That's exactly what they are proposing. Yes, the gradient is too small to be much use- but if these chips are cheap enough (say, $5), and make your laptop batteries last 5-10% longer and run slightly cooler, it will be worth putting them in. Supposedly they can be easily mass-produced, but they need to be very cheap to be worth using.
The problem is that converting heat energy directly into electricity violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, not unlike perpetual motion machines. Thus anyone claiming that they can convert heat into electricity is lying, stupid, or discovering new laws of the universe. What this device does is convert heat differentials into electricity- similar to a steam generator, but without the moving parts. In order to make electricity it needs something hot on one side of it and something (relatively) cold on the other. It makes electricity while heat flows through it.
This does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. What it does is turn a heat differential (i.e. two objects of different temperatures) into a source of electricity as heat flows between them. Its purpose is to make systems more efficient- for instance, your laptop produces a lot of waste heat, and if we could recapture some of that lost energy it would improve your laptop's battery life. It also has the reverse effect of pumping heat (like an air conditioner) when electricity is applied to it.
According to Wikipedia, Mark Cuban was a software salesman who became rich through selling his company. He's a libertarian and objectivist. He's not a moron, and certainly not a suit. I may disagree with his attack on Google here, but that doesn't mean I think he's stupid.
Hydrogen will always take more energy to produce than it generates. Thus, Hydrogen might become a better sorce of stored energy (and replace gasoline) but it can never be used for power plants. Solar does have the potential to eliminate the need for power companies, though.
Seriously, though, Scientology has a long history of suing people who talk about Scientology for copyright infringement. "You're showing people our secret dogma? How dare you distribute our papers without our consent!" Xenu.net and Wikipedia have lots of information on Scientology now. (Disclaimer- Xenu.net is strictly anti-Scientology. Wikipedia has mostly facts, which, as we know, have a decidedly anti-Scientological basis).
Microsoft appears to be making a strategic alliance with Novell. So what. It's unlikely MS will use this to try to crush competing Linux distros- there is no way they would succeed, and we would all boycott MS AND Novell if they tried something stupid and evil like that. See the SCO vs. IBM case for what happened last time MS tried to destroy Linux- we'd all ignore MS's fud, and they would lose a lot of money in court.
Also, Novell's code is under the GPL. This means that anything Microsoft lets Novell do can be used by anyone else. Thus, MS can't use this to make a 'MS only' version of Linux. In fact, thanks to the GPL, anything Microsoft does to help Novell can help the community as a whole.
Microsoft is not the Devil. Everything they touch is not automatically unclean and corrupted. The worst MS could do is help Novell create a Linux distro that is the standard by which other distros are judged. I know many/.ers are afraid of that- but believe me, there are bigger things to worry about. You should use the OS that best suits your needs- be it Ubuntu, Debian, SuSe, Windows, or OSX.
How can math that yields practical results not be pratical mathematics? Isn't that the difference between pratical and theorectical- practical math has real-world benefits, while theorectical math might have real-world benefits at some uncertain point in the future?
The foundations of computer science are discrete mathematics, logic, and binary arithmetic- none of which are esoteric. Certainly if you 'Dig deep enough into the foundations of mathematics underlying CS and you hit metamathematics and finally philosophy in the foundational sense'- but I will give you a hint and tell you that applies to ALL MATHEMATICS. That's like you saying 'Addition looks simple and practical, but once you really get into it, you realize that it is very deep stuff- intuitionistic mathematics vs platonistic mathematics, category theory vs. set theory, etc. '
I realize that you are a philosophy major, and thus making things as complicated as possible is part of what you do. However, philosophy majors also should know basic logic, so I present you this fine proof explaining why you should consider Computer Science practical mathematics.
Computer Science is necessary for well-functioning operating systems and programs. Since you use a computer to post on slashdot, operating systems and programs have practical value to you. Thus, we establish that CS has practical applications in your life. Since you are a Math/CS/Philosophy major, you are aware that CS is a branch of mathematics. We have also established that computer science is a form of mathematics.
Thus, since Computer Science is both practical to you and mathematics, you should consider it practical mathematics. Q.E.D.
