". . . since, in 2003, we believed that the intelligence data was correct." Please leave me out of the "we". I never believed the administration's variying excuses for going to war. And I do recall a lot of experts disputing the "facts" that all the Democrats are now saying everyone believed in.
"Copyright was developed to maintain ownership of a idea, . .." This is simply false. Copyright covers the form of expression. It does not cover an idea. Also, patents are supposed to cover a useful physical device, process, or material. Again, ideas are not supposed to be subject to "Intellectual Property".
The tablature is a derivative work. If you transcribe a song composed by someone else, to the extent that your work is creative (and it just might not be considered creative by a jury), you own the copyright on the form of the tablature you write - and the original composer cannot just photocopy your tab and publish it without your permission. But the original composer still holds the copyright on the original song - and you cannot publish your tab without their permission.
"any war where there are rules will always be decided in favor of the side which ignores the rules." So we're winning in Iraq because we're refusing to follow the Geneva Convention?
"I can finish of the insurgency in Iraq with one word: nukes" And thereby begin 1,000 new insurgencies against the US everywhere else.
"If the US Army had stopped at the German border after liberating France from Nazism they would have lost WWII."
The germans didn't have nuclear weapons. Right or wrong, the idea that China and Russia could retaliate with weapons of mass destruction was one of the main reasons the US didn't invade North Vietnam.
If I had mod points I'd use them all up for this. Star Wars was simply the most over-hyped movie ever. I remember just how overwhelming the quantity of advertising and "news" stories about it were before it even opened. I saw it on a recommendation of my brother and was totally disappointed It had improved special effects but it didn't have an interesting story, it didn't have any good science fiction element, and it didn't have anything interesting to say. Tron at least had an attempt at an interesting theme, as flawed as it was, as well as ground-breaking special effects. I never saw it in its' theatrical release, and it's by far not my favorite movie, or even favorite science fiction movie, but it was better than the incessant and boring Star Wars franchise.
Or move your operations to Europe where there aren't any software patents (like MicroSoft did to avoid royalties), and look the other way when US citizens download your software.
"If you were to watch any channel other than Fox News during the first part of the war, you would have thought that we were losing"
Uh . . . I did watch any channel other than Fox during the first part of the war, and I was never put under the impression that we were losing any battles, let alone the war.
But I saw members of the UN inspection team state that they didn't think Sadaam had wepaons of mass destruction. I was presented with ex-generals commenting that we weren't going in with enough troops to keep control, which turned out to be true. I heard people speaking against de-Baathicization, because if firing all of them it would be impossible to replace the compentent staff, and also because too many people would be out of work, desperate for money, and with plenty of time on their hands to do mischief; both of those turned out to be true. I heard comments on how we weren't prepared to protect assets like national treasures, infrastructure, and amories (which is related to the above) - also turned out to be true.
From the administration all I got was lies and misdirections about why America was starting a war and how successful it was.
Face to face interaction is cery helpful. It's easier to pick up meaning that you'd miss in written correspondence, or even phone conversation. You're more likely to ask a good question and the back and forth nature of conversation makes it more likely that ambiguities will be cleared up. There's an upside to e-mails, though - they automatically leave a written record, which can help a lot a couple of months later.
Face to face meetings are necessary, but productive? They can be productive, especially one-on-one meetings. The more people in a meeting, the less productive they tend to be. A well organized leader helps. You tend to spend a lot of time listening to things that don't affect you. Still, meetings are necessary, and you'll often hear something that no one would otherwise think of telling you that does affect your work.
Well, according to my Webster's unabridged dictionary, the etymology of encyclopedia is: "a misreading of enkýklios paideía circular (i.e., well-rounded) education", so I would say that the wiki got it right.
Sorry, but you're never going to be able to understand music theory by reading an article, anywhere. You need to hear what the theory is talking about. So learn to read music and play an instruent like the piano (if you haven't already) try sight singing, join a choir and learn to sing harmony, practice taking music dictation, in addition to (not instead of) the book learning of harmony.
Besides, having just perused the Wikipedia music harmony article it's not that's it's too hard, it's that it doesn't say anything concrete enough.
I've read (or, tried to read) some Wikipedia articles that were way over my head. But TFA lost me with it's first example of epigenetics. I never had biology past freshman high school level, but I found the quoted paragraph to be easy to understand.
Now some subjects, like fluid dynamics, are inherently hard. The fluid mechanics article includes tough math, especially if you follow the links, and you wouldn't expect most to fully understand. But that shouldn't mean you should leave the math out. Learn to live with it and read around what you don't understand, or use the resources available to learn more. The quoted bits of the Fluid Mechanics article that TFA complains about are not bad at all.
I agree that some articles can be improved by making some of the language more accessible to laymen, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. The author of TFA just comes off as spoiled by quoting understandable text and saying it's too confusing.
You can only dumb things down so far before you're no longer telling the truth.
