You're stance that religion and science are mutually exclusive will never help in the scientific community.
I believe in God, and I believe in science, I believe that my moral beliefs put me in good religious standing while my belief in science puts me in good standing with the advancement of man.
"The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise, but in order to state the correct relationships of man with God and with the universe. Sacred Scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer" - John Paul II
Personally, I often just stop talking to people like that, doesn't mean I believe them. Of course the average person seems to think that the last person talking wins.
Open source software *never* competes on cost alone. Open Office is competing with Microsoft because it offers lower levels of functionality at a lower barrier to entry. Anyone running a home business can use Open Office with mail merge in order to complete their billing, they can put together simple presentations and fliers with Impress and Draw as well as do their bookkeeping in Calc. Essentially, MS Office is turning into an enterprise level suite while Open Office is nipping at Microsoft's heels in the SMB market.
The other way open source software works against proprietary is time vs. required functionality. We all readily admit that MS Office is basically a finished product (aside from usability, though contestable). Given this Open Office *will* be comparable one day and the enterprise hooks that Open Office need to keep playing catch up are already firmly in place. I heard it on youtube the other day and I love it "proprietary software cannot fight the future".
That is nice, I habitually do the same thing. What I'm really looking forward to though is Base. I work in an office that uses way too many spread sheets for things that are served much better with a database. It makes me crazy using the find feature in an excel sheet when I know that a database would cut my time and frustration down to a minimum. Currently I have a query linked to an external xls sheet, I manipulate the query in edit mode and that's the most functionality I've been able to get. I haven't been able to find much documentation for manually creating forms, I don't have wizards (which happen to be well documented) at work (because we don't have a JRE) and haven't been concerned enough to develop the small app at home.
Without Java it is significantly lobotomized. For instance you can't run wizards which cuts out documentation for a good amount of things to do in the entire suite. Furthermore there is always this "it looks like it can do it", but then when you click on an icon either (a) nothing happens or (b) it tells you to install a JRE, you can run it without Java (I do it every day), but it sucks. Having said that, I think a good way to go would be to let less "advanced" users run it without Java while the technically inclined develop with Java, another possibility for future development would be to toggle Java mode on and off. Then again that might make someone's flagship look bad.
Some controversy surrounds the use of terahertz scanners for routine security checks due to the potential capability to produce detailed images of a subject's body through clothing. X-ray vision
Well I'm glad I just said I was stupid instead of reading that, I might have said something dumber. My land-line wireless phone operates in the 2.4Ghz range, costs about $35 and I can't cross the street with it. That hardly compares with the four mile NLOS you can get these days. No offense but price still seems relevant to me.
That's funny, but did you notice how half my moderation was "informative" the other half "interesting"? I don't think many people here know what you're talking about. Anyways, what do you think about little LCD screens on your lenses, maybe you could program your trip to be whatever you wanted, maybe you could go with dancing dead bears in your periphery and a tie-die world a little audio and you'd be talking to Jerry Garcia in a matter of hours (in the psychedelic sense that is).
It seems to me after looking around here a little bit we ought to start calling it "quantum wireless" to go with that "quantum computer" we always hear about. Not trolling, it's just the summary I get goes like this: Good for LANs, very little penetration (i.e. LOS = bad for indoors), it will suffer dearly at the hands of electromagnetic interference (again cannot survive in the house) and it will be very expensive.
I'm not that smart, just a little familiar with 802.16. Are you saying that the cost of common electronics would need to go up in order to support this?
Ok so this would only be effective in a LAN type of situation but just as a question, wouldn't this free up some frequencies in the long run? Also does anyone have any idea on the possible ranges for point to point vs point to multi point? I'm thinking if the cost of these things goes down (a lot) and a point to point connection can get out to about a mile then point to multi point ought to cover a block, then we may have a future with these things on top of telephone poles. The distance for wimax is typically 7.5 to 1 with point to point covering the most distance.
Slashdot Mirror
You are the reason I am afraid to take my kids to church.
You're stance that religion and science are mutually exclusive will never help in the scientific community.
I believe in God, and I believe in science, I believe that my moral beliefs put me in good religious standing while my belief in science puts me in good standing with the advancement of man.
