Jeez, that's like some 500 pound guy dropping a huge smelly turd on the internet and stinking it up for hundreds of millions of people while he gaffaws.
Do we have to observe the Geneva conventions for US citizens? I recommend caning for starters then more severe punishment.
The UN is not having an open-minded discussion about this, RTFA
You are full of non-sequiturs, misinformation, and unsupported opinions. I might ask you to take your own advice (RTFA). First, it's not the UN, second, it doesn't look closed. To quote from TFA
On the table are European proposals for some kind of international forum to discuss principles for running the internet.
The EU does not intend to scrap Icann. It would continue in its current technical role.
Instead Europe is suggesting a way of allowing countries to express their position on internet issues, though the details on how this would happen are vague.
"We have no intention to regulate the internet," said Commissioner Reding, reassuring the US that the EU was not proposing setting up a new global body.
At least I have to give you some credit for your following remark,
Perhaps it should be administered differently in light of what it has become, but this is not the path that should be taken to accomplish that.
Perhaps you have a mistaken idea of the "path" we're talking about?
Now these other nations want for free all the benefits of the decades of work and investment that the United States made.
That's kind of a non sequitur. We're talking about one country controlling root DNS servers. Do you think the US makes money off doing that and that other countries will thereby deprive it of some kind of investment?
Your argument makes as much sense as CERN saying they invented HTML and now the rest of the world wants to "take for free all their investment."
The internet is a commons resource now, like air and water. Most large companies world-wide depend on it for business. Your argument smacks of colonialism and I don't really see how it applies today.
To be fair, the US has not abused its de facto role (so far), and I rather shudder at the prospect of a factious community trying to administer root DNS servers. I'm not really sure what the EU has in mind, but there has to be some kind of open-minded discussion.
To make an analogy, suppose the state of New Jersey said it started the power transmission system and should therefore keep control of the entire US power grid, end of discussion, what would you think?
How did the guy who wrote the page in your link manage to leave space in front of him without other cars going in front of him? I can't believe an interstate is one-lane.
Based on a quick Google of online literature, I don't think solar cells are more efficient than stirling engines. Both have current production efficiencies of about 16% and both have theoretical maximum efficiencies of 30%.
Well, it's zippier and boots faster. There are lots of apps, not as many as for Windows or OSX, but some say it does everything they want.
I haven't kept up with Zeta, but as I recall the best browser for BeOS was Opera, which failed on a few sites, probably because there was no JVM other than BeKaffe, which was kind of mediocre.
It's academic whether a new program is expensive or not. The shuttles won't last much longer, and all it takes is another blow-up and we have lost much of what we saved by trying to prop up the aging fleet for a little while longer.
Kind of like deciding when to junk your old car because its maintenance costs and mileage are declining.
If creating space weapons is a sure fire way to launch an arms race, refraining from creating these weapons is a sure fire way to lose said race.
It's premature to develop space weapons when there is no visible effort by a hostile nation to do so. By jumping the gun, we would only hasten and make worse a space-weapons race.
The same with biological weapons and chemical weapons. We're supposed to be Good Guys (TM), remember?
A lot of unpleasant stuff happens when you are in zero gravity that takes time to adjust to.
For a flight of only a few minutes, I think all you'll enjoy is the view of the vomit bag you will be filling.
The number of seminal thinkers on planet earth at any one time has been constant in number for a while.
There are perhaps a greater number of minor innovators who build on the work of major paradigm-shifting innovators, but trailblazers have always been few.
Does mankind progress by the majority pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps, or do a few avatars make a trail for others to follow and build upon?
I think the latter.
The author does seem to show that there is a growing number of people who may be considered "dead weight". This is on several levels. In addition to the major one the article points out, let me add a few others:
- Fewer companies, percentage-wise, are thinking long term. The majority just want to please Wall Street. - Fewer are working to pay taxes, social security... etc. - Fewer are conversant in our non-technological heritage.
I agree that spelling and grammar are all too neglected in America, and I do sometimes cringe when I see poorly constructed posts. In such cases, a kind parenthetical correction is fine.
But when a fine idea is expressed and the ONLY comment some anal retentive grammar nazi can make is about spelling or grammer, it is equally irritating. The intent is often just naked one-upmanship (if that's how you spell it;).
If your ONLY comment is on grammer, think again about your reply.
In heavy nuclei, you have the repulsive electrical force between the protons barely held in check by the attractive nuclear force in a shallow potential well. When you push the energy of the nucleus over the edge of the potential well, you release all the electric force.
In light nuclei, you have the nuclear force dominating and particles in the nucleus are held at the bottom of a deep potential well. Pushing energetic particles past the shallow slope of the electric potential pulls them into the deep nuclear force potential well, releasing energy.
Of course they're going to try to hack it. And of course they eventually are going to succeed. And what's the business of relying on a SINGLE password 50Trexler? Stupid.
Spend more resources teaching the students the fundamentals. Computers are tools, not the fundamentals which are the raison d'etre for tools.
Much of what is called progress is just so much technological roccoco anyway.
The Schrodinger equation is fully deterministic.
It does not contain any random numbers.
To say that quantum mechanics requires
probabilities is just wrong. It is only
our attempt to describe things classically
that forces us to such nonsense.
What happens between observations is deterministic (i.e., the propagation of the wave equation is deterministic), but when you observe something, you do enter into probabilities. There is absolutely no way to predict what happens when the wave function collapses.
A significant number of CA propositions are authored by interests outside the state. Their titles have little to do with the agenda that drove them, and the groups that "support" it have names that are completely unrelated to their true aims.
I personally think they should either increase the number of signatures required, or drop it altogether.
Slashdot Mirror
Do we have to observe the Geneva conventions for US citizens? I recommend caning for starters then more severe punishment.
