It's telling that Spring's press release uses more space extolling the virtues of its product than describing the situation behind the suit. It's also curious that the primary features it hypes "full Internet browsing while reading" and "interactive multi-media open Internet access", while the nook won't even have a Web browser. B&N basically says they might add one later, if the users want it. This is totally a wait and see situation, because right now it's not at all clear who the bad guy is.
Yes, you can enter without breaking. It's called illegal entry. It applies when no breaking is necessary, such as entering an unlocked door or open window.
The odd thing is that everyone assumes the long blood vessels to be fixed-diameter pipes. If the musculature included a kind of esophageal motion that helped to squeeze the blood upward, the heart wouldn't need to do as much work.
Mostly, it's the publishers that control this. Rights are still parceled out on a regional basis and sold separately, even though the model is aged far beyond any practical meaning. World rights cost a lot more than, say, North American rights.
I've been using a Sony Reader for a couple of years (since the PRS-500 came out) and have yet to use Sony's store. Why should I, when places like FictionWise exist?
"The romance between Spock and Uhura was completely cliche and unnecessary."
Actually, it's a reference to a very important historical point from TOS. The episode "Plato's Stepchildren" contained the first ever interracial kiss on television, between Spock and Uhura.
You're missing two things. Neither is guaranteed, but both are likely. One is that the economy of scale often kicks in very early on at the prototyping level. The error part of trial-and-error gets spread more thinly. The other is that part of the 1X cost includes R&D. Again, that cost gets spread more thinly at 5X.
If we assume said features would be available on half a dozen different phones from a variety of carriers, then from an OS company's point of view, it's an edge.
Except that Orion Pictures doesn't sell financial services. ORF does, which is why the complaint carried weight. The two companies have overlapping areas of business interest. It's not just the use of a trademarked term, it's use of it in such a way that it could cause confusion for potential customers and cost the plaintiff money.
over ORF's use of the word 'Orion' in relation to financial services and products
man, I've got thousands of books I bought used and I'm planning on getting an eBook reader in 2008. I don't get your statement at all.
I think the GP's post was intimating this question: once you get an eBook reader, how many used books do you think you'll continue to purchase?
By moving to eBook, there is no resale because of DRM issues; everyone will have to buy their own "new copy."
You know, if the publishers were actually leading the charge into e-books, this might make some sense. They're not, though. A niche market is having to drag them into it. Most of the folks in the publishing business would be just as happy to stay with paper forever.
I can't disagree with a thing you said. However, a lunar base accomplishes one thing that the others on your list don't. It opens an avenue of research specifically into sustainable habitats, in situ resource usage (mining and processing technologies which might be used on asteroids in the future), and food production.
I know I'd rather have NASA put up replacements for aging weather satellites
Oh, good grief! QuickScat was launched in 1999 with a projected life of two years (three max). And you're just now worrying about replacing it? Where was the outcry five years ago? If NOAA wants the bloody satellite data, let them build the damn replacement bird. I'm sure NASA could find it in their budget to grab a Titan II and toss the thing into orbit for them.
What? It's not in NOAA's budget? How about the combined budgets of the Gulf states and the lower-/mid-Atlantic seaboard states? What about all those other countries that benefit from the data being collected? Anyone want to pitch in? No? How surprising.
. . . doing so is more about proving that they can than getting anything useful out of it.
Maybe. But then again, the same can be said for a great many major technological advancements in human history. Airplanes come to mind. As do automobiles.
Maybe we should think about a moon base first and once we get that up and running then a president can start talking about Mars.
According to the most recent road map, a Moon base is/was already the step prior to a manned Mars mission. If that Moon base is interpreted as "related exclusively to Human Exploration of Mars," then we lose that, too.
But you can bet we'll have plenty of funding for peanut museums, bridges to nowhere, and other imporkant projects.
It might not be quite the thing for places with super high land value like NYC or Tokyo,
I disagree. In the case of NYC, land value is directly related to the lot's proximity to a subway line and to Midtown/Downtown Manhattan. There is a lot of space along the river in upper Manhattan, Queens, and Brooklyn that is cheap. (By comparison only. It's still hideously expensive.) Much of it could easily be dual-use, similar to the plan that would have built a football stadium above a subway rail yard. Around here, air rights can be a lot more valuable than property rights.
