand once she's broken a floppy (very easily I might add) she wants to move on to the next one immediately. She went through a box of old backups a few months ago.
I don't know if you've tried to rescue a floppy by trying to extract the actual floppy disk and putting it into a new case, but it's nigh on impossible and a damn nuisance to have to do in the first place.
There would be plenty of ways to make sure MacOS/X only ran on approved hardware even if Apple moved to a commodity chip. First and most easily it may require a proprietary BIOS. End of story. Even if people reverse engineer it and whatnot (like people do with the X-box) only a tiny portion of the market will go through the exercise.
One of the great things with the CD/DVD format is that you can put a large number in a wallet. Not so with anything that has to come in a cartridge.
Fingerprints don't matter, it's damage to the title part of the CD/DVD that may make it non-playable.
Moreover a cartridge has moving parts and it's also fragile in a different way. I've had countless floppies destroyed by my toddler just by hacking the case (the disk was untouched). Also soon enough production costs go so low that the cost is driven by the substrate. This is largely the case with CD-R right now. A larger, more complex substrate involving a case means the format will never become dirt cheap.
Compare the price of a CD-R and a floppy today for an example of what I mean.
What is the difference between a physical and mental trait? The latter depends on the capacity of your brain, so it is physical after all.
There is plenty of way why midiclorian injection would not work. It would make you a jedi for a day or two while the count was high and then they would die off, but you wouldn't have the training to take advantage of them. You would need a constant supply.
I don't think this is what Hawkings is talking about, but I can't be sure.
What you describe is how things look to a distant observer, but to the particle falling into the black hole there is no horizon. It reaches the singularity in finite proper time and before the end of the universe.
Hawkings does talk about entropy falling into the black hole and being radiated away later. It does cross the event horizon, both ways. How exactly it performs the feats might be clearer once Hawkings' written paper is out.
If this is true Eddington was either joking or full of himself. There would be no shortage of people who understood GR quite well, for example David Hilbert and his incredible team of mathematicians at Heidelberg. Einstein had made a number of trips to Hilbert's lab while he was developing GR and there is a body of correspondence between the two men that showed that Hilbert was right up there with him. Hilbert maybe lacked the physical insight that drove Einstein all the way to the end, but it is quite clear that Hilbert understood everything the minute it was published. Einstein was even worried that Hilbert would find the final, correct theory before him.
For another example consider Schwartzchild, a member of Hilbert's team IIRC. He was also an officer in the Prussian Army during WWI. GR was published in 1915, Schwartzchild proposed his famous metric (that describes the gravitational field around a non-rotating, symmetric massive body, such as the outside of a star or a non-rotating black hole). Clearly Schwartzchild understood GR. He was killed at the front in 1917.
GR was weird because it used tensor calculus, a mathematical tool that few knew about even in the early '20s, but apart from that it is not beyond the grasp of a dedicated graduate student these days.
I agree with you mostly, it probably wasn't worth the effort in the end. However VMS, lisp, smalltalk and a host of other technologies still live on in mutated forms however. It's not all wasted.
Not in this case. He had made a bet in favour of his own hypothesis (that black holes swallow all information), and lost it.
You are thinking of one of his other famous bets where he did a wager against the existence of black holes as a form of insurance, in the case his own research (very much centered on black holes) turned out to be useless (if black holes don't exist).
The couple who battled McDonalds in England representing themselves (see the documentary "McLibel") battled their ways through the court system for months, full time. You have to be pretty dedicated to your cause to do that.
In the end it was found that the leaflet they were handing out at McDonalds outlets were indeed partly libellous, and they were fined. So they lost, essentially.
In fact they refused to pay and McDonalds, AFAIK, never pressed them again because the PR was disastrous from start to finish.
In the case of patent lawsuit there was a/. article not long ago that asserted that they are hard to win for the defendant.
All scientists who review papers get to do that too, it's a matter of audience.
Nonetheless a young scientist will usually be less critical than an experienced one, precisely because they are less experienced. However even experienced scientists get it wrong.
In the case of VMS it is really easy to answer why "the industry" as you say discarded it:
1- it was DEC-only. DEC had great engineers and great support but crappy marketing. 2- it was 100% proprietary, when DEC was acquired VMS went on the back burner. 3- it was expensive, and so was the hardware it was running on.
In an industry where good enough is reason enough, #3 was the killer. The reason why Intel/Microsoft won is almost purely due to pricing reasons. The reason why Unix was way more popular than VMS especially with academics and small businesses is also centered on price.
Keeping the kids safe and giving them a bit of trust are two different things. I can see how RFID can help in some dire situations, I can also see parents misusing the technology in more ways than once.
