The Missile Defense Agency article does sound much more impressive. I am surprised to find that the Reuters rehash of the press release was so sloppy. I'd really like to see an independent journalist's description of the events though.
Nothing was destroyed or shot down and the laser weapon was not fired.
FTFA:
The plane's battle management system issued engagement and target location instructions to the laser's fire control system, which tracked the target and fired a test laser at the missile. Instruments on the missile verified the system had hit its mark, Boeing said.
For all we know at this point the "Battle Management System" is a 2nd lieutenant with binoculars and the "Test Laser" is a Private with a laser pointer. Odds are it's better than that, but the last time I heard about this laser system it was still significantly too heavy (with power source) to mount in a 747 and the best firing they had performed was with it stationary on the ground shooting at a stationary dummy target 10 feet away.
I like it more than the "missile defense shield", but only marginally.
Actually, most studies fail to prove this. Most of the studies I've seen on GMO's have shown that GM crops that have been designed to be used with insecticides/pesticides may have some negative effects. What most fail to look into is how the crop was grown, while the most offensive abuse how the plant is grown. Is it the GM that is effecting the health of those that ate it, or that the "researchers" kept it saturated with excessive pesticide/herbicide for the duration of its growth?
There is good reason to take care in what you eat, and good reasons to be sceptical of GM crops, but that study last week, and many like it, are an insult to scientific research.
This isn't about a recording of a lecture that gets posted, this is about copyright protected videos that a professor shows during a lecture being posted.
So under this threat, a professor that shows "Steamboat Willy" in a class can not post "Steamboat Willy" onto the more accessible distribution system.
Now, if it is true that the PTO is incapable of rotating a piece of paper, that is sad news indeed. BUT, usually when someone is accused of faxing a document "UPSIDE-DOWN" it means that they have placed the paper with the content side facing away from the scanner. Meaning the fax that comes through on the other side is mostly just blank sheets.
With out the full story here, it sure seems like the sender is just bragging about his inability to use a fax machine...
This isn't about some anti-Linux conspiracy, it's about conflicting business interests.
Google has made modifications to make their software work. Those modifications can not be integrated as is with the kernel. Cleaning up their open source code can be done, but their internal closed code would likely also need modifications to account for that cleanup. So for Google, merging their code would likely be expensive and require extensive testing and a large download and upgrade system for all of the live phones.
On the other hand, companies that are developing drivers and software that depend on the new kernel are now hosed because the kernel is no longer exposed as part of the Linux kernel. So they have to deal directly with Google for any changes to their kernel, and if they also want to release their products for other Linux platforms, they have to re-engineer much of the os-interaction functionality. Obviously a pricey situation for them.
If Google updates their code to get it into the kernel, it makes it cheaper and easier for other developers to work it, but it costs them money. If they don't then it costs the developers more money.
We're not talking about a 15 micron thick piece of glass being hit by road debris. We're talking about a 15 micron thick piece of glass that is bonded to steal. So shattering is not likely going to be an issue. Chipping and tearing maybe, but it sounds like some pretty cool stuff.
No more clear coats, no more waxing, no more "rubberized under coating". If it is cheap, and light enough, you could coat every body panel and frame member with the stuff, virtually guarantying a rust proof existence.
This system has been failing since at least the late 90's (That's when I first started tracking it in the Marine Corps). The few successes it has had have been predefined configurations where they had a known flight path and pre-set intercept path. The entire thing is staged. And what's worse is that it fails even the majority of these staged intercepts.
People balked when Obama talked about dropping the missile shield in eastern Europe but honestly, these missile defense systems are a joke. They would do squat to improve our security and are costing us billion of dollars as they feed the military complex industry.
Scrap the system IMO, use the money to help offset the deficit, and the good will of the Russians to compel Iran to drop its uranium refineries.
For January this year most of the guys in IT grew full beards. Much to the dismay of our wifes and girl friends, it was a funny way to bond with our coworkers over the month.
We also have a number of other cross-IT social activities, some of us play WoW together, others are on bowling, soccer, or volley ball leagues together, and we even have a few RPGers. Not everyone bonds with everyone, but we've got enough cross chatter that the teams are meshing really well. It is by far one of the best social atmospheres I've worked in thus far in my career.