I'm a math major myself, but feel the need to warn you that CS is, in fact, practical mathematics. Much of the logic and discrete mathematics (such as boolean algebra) that make up computer science were invented long before computers by DeMorgan, Babbage, and others. Now, however, we actually use it- and it, in fact, has everything to do with anything you can sit in front of, type into, click on, or reboot. The fact that the end user doesn't need to know how it works is unimportant. It's like saying that civil engineering has nothing to do with buildings, bridges, or roads- after all, the people driving on a road or using a building don't need to know civil engineering. Yes, a network admin is not likely to be a computer scientist- but the equipment and software he uses exists because of Math/CS people.
Subsidies mentioned there also mention 'tax concessions' as a form of subsidy. Besides, economically there is minimal difference between me sending you a check for $1000 (tax free) and reducing the taxes you owe me by $1000.
But this does not give tax breaks, so your point is moot. Empty titles (especially ones 10 years after the movie has been made) do next to nothing to promote certain films. Money does.
In economics, a subsidy is generally a monetary grant given by a government to lower the price faced by producers or consumers of a good, generally because it is considered to be in the public interest. The term subsidy may also refer to assistance granted by others, such as individuals or non-government institutions, although this is more commonly described as charity. A subsidy normally exemplifies the opposite of a tax, but can also be given using a reduction of the tax burden. These kinds of subsidies are generally called tax expenditures or tax breaks.
In some cultures, figuring out what a word means occurs before "correcting" someone's mistake. Slashdot has never been one of thsoe cultures.
But not all video games would receive support. Funds would go only to those that have creative input from France and are deemed to have artistic merit.
"Video game characters will not be required to wear a beret and carry a liter of wine under their arm," Mr. Donnedieu de Vabres said. "But we do need to protect what is different in video games produced by each nation."
So there will be a government commitee deciding which games get nifty tax breaks and which don't. I am curious if the same is true for movies as well- is there a comittee in France that decides whether a movie is a cultural film or not? Which books are 'art' or not?
This would result in more games focused on being 'artsy' -whatever that means- and less focused on being appealing to people who actually play the games.
Are you sure of that? They have mass-murdered other religious groups, such as the Falung Gong, Tibetan Buddists, and Christians. If they haven't been killing off Muslims or putting them in concentration camps, it is only because there aren't enough of them in China to be worth the effort.
Most people don't feel the need to update unless they see things they need. There is no way people would update to IE 7 unless forced- just like there is no way people will update to Vista until they are forced to.
I did check IE 7 out yesterday- we use IE for internal browsing at work, and my boss wanted me to make sure the new version worked properly. (Web browsing, of course, is done with Firefox). It definitely looks and feels better than IE 6, and they have taken measures to improve security (whether they work or not remains to be seen). As usual, Microsoft makes great improvements to their products as soon as they get competition. That's what capitalism is all about.
This is very true- look at the dollar menu that McDonald's has. The profits they make off most of the items on the dollar menu are minimal- I've even heard that they lose money on every Big N'Tasty made. However, the soda is something like 90 cents profit out of a dollar. So as long as they sell a $1 soda for every couple Big N'Tasties, they make a decent profit.
It means that they are less likely to impose onerous restrictions on games being made. I have no problems with a game like GTAIII not being sold to minors, similar to R and NC-17 movies. I do have problems with Congress passing additional laws that would, say, destroy the ESRB and replace it with a new board of Congress-appointed stooges.
The more people who play video games the better off gamers will be, because there is more money that goes to the games developers (and therefore more encouragement for people to create games). This is especially true of the older people- not only do they have more money, they have more influence. The idiots in congress are less likely to screw over an industry that has wide public support. As long as congress thinks games are only for people under 20, they will happily listen to people like Jack Thompson- after all, non-voters only matter if you can get the voters to 'think of the children' and support your legislation.
Interesting idea, but totally pointless. There is no incentive to be in the "patenting" group. Just like there is no incentive to be on a PvP server except the excitement of killing and being killed. Since respawing is much more painful in real life, people won't do it.
You might think that people would want to be in the patenting group so they have access to other people's ideas, but once word got out about a patent, anyone who wasn't in the group could use it at no cost. If I paid you to use your patent, nothing stops me from letting other (non PvP) companies know about the idea for a fee. Not to mention that if I sold a product with a patented idea, other companies could see what I did and use it for free.
Your idea is the death of patents. If that's what you are going for, suggest banning them outright- it would be simpler.