It does play on win2k, there is just a little trick to installing it:
From the compatibility pages right here at NT Compatible (http://www.ntcompatible.com/comp.php?cat=games&id x=s):
System Shock 2 (Looking Glass) Yes W2000 03/02 Received the follow messages: 1)To install System Shock 2 on your Windows 2000 system, you will need to run the following command (from a DOS window or using the Run Program command): Setup -lgntforce also you need the patch from http://www.lglass.com/cs/shkpatch.exe to fix the incompatibility with the SafeDisk copy protection and the OS.
I wasn't aware that transistors decided to shrink by themselves and to multiply to fill the available size on the die. I thought that someone had to make it happens somehow.
I have a 4yo. I already find that things are much between us better if there is a bit of trust going on. Kids, even young, are not nearly as unperceptive and dependend at adults sometimes seem to assume they are.
You have to barter. "I'll give you a bit more leeway if you show me you can use it wisely" sort of thing. The hard bit is not to back down.
The problem is no one has found a better alternative. If you take out all the conservative peer-review, then all kinds of kooks start getting publicity & funding. Think cargo cult stuff.
Truth has a formidable way of eventually winning: it is the truth. No matter how derided were the people who proposed plate techtonics or quantum physics, it eventually won out because it worked better than anything else. If a result is reproducible then someone will reproduce it and confirm it. It doesn't then matter what high-ranked people in various department thought of the idea.
This means that to be a successful scientist, you not only need to be creative, smart, inventive, patient and persistent, you also need to have balls of steel and a will of iron and prepare for the worst of injustice. Not only that, but when they do succeed after a hard slog, they often become the highly-ranked people who deride other people's ideas.
A proper supervisor tells their student about all this during their PhDs. You soon find out if you are fit for the job.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't know for sure what Telstra was doing. My own interpretation is that they were negociating in good faith and were considering Linux seriously. Most probably they are already using some kind of Microsoft desktop and they had put a dollar value to the task of switching to Linux, but that it was lower than the deal Microsoft was offering initially. Had Microsoft not lowered their prices, Telstra would have gone ahead with their Linux option. Once Microsoft offer was lower than the cost of switching Telstra just took that option purely on financial ground.
Nowhere in there can you read "Linux is bad".
Here in Australia a dated lab notebook with the signature of your line manager is enough evidence of prior art admissible in court. Of course in the proceedings they'll look for evidence that corroborate the date, but it's a good start.
The US/Australia talks were started about nine months ago, as a "reward" for Australia's involvement in the Iraq war. Both Bush and Howard (Australia's PM) are big fans of bilateral talks & deals and don't believe in large multilateral rounds like those of the WTO, Kyoto, etc.
My toddler has yet to destroy a CD or a DVD despite plenty of opportunities. She does like the shiny stuff but I can just give her an AOL disk, she's none the wiser. These disks are unbreakable anyway (for a toddler). We did make the microwave unreachable (for many reasons, not just CDs cooking).
On the other hand once she's broken a floppy (very easily I might add) she wants to move on to the next one immediately. She went through a box of old backups a few months ago.
I don't know if you've tried to rescue a floppy by trying to extract the actual floppy disk and putting it into a new case, but it's nigh on impossible and a damn nuisance to have to do in the first place.
There would be plenty of ways to make sure MacOS/X only ran on approved hardware even if Apple moved to a commodity chip. First and most easily it may require a proprietary BIOS. End of story. Even if people reverse engineer it and whatnot (like people do with the X-box) only a tiny portion of the market will go through the exercise.
Thanks.
One of the great things with the CD/DVD format is that you can put a large number in a wallet. Not so with anything that has to come in a cartridge.
Fingerprints don't matter, it's damage to the title part of the CD/DVD that may make it non-playable.
Moreover a cartridge has moving parts and it's also fragile in a different way. I've had countless floppies destroyed by my toddler just by hacking the case (the disk was untouched). Also soon enough production costs go so low that the cost is driven by the substrate. This is largely the case with CD-R right now. A larger, more complex substrate involving a case means the format will never become dirt cheap.
Compare the price of a CD-R and a floppy today for an example of what I mean.
What is the difference between a physical and mental trait? The latter depends on the capacity of your brain, so it is physical after all.
There is plenty of way why midiclorian injection would not work. It would make you a jedi for a day or two while the count was high and then they would die off, but you wouldn't have the training to take advantage of them. You would need a constant supply.
I don't think this is what Hawkings is talking about, but I can't be sure.
What you describe is how things look to a distant observer, but to the particle falling into the black hole there is no horizon. It reaches the singularity in finite proper time and before the end of the universe.
Hawkings does talk about entropy falling into the black hole and being radiated away later. It does cross the event horizon, both ways. How exactly it performs the feats might be clearer once Hawkings' written paper is out.
