Firstly, I agree with you; the target audience is one major reason that advertisement is such a pain.
Secondly, although I agree with your comment about Windows, that's not relevant.
Thirdly, one should always insult another's intelligence in at least *vaguely* correct language.
He was inquiring with regard to a/temperature range,/ not a geometrical dimension. Additionally, yes, that is based on no knowledge whatsoever: half a kilometer would be classified as a asteroid.
2600K isn't even CLOSE to hot enough to "vaporize" rock. The binding energies of the bonds are measured in eV or tens of eV; 2600K * k_B isn't even a quarter of an eV. Quartz doesn't even melt until ~1600K. Think about it for just a second - if it was hot enough to vaporize rock, what would be happening to the planet's surface over time?
...stop trying to invade IE's turf and just convince people to use another browser for real. Moreover, at this point, anyone who hasn't switched probably isn't going to because one has to be either very ignorant of browsers or very dependent on an MS-specific feature to keep using that PoS.
In the meantime, it's still better to adjust "non-lethal" weapons to the "dangerous" end of the spectrum (to get the 250-pound meth addict) than to shun them and revert to conventionally lethal weapons like firearms.
The current definition is not fine, but neither is the proposed definition. The bit about "logical argument and theory-building" is probably bad to include. The theory-building part may be acceptable when taken in the scientific meaning and not the lay connotation, but "logical argument" invalidates the definition. Logical argument can be applied to philosophy, religion, morality, and none of these things are science. Science is defined by experimentation and observation. What does not use these processes, or uses them in part but does not apply them to all its investigation, is not science. Without this distinction, philosophy, religion, etc. could be considered science. Science is one of the most difficult concepts to define, and its definition, as seen here, has been hotly contested. We ought not try to develop any more complex definition for it than simply the requirement of these two criteria, because we will likely compromise our efforts.
OSS has a wonderful resistance to lawsuits in redundancy - multiple items developed independently make it such that it is unlikely that ALL open-source solutions to an issue be susceptible to any given suit. Furthermore, the incomparable ingenuity and swiftness of the open-source community mean that any code found to be in violation has a relatively high probability of being quickly changed (one reason that SCO was so reluctant to identify the specific Linux source "in violation of" their copyright).
Also, should the government adopt OSS, it can always shrewdly deny software patents it believes might lead to legitimate suits against it.
Of course, as was pointed out by others above, it is doubtful that the government would adopt OSS in the forseeable future because... well... do any of us doubt that Micro$oft has the money to buy, among other things, our responsible civic representatives?
Would not any perfectly random number have to have subsequences of digits with imperfect, variant randomness? Otherwise, at any point, its randomness could be predicted infallibly, making its randomness, well, unrandom. Therefore, is this not honestly a confirmation of pi's randomness?
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, I agree with you; the target audience is one major reason that advertisement is such a pain. Secondly, although I agree with your comment about Windows, that's not relevant. Thirdly, one should always insult another's intelligence in at least *vaguely* correct language.
He was inquiring with regard to a /temperature range,/ not a geometrical dimension. Additionally, yes, that is based on no knowledge whatsoever: half a kilometer would be classified as a asteroid.
2600K isn't even CLOSE to hot enough to "vaporize" rock. The binding energies of the bonds are measured in eV or tens of eV; 2600K * k_B isn't even a quarter of an eV. Quartz doesn't even melt until ~1600K. Think about it for just a second - if it was hot enough to vaporize rock, what would be happening to the planet's surface over time?
That's just a matter of training responsible law enforcement.
...stop trying to invade IE's turf and just convince people to use another browser for real. Moreover, at this point, anyone who hasn't switched probably isn't going to because one has to be either very ignorant of browsers or very dependent on an MS-specific feature to keep using that PoS.
In the meantime, it's still better to adjust "non-lethal" weapons to the "dangerous" end of the spectrum (to get the 250-pound meth addict) than to shun them and revert to conventionally lethal weapons like firearms.
The current definition is not fine, but neither is the proposed definition. The bit about "logical argument and theory-building" is probably bad to include. The theory-building part may be acceptable when taken in the scientific meaning and not the lay connotation, but "logical argument" invalidates the definition. Logical argument can be applied to philosophy, religion, morality, and none of these things are science. Science is defined by experimentation and observation. What does not use these processes, or uses them in part but does not apply them to all its investigation, is not science. Without this distinction, philosophy, religion, etc. could be considered science. Science is one of the most difficult concepts to define, and its definition, as seen here, has been hotly contested. We ought not try to develop any more complex definition for it than simply the requirement of these two criteria, because we will likely compromise our efforts.
OSS has a wonderful resistance to lawsuits in redundancy - multiple items developed independently make it such that it is unlikely that ALL open-source solutions to an issue be susceptible to any given suit. Furthermore, the incomparable ingenuity and swiftness of the open-source community mean that any code found to be in violation has a relatively high probability of being quickly changed (one reason that SCO was so reluctant to identify the specific Linux source "in violation of" their copyright).
Also, should the government adopt OSS, it can always shrewdly deny software patents it believes might lead to legitimate suits against it.
Of course, as was pointed out by others above, it is doubtful that the government would adopt OSS in the forseeable future because... well... do any of us doubt that Micro$oft has the money to buy, among other things, our responsible civic representatives?
Would not any perfectly random number have to have subsequences of digits with imperfect, variant randomness? Otherwise, at any point, its randomness could be predicted infallibly, making its randomness, well, unrandom. Therefore, is this not honestly a confirmation of pi's randomness?