C# is on its third version (3), although the runtime is on its fifth (3.5).
.Net is still on it's second run time (2.0), but the 5th library version. The easiest way to see this is to go to an IIS server that has.Net 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, and 3.5 installed, open up the configuration for a web site and look for the application settings. Even though you have all 5 versions of.Net installed, the only two options IIS will give you is for the 1.0 and 2.0.Net engines.
The fact that the 2.0 engine has been robust enough to handle all of the additions in features from 2.0 on is quite an impressive feat IMO.
Silverlight, however, is available cross-platform via Moonlight.
Silverlight is available cross-platform with out moonlight as well, just not on many platforms;)
Funny, this very discussion was on NPR this morning. The guests were a journalist and a producer and they were talking about the current state of popular "news" networks. The specifically harped on NBC and FOX. These networks are getting great viewership not because they are presenting the news, but because that have celebrities presenting opinions. What you wind up with is the greatest success for capitalism (the networks produce a program that viewers want to watch) but the worst failure for information distribution (as all that is getting repeated is opinion, not fact).
So I'm all for the "get the news you want" angle, so long as it is news we are talking about. News that is factually based and composed by journalist. Not opinion pieces and partisan blowhards repeating the talking points that will help their preferred candidate/downer.
I don't feel comfortable saying exactly what I made, but when I got out of the Marine Corps, with 4 years experience developing software and no degree, I was making more than that report's bottom end. And that was just after the.Com bust in a relatively small mid-west city.
A developer I worked with while I was in the MC, back in Washington DC was a consultant who's pay rate was $125k a year. Again, this was post.com bust. And most of the other folks I know who are working in DC, LA, or NY are also seeing much higher pay rates. Then again, a crappy apartment in NYC costs more than a nice house in Wisconsin.
There is money to be made in business software development, but that money is not in "programming". The way to make big money as a developer in the business world is to become a domain expert on what ever it is your users do. Know everything your users do and you'll write software significantly better than the best cowboy coder in world who spends his days hiding from the users.
Know your users, communicate with them, find out the ins and outs of their jobs. Look for ways that you can help them, more than just software, the full six sigma process improvement cycle. If you can do that, you'll be exceptionally well payed for your services. That's why I prefer the title "Solutions Developer" over "Programmer".
I'd say it would be more akin to having to make the cop look at every single interaction that ever occurs and giving them his blessing. As opposed to the cop investigating abuses and detaining the violators.
I corrected his flawed analogy, how is that trolling? Anyone who is still under the misunderstanding that this is about DOWNLOADING songs needs to be corrected. This is about UPLOADING songs.
I strongly disagree with the heft of the fine, but not to the point that I am willing to pander incorrect information to people. Yes, the fine for UPLOADING songs in this case is very likely excessive. I fail to see how clarifying that mistake is a trolling act.
In response to the AC about where I came up with the number 3,000, the GGP posted this:
The wholesale price of 24 songs is $16.80. $54,000 is over 3,000 times the maximum possible damages.
So IF a person were to distribute 3000 CDs of protected content, the maximum possible damages would be $54,000. So IF the defendant UPLOADED 3,000 albums worth of music, the maximum possible damages would also be $54,000.
What sort of punishment would you get is you printed off 3000 CDs of copy right protected music, and gave them away for free with out the permission of the copy right holders?
Straw man argument. Are you suggesting that libelous ads or slander are somehow now protected because they are bought/run by a labor union or group of people that have formed a company? How does free (non-libelous, non-fraudulant) speech threaten democracy? I can, though, think of a lot of ways that silencing speech does that.
I am making 2 arguments:
1) The Constitution applies to the government and people of this country (and in theory at least, all people). Corporations are not a person, and thus receive no such guarantees. Or do you feel that every corporation should be allow to vote as well?
2) The ability of a corporation to pool it's resources to acquire a dominant share of political advertising can sway the opinion of the people based solely on the mass of their communications. It is the same reason that there is the on-going campaign finance reform bill. The goal is to get big money interest groups out of election campaign funding.