The Semen washer doesn't sound like a bad job either- You aren't exposed to toxins during the course of your work, all you have is social stigma. The other job that isn't that bad (from personal experience) is corpse cleaner. We used Carrion Beetles (this was at a Zoo, the Beetles were an exhibit) to clean the corpses for us- basically we just placed the corpse in a beetle tank, the Beetles would clear the flesh off the corpse in days, and then we could take the skeleton if we wanted it. It's not for the squeamish, but it's not dangerous (the beetles are harmless, and the corpses were usually fresh). Most of the other jobs sounds like they were pretty hazardous, with the ape pee collector being both humiliating and dangerous (at least in the wild, at a Zoo it wouldn't be bad).
Our whole society and economy is based around Intellectual Property. Take a U.S. $20 bill, for instance. What makes a $20 bill any different from any other piece of paper? The information that's printed on it. Information, I might add, that only the government is allowed to copy.
Honestly, all property is rooted in the concept that "I can use this and you can't". The Native Americans (if rumors are true) never saw land as something that could be owned. Is saying "you can't walk on this land because it's mine" that much different than saying "You can't copy this book because it's mine"?
The purpose of Laws is to create a functioning society. We have found that 'property' is a useful concept in the realm of the physical, and many people have found 'property' to be helpful even in the intellectual realm. Just because something doesn't have a direct physical effect doesn't mean that it shouldn't be illegal. Fraud, Forgery, Libel, and Slander are all examples of 'Intellectual' crimes, all of which harm people. For instance, if I told police that you had bodies in your basement, you would probably be searched, causing you inconvenience and property damage. I didn't do anything physical to you at all, but I would imagine that you would want to prosecute me anyway.
Copyright laws seem to increase the creation of widely-spread intellectual property. Thus, one could argue that they benefit society, just like 'real' property laws benefit society. Certainly having your arms cut off hurts more than being slandered, which is why someone cutting my arms off would get 40-life in prison, while someone slandering me would get a fine.
To expand on the previous response to the parent, If you rotate a ball it won't change it's X,Y, or Z position- but that is clearly motion that you could track. Thus, roll, pitch and yaw are independant of X,Y, and Z movement.
I work with machines doing 4 axis movement. You can't do everything with only 3 (though with 5 you can fake the 6th).
Every married/engaged woman I know in the U.S.A. has a diamond ring, including my wife. We didn't want a huge rock; we wanted our money to go towards other things, like buying our house... but I still got her a (small) diamond ring. It's the thing to do, here.
Slashdot Mirror
That's exactly what they are proposing. Yes, the gradient is too small to be much use- but if these chips are cheap enough (say, $5), and make your laptop batteries last 5-10% longer and run slightly cooler, it will be worth putting them in. Supposedly they can be easily mass-produced, but they need to be very cheap to be worth using.
The problem is that converting heat energy directly into electricity violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics, not unlike perpetual motion machines. Thus anyone claiming that they can convert heat into electricity is lying, stupid, or discovering new laws of the universe. What this device does is convert heat differentials into electricity- similar to a steam generator, but without the moving parts. In order to make electricity it needs something hot on one side of it and something (relatively) cold on the other. It makes electricity while heat flows through it.
This does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. What it does is turn a heat differential (i.e. two objects of different temperatures) into a source of electricity as heat flows between them. Its purpose is to make systems more efficient- for instance, your laptop produces a lot of waste heat, and if we could recapture some of that lost energy it would improve your laptop's battery life. It also has the reverse effect of pumping heat (like an air conditioner) when electricity is applied to it.
According to Wikipedia, Mark Cuban was a software salesman who became rich through selling his company. He's a libertarian and objectivist. He's not a moron, and certainly not a suit. I may disagree with his attack on Google here, but that doesn't mean I think he's stupid.
Hydrogen will always take more energy to produce than it generates. Thus, Hydrogen might become a better sorce of stored energy (and replace gasoline) but it can never be used for power plants. Solar does have the potential to eliminate the need for power companies, though.
Hey, the 'Reply' button is back!
Seriously, though, Scientology has a long history of suing people who talk about Scientology for copyright infringement. "You're showing people our secret dogma? How dare you distribute our papers without our consent!" Xenu.net and Wikipedia have lots of information on Scientology now. (Disclaimer- Xenu.net is strictly anti-Scientology. Wikipedia has mostly facts, which, as we know, have a decidedly anti-Scientological basis).