" . . . or should we be giving them a computer that gives them the potential to learn the systems in use by a majority of the world?"
We're talking about young students here. What system will be in use by a majority of the world a few years from now? (hint: it won't be XP) In my opinion, it is almost always a mistake to teach skill in particular technologies over teaching the fundamental ideas that allow you to think on your own and adapt to changes.
It could be the power supply / transformer. If the off switch doesn't actually cut power into the transformer, it will still draw power from the incoming A/C. The transformer will have a peak efficiency somewhere around its' common load point. I know from first hand experience that some UPS', at least, use more power at no to low loads than they do at high loads.
The video maybe should be freely shareable, but legally, NBC holds the copyright to their video. Nobody holds the copyright to the debate itself. It is not the same thing, in that a transcript or recording made without involving NBC's works would not be subject to NBC copyright. (Small solace, I know)
No. We need more backlash, but direct it where it belongs. Most people are hypocrites, but most American Christians are not among the so-called " 'Christian' Right".
I work as an HVAC engineer, and I have to take into account the PCs when designing air conditioning for an office. I figure 200 to 250 watts per workstation; that is supposed to take into account average usage including everything: the PC, monitor, peripherals, task lighting, occassional printers, etc. I've been told that this is too high, but my career has spanned a lot of changes - dummy terminals, energy inefficient monitors, heavy duty PC workstations, efficient but larger monitors, LCD monitors, thin clients, etc. - so I tend to take the conservative approach and assume that it can change again to higher wattages within the lifetime of the AC system. Power consumption of devices keeps on being improved, but instead of using less power, PCs do more with the same amount of power. If your PC has a 500 watt power supply it would probably never use much more than 400 watts (you need some safety margin) and it would probably use, on average, less than half that while working hard. With modern PCs it could easily use less than 50 watts when idle.
Slashdot Mirror
". . . since, in 2003, we believed that the intelligence data was correct."
Please leave me out of the "we". I never believed the administration's variying excuses for going to war. And I do recall a lot of experts disputing the "facts" that all the Democrats are now saying everyone believed in.
"Copyright was developed to maintain ownership of a idea, . . ."
This is simply false. Copyright covers the form of expression. It does not cover an idea.
Also, patents are supposed to cover a useful physical device, process, or material. Again, ideas are not supposed to be subject to "Intellectual Property".
The tablature is a derivative work.
If you transcribe a song composed by someone else, to the extent that your work is creative (and it just might not be considered creative by a jury), you own the copyright on the form of the tablature you write - and the original composer cannot just photocopy your tab and publish it without your permission.
But the original composer still holds the copyright on the original song - and you cannot publish your tab without their permission.
"Would they"
Would you risk it?
Johnson and Nixon didn't.
"That is my point exactly."
No, you completely missed the point.
"any war where there are rules will always be decided in favor of the side which ignores the rules."
So we're winning in Iraq because we're refusing to follow the Geneva Convention?
"I can finish of the insurgency in Iraq with one word: nukes"
And thereby begin 1,000 new insurgencies against the US everywhere else.
"If the US Army had stopped at the German border after liberating France from Nazism they would have lost WWII."
The germans didn't have nuclear weapons. Right or wrong, the idea that China and Russia could retaliate with weapons of mass destruction was one of the main reasons the US didn't invade North Vietnam.
http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchArticle.action ?articleURI=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0000456
If I had mod points I'd use them all up for this.
Star Wars was simply the most over-hyped movie ever. I remember just how overwhelming the quantity of advertising and "news" stories about it were before it even opened. I saw it on a recommendation of my brother and was totally disappointed
It had improved special effects but it didn't have an interesting story, it didn't have any good science fiction element, and it didn't have anything interesting to say.
Tron at least had an attempt at an interesting theme, as flawed as it was, as well as ground-breaking special effects. I never saw it in its' theatrical release, and it's by far not my favorite movie, or even favorite science fiction movie, but it was better than the incessant and boring Star Wars franchise.
Wish they'd let me forget about Star Wars like that.
"how many professionals like working with their software in the office as much as gaming after hours?"
Work hasn't been all that fun lately, but most modern games I encounter are still less fun.
Or move your operations to Europe where there aren't any software patents (like MicroSoft did to avoid royalties), and look the other way when US citizens download your software.
Funny thing, though, the USA has officially defined the inch, pound, etc. in terms of metric measurements for years.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/laws/
"If you were to watch any channel other than Fox News during the first part of the war, you would have thought that we were losing"
Uh . . . I did watch any channel other than Fox during the first part of the war, and I was never put under the impression that we were losing any battles, let alone the war.
But I saw members of the UN inspection team state that they didn't think Sadaam had wepaons of mass destruction. I was presented with ex-generals commenting that we weren't going in with enough troops to keep control, which turned out to be true. I heard people speaking against de-Baathicization, because if firing all of them it would be impossible to replace the compentent staff, and also because too many people would be out of work, desperate for money, and with plenty of time on their hands to do mischief; both of those turned out to be true. I heard comments on how we weren't prepared to protect assets like national treasures, infrastructure, and amories (which is related to the above) - also turned out to be true.