I would also take offense at the assertion that political advertisement are non-libelous nor fraudulent. Politicians and those groups that support them have long been able to flirt with the edge of illegal speech knowing that if their opponent were to sue them for libel, slander, or defamation that the press would eat them alive. The old LBJ quote, "I know that, but I want to hear the SOB deny it."
IF political advertisements were limited to explicitly provable truths, and whole truths, AND the people of a corporation could be held criminally liable for the transgressions of that corporation, then sure, have at. But that is not the reality of the situation.
This ruling effectively opens the door for more big money interests to get in the door. How long until our representatives start wearing patches to show who funds them, like race car drivers? Although, I would get a chuckle out of hearing the speaker of the house introducing "Senator John Viagra Boehner" and "Senator Harry Walmart Reid"
The constitution doesn't give you, or a business formed by you and a friend, any rights. The constitution is there to limit the government's ability to take those rights away. Being able to buy a newspaper advertisement or broadcast an advertisement isn't something that the goverment should be able to prevent you (or the company you've formed) from doing. Likewise for labor unions, advocacy groups, churches, scouting troops, bowling leagues, open source code projects, or anyone else.
If your purchasing of that advertisement threatens the fundamentals of democracy, than it is absolutely the purview of the government to limit such purchases.
Slashdot Mirror
The Missile Defense Agency article does sound much more impressive. I am surprised to find that the Reuters rehash of the press release was so sloppy. I'd really like to see an independent journalist's description of the events though.
-Rick
Nothing was destroyed or shot down and the laser weapon was not fired.
FTFA:
The plane's battle management system issued engagement and target location instructions to the laser's fire control system, which tracked the target and fired a test laser at the missile. Instruments on the missile verified the system had hit its mark, Boeing said.
For all we know at this point the "Battle Management System" is a 2nd lieutenant with binoculars and the "Test Laser" is a Private with a laser pointer. Odds are it's better than that, but the last time I heard about this laser system it was still significantly too heavy (with power source) to mount in a 747 and the best firing they had performed was with it stationary on the ground shooting at a stationary dummy target 10 feet away.
I like it more than the "missile defense shield", but only marginally.
-Rick
So because politicians in both of the major US parties agree that something is good, it is there for irrefutably good?
Because other people have it worse than us means that we shouldn't fight against oppression in our own country?
Soap, Ballot, Jury, Ammo. The four boxes of freedom. You sir, are standing right next to the GP's 1st box.
-Rick
Actually, most studies fail to prove this. Most of the studies I've seen on GMO's have shown that GM crops that have been designed to be used with insecticides/pesticides may have some negative effects. What most fail to look into is how the crop was grown, while the most offensive abuse how the plant is grown. Is it the GM that is effecting the health of those that ate it, or that the "researchers" kept it saturated with excessive pesticide/herbicide for the duration of its growth?
There is good reason to take care in what you eat, and good reasons to be sceptical of GM crops, but that study last week, and many like it, are an insult to scientific research.
-Rick
This isn't about a recording of a lecture that gets posted, this is about copyright protected videos that a professor shows during a lecture being posted.
So under this threat, a professor that shows "Steamboat Willy" in a class can not post "Steamboat Willy" onto the more accessible distribution system.
-Rick
Now, if it is true that the PTO is incapable of rotating a piece of paper, that is sad news indeed. BUT, usually when someone is accused of faxing a document "UPSIDE-DOWN" it means that they have placed the paper with the content side facing away from the scanner. Meaning the fax that comes through on the other side is mostly just blank sheets.
With out the full story here, it sure seems like the sender is just bragging about his inability to use a fax machine...
-Rick
This isn't about some anti-Linux conspiracy, it's about conflicting business interests.
Google has made modifications to make their software work. Those modifications can not be integrated as is with the kernel. Cleaning up their open source code can be done, but their internal closed code would likely also need modifications to account for that cleanup. So for Google, merging their code would likely be expensive and require extensive testing and a large download and upgrade system for all of the live phones.
On the other hand, companies that are developing drivers and software that depend on the new kernel are now hosed because the kernel is no longer exposed as part of the Linux kernel. So they have to deal directly with Google for any changes to their kernel, and if they also want to release their products for other Linux platforms, they have to re-engineer much of the os-interaction functionality. Obviously a pricey situation for them.