I don't think they would be any more fragile that anyother glass structure in the city. The cost/availability of water strikes me as a limiting factor morse that anything else. The extra cost in real estate could conceiveably be recouped in smaller transport costs.
Agreed. There are hundreds and hundreds of glass-sided buildings here that have gone to great lengths to keep a large portion of the sun's heat energy out. Letting it in would be a breeze.
Water is actually pretty cheap here. The aqueduct just rolls it on down from upstate. As to transportation costs, I'm not sure how much of a reduction there would actually be, compared to some of the competitors. Most of NYC's premium tomatoes, for example, are actually grown in New Jersey. It wouldn't cost a whole lot more to get them across the river than to just haul them downstairs in an elevator. The expensive part is the local delivery, which is a nightmare.
If the initial efforts focused primarily on premium crops; like Beefsteak Tomatoes, instead of the average, tasteless, grocery store varieties; and built on the tons of undervalued waterfront space, then it might work.
I would argue that the definitions you've cited are just examples of the cognitive battle already having been lost on this one. It doesn't make the word any more precise or actually meaningful.
I understand what you're saying, but if you want to play the "strict definition" game, you have to play it all the way. How can you possibly refer to "the cognitive battle" while demanding such restrictions on the use of language? Where are the weapons? Where is the blood? There are none, of course. Somehow, everyone knew you were using the word "battle" figuratively rather than literally, because its original definition of "armed conflict" has broadened considerably over time.
Why not call gravity-powered electricity generation (say, the Hoover Dam) just that: gravity-powered. That means something, especially if you mention the hydro part of it in conjunction. As opposed to "tidal power" (also hydro, but a different beast).
But tidal power is powered by gravity. That's what causes tides, after all. Look, it doesn't matter what existing word or category you choose, there will always be a way to argue that it's wrong. Let's call it gloobish energy, instead. As long as most of the reference sources agree on what gloobish means, then we have a symbol we can use to relate a large concept in a very efficient package. That's what language is for. When your computer boots up, do you look for little leather straps on its knee-length shoes?
Right now, the marketplace of ideas has settled on a meaning for the symbol renewable energy. Fine. Me? I vote for "gloobish."
Well, technically it doesn't actually hurt anyone, it's just stupid.
I think the case for harm is stronger than you think. It's a kind of fraud perpetrated by someone in a position of trust against those specifically put in a position to trust them. Leaving critical information out of someone's education can be very harmful, depending on how critical that information is.
Stoves are hot. Knives are sharp. Red lights mean stop. Don't talk to strangers. Yes, these are relatively silly examples, but they are examples nonetheless of critical bits knowledge that could cause harm if completely omitted from a child's education.
Slashdot Mirror
By sending business back to Blackberry and the various Android-based phones?
It's telling that Spring's press release uses more space extolling the virtues of its product than describing the situation behind the suit. It's also curious that the primary features it hypes "full Internet browsing while reading" and "interactive multi-media open Internet access", while the nook won't even have a Web browser. B&N basically says they might add one later, if the users want it. This is totally a wait and see situation, because right now it's not at all clear who the bad guy is.
Yes, you can enter without breaking. It's called illegal entry. It applies when no breaking is necessary, such as entering an unlocked door or open window.
The odd thing is that everyone assumes the long blood vessels to be fixed-diameter pipes. If the musculature included a kind of esophageal motion that helped to squeeze the blood upward, the heart wouldn't need to do as much work.
Mostly, it's the publishers that control this. Rights are still parceled out on a regional basis and sold separately, even though the model is aged far beyond any practical meaning. World rights cost a lot more than, say, North American rights.
I've been using a Sony Reader for a couple of years (since the PRS-500 came out) and have yet to use Sony's store. Why should I, when places like FictionWise exist?
Well, that'll teach me to rely on memory.
"The romance between Spock and Uhura was completely cliche and unnecessary."
Actually, it's a reference to a very important historical point from TOS. The episode "Plato's Stepchildren" contained the first ever interracial kiss on television, between Spock and Uhura.
You're missing two things. Neither is guaranteed, but both are likely. One is that the economy of scale often kicks in very early on at the prototyping level. The error part of trial-and-error gets spread more thinly. The other is that part of the 1X cost includes R&D. Again, that cost gets spread more thinly at 5X.