From the administration all I got was lies and misdirections about why America was starting a war and how successful it was.
Audible Magic software is one of the tools used by the RIAA "expert" in that recent RIAA suit where the RIAA expert was knocked down:0 2206
_ lindor_070223JacobsonDepositionTranscript
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/28/2
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=umg
Nothing like relying on trade secrets and black box algorithms to make you sure that you're taking down the right files and leaving up the clean ones.
Audible Magic software is one of the tools used by the RIAA "expert" in that recent RIAA suit where the RIAA expert was knocked down:0 2206:/
_ lindor_070223JacobsonDepositionTranscript:/
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/04/28/2
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=umg
Nothing like relying on trade secrets and black box algorithms to make you sure that you're taking down the right files and leaving up the clean ones.
Face to face interaction is cery helpful. It's easier to pick up meaning that you'd miss in written correspondence, or even phone conversation. You're more likely to ask a good question and the back and forth nature of conversation makes it more likely that ambiguities will be cleared up. There's an upside to e-mails, though - they automatically leave a written record, which can help a lot a couple of months later.
Face to face meetings are necessary, but productive? They can be productive, especially one-on-one meetings. The more people in a meeting, the less productive they tend to be. A well organized leader helps. You tend to spend a lot of time listening to things that don't affect you. Still, meetings are necessary, and you'll often hear something that no one would otherwise think of telling you that does affect your work.
Well, according to my Webster's unabridged dictionary, the etymology of encyclopedia is: "a misreading of enkýklios paideía circular (i.e., well-rounded) education", so I would say that the wiki got it right.
Sorry, but you're never going to be able to understand music theory by reading an article, anywhere.
You need to hear what the theory is talking about. So learn to read music and play an instruent like the piano (if you haven't already) try sight singing, join a choir and learn to sing harmony, practice taking music dictation, in addition to (not instead of) the book learning of harmony.
Besides, having just perused the Wikipedia music harmony article it's not that's it's too hard, it's that it doesn't say anything concrete enough.
I think the submitted article has got it wrong.
I've read (or, tried to read) some Wikipedia articles that were way over my head. But TFA lost me with it's first example of epigenetics. I never had biology past freshman high school level, but I found the quoted paragraph to be easy to understand.
Now some subjects, like fluid dynamics, are inherently hard. The fluid mechanics article includes tough math, especially if you follow the links, and you wouldn't expect most to fully understand. But that shouldn't mean you should leave the math out. Learn to live with it and read around what you don't understand, or use the resources available to learn more. The quoted bits of the Fluid Mechanics article that TFA complains about are not bad at all.
I agree that some articles can be improved by making some of the language more accessible to laymen, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. The author of TFA just comes off as spoiled by quoting understandable text and saying it's too confusing.
You can only dumb things down so far before you're no longer telling the truth.
" . . . or should we be giving them a computer that gives them the potential to learn the systems in use by a majority of the world?"
We're talking about young students here. What system will be in use by a majority of the world a few years from now? (hint: it won't be XP)
In my opinion, it is almost always a mistake to teach skill in particular technologies over teaching the fundamental ideas that allow you to think on your own and adapt to changes.
It could be the power supply / transformer. If the off switch doesn't actually cut power into the transformer, it will still draw power from the incoming A/C. The transformer will have a peak efficiency somewhere around its' common load point.
I know from first hand experience that some UPS', at least, use more power at no to low loads than they do at high loads.
The video maybe should be freely shareable, but legally, NBC holds the copyright to their video. Nobody holds the copyright to the debate itself.
It is not the same thing, in that a transcript or recording made without involving NBC's works would not be subject to NBC copyright. (Small solace, I know)
No.
We need more backlash, but direct it where it belongs.
Most people are hypocrites,
but most American Christians are not among the so-called " 'Christian' Right".
I work as an HVAC engineer, and I have to take into account the PCs when designing air conditioning for an office. I figure 200 to 250 watts per workstation; that is supposed to take into account average usage including everything: the PC, monitor, peripherals, task lighting, occassional printers, etc. I've been told that this is too high, but my career has spanned a lot of changes - dummy terminals, energy inefficient monitors, heavy duty PC workstations, efficient but larger monitors, LCD monitors, thin clients, etc. - so I tend to take the conservative approach and assume that it can change again to higher wattages within the lifetime of the AC system. Power consumption of devices keeps on being improved, but instead of using less power, PCs do more with the same amount of power. If your PC has a 500 watt power supply it would probably never use much more than 400 watts (you need some safety margin) and it would probably use, on average, less than half that while working hard. With modern PCs it could easily use less than 50 watts when idle.