Or maybe on the USPTO. Mohammed, where's that IED?
You are full of non-sequiturs, misinformation, and unsupported opinions. I might ask you to take your own advice (RTFA). First, it's not the UN, second, it doesn't look closed. To quote from TFA
On the table are European proposals for some kind of international forum to discuss principles for running the internet.
The EU does not intend to scrap Icann. It would continue in its current technical role.
Instead Europe is suggesting a way of allowing countries to express their position on internet issues, though the details on how this would happen are vague.
"We have no intention to regulate the internet," said Commissioner Reding, reassuring the US that the EU was not proposing setting up a new global body.
At least I have to give you some credit for your following remark,
Perhaps it should be administered differently in light of what it has become, but this is not the path that should be taken to accomplish that.
Perhaps you have a mistaken idea of the "path" we're talking about?
That's kind of a non sequitur. We're talking about one country controlling root DNS servers. Do you think the US makes money off doing that and that other countries will thereby deprive it of some kind of investment?
Your argument makes as much sense as CERN saying they invented HTML and now the rest of the world wants to "take for free all their investment."
The internet is a commons resource now, like air and water. Most large companies world-wide depend on it for business. Your argument smacks of colonialism and I don't really see how it applies today. To be fair, the US has not abused its de facto role (so far), and I rather shudder at the prospect of a factious community trying to administer root DNS servers. I'm not really sure what the EU has in mind, but there has to be some kind of open-minded discussion. To make an analogy, suppose the state of New Jersey said it started the power transmission system and should therefore keep control of the entire US power grid, end of discussion, what would you think?
And a couple of the losers powered by Altair 8008's were reputedly swearing using 4 bit words.
How did the guy who wrote the page in your link manage to leave space in front of him without other cars going in front of him? I can't believe an interstate is one-lane.
Because you know congress wants it done for 1/20th the amount it really takes to do it.
http://www.jet.efda.org/pages/history-of-jet.html talked about "a 65% ratio of fusion power produced to total input power."
Did they really break even, i.e. 100%?
Based on a quick Google of online literature, I don't think solar cells are more efficient than stirling engines. Both have current production efficiencies of about 16% and both have theoretical maximum efficiencies of 30%.
I haven't kept up with Zeta, but as I recall the best browser for BeOS was Opera, which failed on a few sites, probably because there was no JVM other than BeKaffe, which was kind of mediocre.
It's academic whether a new program is expensive or not. The shuttles won't last much longer, and all it takes is another blow-up and we have lost much of what we saved by trying to prop up the aging fleet for a little while longer. Kind of like deciding when to junk your old car because its maintenance costs and mileage are declining.
It's premature to develop space weapons when there is no visible effort by a hostile nation to do so. By jumping the gun, we would only hasten and make worse a space-weapons race.
The same with biological weapons and chemical weapons. We're supposed to be Good Guys (TM), remember?
A lot of unpleasant stuff happens when you are in zero gravity that takes time to adjust to. For a flight of only a few minutes, I think all you'll enjoy is the view of the vomit bag you will be filling.
Dennis Ralsky et al?
- You can link them together.
- You have access to hundreds or thousands of commands in one window. No wending your way through endless menus and submenus.
I think the idea of the incompetent executive is somewhat of a myth.
Look at companies that made their fortune on innovative engineering, and were then led by bean counters, such as SGI and HP.
This act is sub-human. I'm so sorry for those who lost loved ones and who have been injured.
And thiefs make for more secure banks. Let's celebrate theft.
Not to be too far out there, but ...
... etc.
The number of seminal thinkers on planet earth at any one time has been constant in number for a while.
There are perhaps a greater number of minor innovators who build on the work of major paradigm-shifting innovators, but trailblazers have always been few.
Does mankind progress by the majority pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps, or do a few avatars make a trail for others to follow and build upon?
I think the latter.
The author does seem to show that there is a growing number of people who may be considered "dead weight". This is on several levels. In addition to the major one the article points out, let me add a few others:
- Fewer companies, percentage-wise, are thinking long term. The majority just want to please Wall Street.
- Fewer are working to pay taxes, social security
- Fewer are conversant in our non-technological heritage.
I agree that spelling and grammar are all too neglected in America, and I do sometimes cringe when I see poorly constructed posts. In such cases, a kind parenthetical correction is fine.
;).
But when a fine idea is expressed and the ONLY comment some anal retentive grammar nazi can make is about spelling or grammer, it is equally irritating. The intent is often just naked one-upmanship (if that's how you spell it
If your ONLY comment is on grammer, think again about your reply.
In heavy nuclei, you have the repulsive electrical force between the protons barely held in check by the attractive nuclear force in a shallow potential well. When you push the energy of the nucleus over the edge of the potential well, you release all the electric force. In light nuclei, you have the nuclear force dominating and particles in the nucleus are held at the bottom of a deep potential well. Pushing energetic particles past the shallow slope of the electric potential pulls them into the deep nuclear force potential well, releasing energy.
Of course they're going to try to hack it. And of course they eventually are going to succeed. And what's the business of relying on a SINGLE password 50Trexler? Stupid. Spend more resources teaching the students the fundamentals. Computers are tools, not the fundamentals which are the raison d'etre for tools. Much of what is called progress is just so much technological roccoco anyway.
What happens between observations is deterministic (i.e., the propagation of the wave equation is deterministic), but when you observe something, you do enter into probabilities. There is absolutely no way to predict what happens when the wave function collapses.
A significant number of CA propositions are authored by interests outside the state. Their titles have little to do with the agenda that drove them, and the groups that "support" it have names that are completely unrelated to their true aims. I personally think they should either increase the number of signatures required, or drop it altogether.