If we assume said features would be available on half a dozen different phones from a variety of carriers, then from an OS company's point of view, it's an edge.
Except that Orion Pictures doesn't sell financial services. ORF does, which is why the complaint carried weight. The two companies have overlapping areas of business interest. It's not just the use of a trademarked term, it's use of it in such a way that it could cause confusion for potential customers and cost the plaintiff money.
Mathematics is physics without purpose, Chemistry is physics without thought, Engineering is physics without tenure.
If you want it for the reading experience, get the Sony.
If you want it so that everyone will think you're geeky, get the Kindle.
If you want it because you're truly geeky, get the Irex Iliad.
There's more information than you ever wanted to know about e-book hardware, software, formats, etc. at MobileRead
I can't disagree with a thing you said. However, a lunar base accomplishes one thing that the others on your list don't. It opens an avenue of research specifically into sustainable habitats, in situ resource usage (mining and processing technologies which might be used on asteroids in the future), and food production.
Oh, good grief! QuickScat was launched in 1999 with a projected life of two years (three max). And you're just now worrying about replacing it? Where was the outcry five years ago? If NOAA wants the bloody satellite data, let them build the damn replacement bird. I'm sure NASA could find it in their budget to grab a Titan II and toss the thing into orbit for them.
What? It's not in NOAA's budget? How about the combined budgets of the Gulf states and the lower-/mid-Atlantic seaboard states? What about all those other countries that benefit from the data being collected? Anyone want to pitch in? No? How surprising.
Maybe. But then again, the same can be said for a great many major technological advancements in human history. Airplanes come to mind. As do automobiles.
According to the most recent road map, a Moon base is/was already the step prior to a manned Mars mission. If that Moon base is interpreted as "related exclusively to Human Exploration of Mars," then we lose that, too.
But you can bet we'll have plenty of funding for peanut museums, bridges to nowhere, and other imporkant projects.
I disagree. In the case of NYC, land value is directly related to the lot's proximity to a subway line and to Midtown/Downtown Manhattan. There is a lot of space along the river in upper Manhattan, Queens, and Brooklyn that is cheap. (By comparison only. It's still hideously expensive.) Much of it could easily be dual-use, similar to the plan that would have built a football stadium above a subway rail yard. Around here, air rights can be a lot more valuable than property rights.
Agreed. There are hundreds and hundreds of glass-sided buildings here that have gone to great lengths to keep a large portion of the sun's heat energy out. Letting it in would be a breeze.
Water is actually pretty cheap here. The aqueduct just rolls it on down from upstate. As to transportation costs, I'm not sure how much of a reduction there would actually be, compared to some of the competitors. Most of NYC's premium tomatoes, for example, are actually grown in New Jersey. It wouldn't cost a whole lot more to get them across the river than to just haul them downstairs in an elevator. The expensive part is the local delivery, which is a nightmare.
If the initial efforts focused primarily on premium crops; like Beefsteak Tomatoes, instead of the average, tasteless, grocery store varieties; and built on the tons of undervalued waterfront space, then it might work.
That's the Spirit!
I understand what you're saying, but if you want to play the "strict definition" game, you have to play it all the way. How can you possibly refer to "the cognitive battle" while demanding such restrictions on the use of language? Where are the weapons? Where is the blood? There are none, of course. Somehow, everyone knew you were using the word "battle" figuratively rather than literally, because its original definition of "armed conflict" has broadened considerably over time.
But tidal power is powered by gravity. That's what causes tides, after all. Look, it doesn't matter what existing word or category you choose, there will always be a way to argue that it's wrong. Let's call it gloobish energy, instead. As long as most of the reference sources agree on what gloobish means, then we have a symbol we can use to relate a large concept in a very efficient package. That's what language is for. When your computer boots up, do you look for little leather straps on its knee-length shoes?
Right now, the marketplace of ideas has settled on a meaning for the symbol renewable energy. Fine. Me? I vote for "gloobish."
I think the case for harm is stronger than you think. It's a kind of fraud perpetrated by someone in a position of trust against those specifically put in a position to trust them. Leaving critical information out of someone's education can be very harmful, depending on how critical that information is.
Stoves are hot. Knives are sharp. Red lights mean stop. Don't talk to strangers. Yes, these are relatively silly examples, but they are examples nonetheless of critical bits knowledge that could cause harm if completely omitted from a child's education.