If Google updates their code to get it into the kernel, it makes it cheaper and easier for other developers to work it, but it costs them money. If they don't then it costs the developers more money.
-Rick
We're not talking about a 15 micron thick piece of glass being hit by road debris. We're talking about a 15 micron thick piece of glass that is bonded to steal. So shattering is not likely going to be an issue. Chipping and tearing maybe, but it sounds like some pretty cool stuff.
-Rick
Forget your windshield, think YOUR ENTIRE CAR!
No more clear coats, no more waxing, no more "rubberized under coating". If it is cheap, and light enough, you could coat every body panel and frame member with the stuff, virtually guarantying a rust proof existence.
-Rick
This system has been failing since at least the late 90's (That's when I first started tracking it in the Marine Corps). The few successes it has had have been predefined configurations where they had a known flight path and pre-set intercept path. The entire thing is staged. And what's worse is that it fails even the majority of these staged intercepts.
People balked when Obama talked about dropping the missile shield in eastern Europe but honestly, these missile defense systems are a joke. They would do squat to improve our security and are costing us billion of dollars as they feed the military complex industry.
Scrap the system IMO, use the money to help offset the deficit, and the good will of the Russians to compel Iran to drop its uranium refineries.
-Rick
For January this year most of the guys in IT grew full beards. Much to the dismay of our wifes and girl friends, it was a funny way to bond with our coworkers over the month.
We also have a number of other cross-IT social activities, some of us play WoW together, others are on bowling, soccer, or volley ball leagues together, and we even have a few RPGers. Not everyone bonds with everyone, but we've got enough cross chatter that the teams are meshing really well. It is by far one of the best social atmospheres I've worked in thus far in my career.
-Rick
C# is on its third version (3), although the runtime is on its fifth (3.5).
.Net is still on it's second run time (2.0), but the 5th library version. The easiest way to see this is to go to an IIS server that has .Net 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, 3.0, and 3.5 installed, open up the configuration for a web site and look for the application settings. Even though you have all 5 versions of .Net installed, the only two options IIS will give you is for the 1.0 and 2.0 .Net engines.
The fact that the 2.0 engine has been robust enough to handle all of the additions in features from 2.0 on is quite an impressive feat IMO.
Silverlight, however, is available cross-platform via Moonlight.
Silverlight is available cross-platform with out moonlight as well, just not on many platforms ;)
-Rick
Funny, this very discussion was on NPR this morning. The guests were a journalist and a producer and they were talking about the current state of popular "news" networks. The specifically harped on NBC and FOX. These networks are getting great viewership not because they are presenting the news, but because that have celebrities presenting opinions. What you wind up with is the greatest success for capitalism (the networks produce a program that viewers want to watch) but the worst failure for information distribution (as all that is getting repeated is opinion, not fact).
So I'm all for the "get the news you want" angle, so long as it is news we are talking about. News that is factually based and composed by journalist. Not opinion pieces and partisan blowhards repeating the talking points that will help their preferred candidate/downer.
-Rick
Double the viewership!
Woowho!! 70 subscribers!
-Rick
The report must be on the low side.
I don't feel comfortable saying exactly what I made, but when I got out of the Marine Corps, with 4 years experience developing software and no degree, I was making more than that report's bottom end. And that was just after the .Com bust in a relatively small mid-west city.
A developer I worked with while I was in the MC, back in Washington DC was a consultant who's pay rate was $125k a year. Again, this was post .com bust. And most of the other folks I know who are working in DC, LA, or NY are also seeing much higher pay rates. Then again, a crappy apartment in NYC costs more than a nice house in Wisconsin.
There is money to be made in business software development, but that money is not in "programming". The way to make big money as a developer in the business world is to become a domain expert on what ever it is your users do. Know everything your users do and you'll write software significantly better than the best cowboy coder in world who spends his days hiding from the users.
Know your users, communicate with them, find out the ins and outs of their jobs. Look for ways that you can help them, more than just software, the full six sigma process improvement cycle. If you can do that, you'll be exceptionally well payed for your services. That's why I prefer the title "Solutions Developer" over "Programmer".