Ah, Lawsuits. Is there any problem you can't solve?
Microsoft appears to be making a strategic alliance with Novell. So what. It's unlikely MS will use this to try to crush competing Linux distros- there is no way they would succeed, and we would all boycott MS AND Novell if they tried something stupid and evil like that. See the SCO vs. IBM case for what happened last time MS tried to destroy Linux- we'd all ignore MS's fud, and they would lose a lot of money in court.
/.ers are afraid of that- but believe me, there are bigger things to worry about. You should use the OS that best suits your needs- be it Ubuntu, Debian, SuSe, Windows, or OSX.
Also, Novell's code is under the GPL. This means that anything Microsoft lets Novell do can be used by anyone else. Thus, MS can't use this to make a 'MS only' version of Linux. In fact, thanks to the GPL, anything Microsoft does to help Novell can help the community as a whole.
Microsoft is not the Devil. Everything they touch is not automatically unclean and corrupted. The worst MS could do is help Novell create a Linux distro that is the standard by which other distros are judged. I know many
How can math that yields practical results not be pratical mathematics? Isn't that the difference between pratical and theorectical- practical math has real-world benefits, while theorectical math might have real-world benefits at some uncertain point in the future?
The foundations of computer science are discrete mathematics, logic, and binary arithmetic- none of which are esoteric. Certainly if you 'Dig deep enough into the foundations of mathematics underlying CS and you hit metamathematics and finally philosophy in the foundational sense'- but I will give you a hint and tell you that applies to ALL MATHEMATICS. That's like you saying 'Addition looks simple and practical, but once you really get into it, you realize that it is very deep stuff- intuitionistic mathematics vs platonistic mathematics, category theory vs. set theory, etc. '
I realize that you are a philosophy major, and thus making things as complicated as possible is part of what you do. However, philosophy majors also should know basic logic, so I present you this fine proof explaining why you should consider Computer Science practical mathematics.
Computer Science is necessary for well-functioning operating systems and programs. Since you use a computer to post on slashdot, operating systems and programs have practical value to you. Thus, we establish that CS has practical applications in your life. Since you are a Math/CS/Philosophy major, you are aware that CS is a branch of mathematics. We have also established that computer science is a form of mathematics.
Thus, since Computer Science is both practical to you and mathematics, you should consider it practical mathematics. Q.E.D.
I'm a math major myself, but feel the need to warn you that CS is, in fact, practical mathematics. Much of the logic and discrete mathematics (such as boolean algebra) that make up computer science were invented long before computers by DeMorgan, Babbage, and others. Now, however, we actually use it- and it, in fact, has everything to do with anything you can sit in front of, type into, click on, or reboot. The fact that the end user doesn't need to know how it works is unimportant. It's like saying that civil engineering has nothing to do with buildings, bridges, or roads- after all, the people driving on a road or using a building don't need to know civil engineering. Yes, a network admin is not likely to be a computer scientist- but the equipment and software he uses exists because of Math/CS people.
Subsidies mentioned there also mention 'tax concessions' as a form of subsidy. Besides, economically there is minimal difference between me sending you a check for $1000 (tax free) and reducing the taxes you owe me by $1000.
But this does not give tax breaks, so your point is moot. Empty titles (especially ones 10 years after the movie has been made) do next to nothing to promote certain films. Money does.
In some cultures, figuring out what a word means occurs before "correcting" someone's mistake. Slashdot has never been one of thsoe cultures.
So there will be a government commitee deciding which games get nifty tax breaks and which don't. I am curious if the same is true for movies as well- is there a comittee in France that decides whether a movie is a cultural film or not? Which books are 'art' or not?
This would result in more games focused on being 'artsy' -whatever that means- and less focused on being appealing to people who actually play the games.
The People are the trunk. Without them it's not a tree, just some sticks lying on the ground.
Are you sure of that? They have mass-murdered other religious groups, such as the Falung Gong, Tibetan Buddists, and Christians. If they haven't been killing off Muslims or putting them in concentration camps, it is only because there aren't enough of them in China to be worth the effort.
Most people don't feel the need to update unless they see things they need. There is no way people would update to IE 7 unless forced- just like there is no way people will update to Vista until they are forced to.