"The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise, but in order to state the correct relationships of man with God and with the universe. Sacred Scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer" - John Paul IIPersonally, I often just stop talking to people like that, doesn't mean I believe them. Of course the average person seems to think that the last person talking wins.
Open source software *never* competes on cost alone. Open Office is competing with Microsoft because it offers lower levels of functionality at a lower barrier to entry. Anyone running a home business can use Open Office with mail merge in order to complete their billing, they can put together simple presentations and fliers with Impress and Draw as well as do their bookkeeping in Calc. Essentially, MS Office is turning into an enterprise level suite while Open Office is nipping at Microsoft's heels in the SMB market.
The other way open source software works against proprietary is time vs. required functionality. We all readily admit that MS Office is basically a finished product (aside from usability, though contestable). Given this Open Office *will* be comparable one day and the enterprise hooks that Open Office need to keep playing catch up are already firmly in place. I heard it on youtube the other day and I love it "proprietary software cannot fight the future".
Everything in Openoffice.org must go to a PDF, I think that's his point.
That is nice, I habitually do the same thing. What I'm really looking forward to though is Base. I work in an office that uses way too many spread sheets for things that are served much better with a database. It makes me crazy using the find feature in an excel sheet when I know that a database would cut my time and frustration down to a minimum. Currently I have a query linked to an external xls sheet, I manipulate the query in edit mode and that's the most functionality I've been able to get. I haven't been able to find much documentation for manually creating forms, I don't have wizards (which happen to be well documented) at work (because we don't have a JRE) and haven't been concerned enough to develop the small app at home.
Your sig makes me sad :(
Without Java it is significantly lobotomized. For instance you can't run wizards which cuts out documentation for a good amount of things to do in the entire suite. Furthermore there is always this "it looks like it can do it", but then when you click on an icon either (a) nothing happens or (b) it tells you to install a JRE, you can run it without Java (I do it every day), but it sucks. Having said that, I think a good way to go would be to let less "advanced" users run it without Java while the technically inclined develop with Java, another possibility for future development would be to toggle Java mode on and off. Then again that might make someone's flagship look bad.
Looks like the most they can hope for is managing configuration files, I mean doesn't Ubuntu use apt/synaptic?
Could be because they're both quasicrystals.
I get it now it's the connectors not the length of the cable that matters.
That's what I'm waiting for :)
Well I'm glad I just said I was stupid instead of reading that, I might have said something dumber. My land-line wireless phone operates in the 2.4Ghz range, costs about $35 and I can't cross the street with it. That hardly compares with the four mile NLOS you can get these days. No offense but price still seems relevant to me.
What are you talking about? Now there will be a George Bush IX!
That's funny, but did you notice how half my moderation was "informative" the other half "interesting"? I don't think many people here know what you're talking about. Anyways, what do you think about little LCD screens on your lenses, maybe you could program your trip to be whatever you wanted, maybe you could go with dancing dead bears in your periphery and a tie-die world a little audio and you'd be talking to Jerry Garcia in a matter of hours (in the psychedelic sense that is).
Patents!!!
P.S. - Mod me insightful.
It seems to me after looking around here a little bit we ought to start calling it "quantum wireless" to go with that "quantum computer" we always hear about. Not trolling, it's just the summary I get goes like this: Good for LANs, very little penetration (i.e. LOS = bad for indoors), it will suffer dearly at the hands of electromagnetic interference (again cannot survive in the house) and it will be very expensive.
I'm not that smart, just a little familiar with 802.16. Are you saying that the cost of common electronics would need to go up in order to support this?
Space maybe? (thanks I was wondering about the LOS issue)
thanks, I would still prefer "bluewave wireless" actually I think that sounds better than "redwave".
At the same time won't the cost of lower frequency hardware go down a little bit with a new premium around?
Precision is key for distance, this stuff already doesn't carry that far.
How about "infrared waves", "red shifted microwaves", or the most marketable "redwave wireless".
Ok so this would only be effective in a LAN type of situation but just as a question, wouldn't this free up some frequencies in the long run? Also does anyone have any idea on the possible ranges for point to point vs point to multi point? I'm thinking if the cost of these things goes down (a lot) and a point to point connection can get out to about a mile then point to multi point ought to cover a block, then we may have a future with these things on top of telephone poles. The distance for wimax is typically 7.5 to 1 with point to point covering the most distance.
Funny I bet he makes more than I do too.