If this is true Eddington was either joking or full of himself. There would be no shortage of people who understood GR quite well, for example David Hilbert and his incredible team of mathematicians at Heidelberg. Einstein had made a number of trips to Hilbert's lab while he was developing GR and there is a body of correspondence between the two men that showed that Hilbert was right up there with him. Hilbert maybe lacked the physical insight that drove Einstein all the way to the end, but it is quite clear that Hilbert understood everything the minute it was published. Einstein was even worried that Hilbert would find the final, correct theory before him.
For another example consider Schwartzchild, a member of Hilbert's team IIRC. He was also an officer in the Prussian Army during WWI. GR was published in 1915, Schwartzchild proposed his famous metric (that describes the gravitational field around a non-rotating, symmetric massive body, such as the outside of a star or a non-rotating black hole). Clearly Schwartzchild understood GR. He was killed at the front in 1917.
GR was weird because it used tensor calculus, a mathematical tool that few knew about even in the early '20s, but apart from that it is not beyond the grasp of a dedicated graduate student these days.
I agree with you mostly, it probably wasn't worth the effort in the end. However VMS, lisp, smalltalk and a host of other technologies still live on in mutated forms however. It's not all wasted.
Not in this case. He had made a bet in favour of his own hypothesis (that black holes swallow all information), and lost it.
You are thinking of one of his other famous bets where he did a wager against the existence of black holes as a form of insurance, in the case his own research (very much centered on black holes) turned out to be useless (if black holes don't exist).
I thought that DHCP was an IP number allocation protocol and PPPoE a transport protocol. How can you use one instead of the other?
You can't patent something that has been published. In some countries like the US you have a year of leeway but in most you don't have anything.
OSS constitues prima-facies publication. You need to patent *before* you open your software.
The couple who battled McDonalds in England representing themselves (see the documentary "McLibel") battled their ways through the court system for months, full time. You have to be pretty dedicated to your cause to do that.
/. article not long ago that asserted that they are hard to win for the defendant.
In the end it was found that the leaflet they were handing out at McDonalds outlets were indeed partly libellous, and they were fined. So they lost, essentially.
In fact they refused to pay and McDonalds, AFAIK, never pressed them again because the PR was disastrous from start to finish.
In the case of patent lawsuit there was a
No, the GF4-MX is a rebadge GF2, I know, I'm using one right now. It does have HW T&L.
It's a good cheap card but it doesn't do pixel or vertex shading. The GF4 non-MX does.
There is a range of Quadro cards, they all do hardware 3D relatively well. The low end performs like a GF2, and the high-end better than the FX5900.
All scientists who review papers get to do that too, it's a matter of audience.
Nonetheless a young scientist will usually be less critical than an experienced one, precisely because they are less experienced. However even experienced scientists get it wrong.
In the case of VMS it is really easy to answer why "the industry" as you say discarded it:
1- it was DEC-only. DEC had great engineers and great support but crappy marketing.
2- it was 100% proprietary, when DEC was acquired VMS went on the back burner.
3- it was expensive, and so was the hardware it was running on.
In an industry where good enough is reason enough, #3 was the killer. The reason why Intel/Microsoft won is almost purely due to pricing reasons. The reason why Unix was way more popular than VMS especially with academics and small businesses is also centered on price.
Keeping the kids safe and giving them a bit of trust are two different things. I can see how RFID can help in some dire situations, I can also see parents misusing the technology in more ways than once.
It worked for me.
I wasn't aware that transistors decided to shrink by themselves and to multiply to fill the available size on the die. I thought that someone had to make it happens somehow.
(different parent).
I have a 4yo. I already find that things are much between us better if there is a bit of trust going on. Kids, even young, are not nearly as unperceptive and dependend at adults sometimes seem to assume they are.
You have to barter. "I'll give you a bit more leeway if you show me you can use it wisely" sort of thing. The hard bit is not to back down.
The problem is no one has found a better alternative. If you take out all the conservative peer-review, then all kinds of kooks start getting publicity & funding. Think cargo cult stuff.
Truth has a formidable way of eventually winning: it is the truth. No matter how derided were the people who proposed plate techtonics or quantum physics, it eventually won out because it worked better than anything else. If a result is reproducible then someone will reproduce it and confirm it. It doesn't then matter what high-ranked people in various department thought of the idea.
This means that to be a successful scientist, you not only need to be creative, smart, inventive, patient and persistent, you also need to have balls of steel and a will of iron and prepare for the worst of injustice. Not only that, but when they do succeed after a hard slog, they often become the highly-ranked people who deride other people's ideas.
A proper supervisor tells their student about all this during their PhDs. You soon find out if you are fit for the job.
Microsoft means 600 million licenses. That makes a lot of difference. Think of the Microsoft licenses that you've paid for over the years.