-Rick
Because theft is a CRIME.
Infringement is a TORT.
-Rick
I'd say it would be more akin to having to make the cop look at every single interaction that ever occurs and giving them his blessing. As opposed to the cop investigating abuses and detaining the violators.
-Rick
Ahh the joys of civil court. They don't have to prove that she uploaded the music, just that it is the most likely explanation.
-Rick
I corrected his flawed analogy, how is that trolling? Anyone who is still under the misunderstanding that this is about DOWNLOADING songs needs to be corrected. This is about UPLOADING songs.
I strongly disagree with the heft of the fine, but not to the point that I am willing to pander incorrect information to people. Yes, the fine for UPLOADING songs in this case is very likely excessive. I fail to see how clarifying that mistake is a trolling act.
In response to the AC about where I came up with the number 3,000, the GGP posted this:
The wholesale price of 24 songs is $16.80. $54,000 is over 3,000 times the maximum possible damages.
So IF a person were to distribute 3000 CDs of protected content, the maximum possible damages would be $54,000. So IF the defendant UPLOADED 3,000 albums worth of music, the maximum possible damages would also be $54,000.
-Rick
It's not the downloading, it's the uploading.
The correct analogy would be:
What sort of punishment would you get is you printed off 3000 CDs of copy right protected music, and gave them away for free with out the permission of the copy right holders?
-Rick
But my understanding is that this is being set up as a violation of the CANSPAM act, not as a new law.
So privatized whois is still perfectly legal, unless you are using it to hide the owner of a spamming operation.
-Rick
Straw man argument. Are you suggesting that libelous ads or slander are somehow now protected because they are bought/run by a labor union or group of people that have formed a company? How does free (non-libelous, non-fraudulant) speech threaten democracy? I can, though, think of a lot of ways that silencing speech does that.
I am making 2 arguments:
1) The Constitution applies to the government and people of this country (and in theory at least, all people). Corporations are not a person, and thus receive no such guarantees. Or do you feel that every corporation should be allow to vote as well?
2) The ability of a corporation to pool it's resources to acquire a dominant share of political advertising can sway the opinion of the people based solely on the mass of their communications. It is the same reason that there is the on-going campaign finance reform bill. The goal is to get big money interest groups out of election campaign funding.
I would also take offense at the assertion that political advertisement are non-libelous nor fraudulent. Politicians and those groups that support them have long been able to flirt with the edge of illegal speech knowing that if their opponent were to sue them for libel, slander, or defamation that the press would eat them alive. The old LBJ quote, "I know that, but I want to hear the SOB deny it."
IF political advertisements were limited to explicitly provable truths, and whole truths, AND the people of a corporation could be held criminally liable for the transgressions of that corporation, then sure, have at. But that is not the reality of the situation.
This ruling effectively opens the door for more big money interests to get in the door. How long until our representatives start wearing patches to show who funds them, like race car drivers? Although, I would get a chuckle out of hearing the speaker of the house introducing "Senator John Viagra Boehner" and "Senator Harry Walmart Reid"
-Rick
Except for the one right here: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS298US298&q=1513+University+Ave+Madison,+WI+53706&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=1513+University+Ave,+Madison,+WI+53706&gl=us&ei=LcJYS7m2K4y6Nt2Y0MkE&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&ct=image&resnum=1&ved=0CAkQ8gEwAA
-Rick
The constitution doesn't give you, or a business formed by you and a friend, any rights. The constitution is there to limit the government's ability to take those rights away. Being able to buy a newspaper advertisement or broadcast an advertisement isn't something that the goverment should be able to prevent you (or the company you've formed) from doing. Likewise for labor unions, advocacy groups, churches, scouting troops, bowling leagues, open source code projects, or anyone else.
If your purchasing of that advertisement threatens the fundamentals of democracy, than it is absolutely the purview of the government to limit such purchases.
-Rick
Baidu (the leader in the Chinese market) stock went up over 20% today on the news.
Hmm, I'm not sure if that's an exaggeration or if maybe I'm looking at bad data, but I'm seeing a ~2% bumb, not a 20% bump.
-Rick