I did check IE 7 out yesterday- we use IE for internal browsing at work, and my boss wanted me to make sure the new version worked properly. (Web browsing, of course, is done with Firefox). It definitely looks and feels better than IE 6, and they have taken measures to improve security (whether they work or not remains to be seen). As usual, Microsoft makes great improvements to their products as soon as they get competition. That's what capitalism is all about.
This is very true- look at the dollar menu that McDonald's has. The profits they make off most of the items on the dollar menu are minimal- I've even heard that they lose money on every Big N'Tasty made. However, the soda is something like 90 cents profit out of a dollar. So as long as they sell a $1 soda for every couple Big N'Tasties, they make a decent profit.
It means that they are less likely to impose onerous restrictions on games being made. I have no problems with a game like GTAIII not being sold to minors, similar to R and NC-17 movies. I do have problems with Congress passing additional laws that would, say, destroy the ESRB and replace it with a new board of Congress-appointed stooges.
The more people who play video games the better off gamers will be, because there is more money that goes to the games developers (and therefore more encouragement for people to create games). This is especially true of the older people- not only do they have more money, they have more influence. The idiots in congress are less likely to screw over an industry that has wide public support. As long as congress thinks games are only for people under 20, they will happily listen to people like Jack Thompson- after all, non-voters only matter if you can get the voters to 'think of the children' and support your legislation.
Interesting idea, but totally pointless. There is no incentive to be in the "patenting" group. Just like there is no incentive to be on a PvP server except the excitement of killing and being killed. Since respawing is much more painful in real life, people won't do it.
You might think that people would want to be in the patenting group so they have access to other people's ideas, but once word got out about a patent, anyone who wasn't in the group could use it at no cost. If I paid you to use your patent, nothing stops me from letting other (non PvP) companies know about the idea for a fee. Not to mention that if I sold a product with a patented idea, other companies could see what I did and use it for free.
Your idea is the death of patents. If that's what you are going for, suggest banning them outright- it would be simpler.
The Semen washer doesn't sound like a bad job either- You aren't exposed to toxins during the course of your work, all you have is social stigma. The other job that isn't that bad (from personal experience) is corpse cleaner. We used Carrion Beetles (this was at a Zoo, the Beetles were an exhibit) to clean the corpses for us- basically we just placed the corpse in a beetle tank, the Beetles would clear the flesh off the corpse in days, and then we could take the skeleton if we wanted it. It's not for the squeamish, but it's not dangerous (the beetles are harmless, and the corpses were usually fresh). Most of the other jobs sounds like they were pretty hazardous, with the ape pee collector being both humiliating and dangerous (at least in the wild, at a Zoo it wouldn't be bad).
Our whole society and economy is based around Intellectual Property. Take a U.S. $20 bill, for instance. What makes a $20 bill any different from any other piece of paper? The information that's printed on it. Information, I might add, that only the government is allowed to copy.
Honestly, all property is rooted in the concept that "I can use this and you can't". The Native Americans (if rumors are true) never saw land as something that could be owned. Is saying "you can't walk on this land because it's mine" that much different than saying "You can't copy this book because it's mine"?
The purpose of Laws is to create a functioning society. We have found that 'property' is a useful concept in the realm of the physical, and many people have found 'property' to be helpful even in the intellectual realm. Just because something doesn't have a direct physical effect doesn't mean that it shouldn't be illegal. Fraud, Forgery, Libel, and Slander are all examples of 'Intellectual' crimes, all of which harm people. For instance, if I told police that you had bodies in your basement, you would probably be searched, causing you inconvenience and property damage. I didn't do anything physical to you at all, but I would imagine that you would want to prosecute me anyway.
Copyright laws seem to increase the creation of widely-spread intellectual property. Thus, one could argue that they benefit society, just like 'real' property laws benefit society. Certainly having your arms cut off hurts more than being slandered, which is why someone cutting my arms off would get 40-life in prison, while someone slandering me would get a fine.
To expand on the previous response to the parent, If you rotate a ball it won't change it's X,Y, or Z position- but that is clearly motion that you could track. Thus, roll, pitch and yaw are independant of X,Y, and Z movement.
I work with machines doing 4 axis movement. You can't do everything with only 3 (though with 5 you can fake the 6th).
Every married/engaged woman I know in the U.S.A. has a diamond ring, including my wife. We didn't want a huge rock; we wanted our money to go towards other things, like buying our house... but I still got her a (small) diamond ring. It's the thing to do, here.