Isn't it amusing how commercial interests hinder innovation? I've been expecting DivX-capable players since 5 years ago.
I'm not sure what kind of players you are expecting, but my DivX and Xvid capable Philips DVD player cost 99 euros when I bought it ~1½ years ago, today I can get a similarly priced MPEG4 capable DVD player which also plays DivX&Xvid. I think the bandwagon you're waiting for left without you.:)
Betty: Hmm? Tiger, tiger, tiger.
Betty: Hmm ! Bird. Birdie. Birdie, birdie. Hmm.
Betty: I am a great magician.
Betty: Your clothes are red !
Betty: Your clothes are black.
After that quote from Kung Pow, I think everyone sees the potential the combination of RFID hand implants and OLED clothes has!
All right, after reading that I understand your point. I had based my definition of anarchy on the wiktionary definition, without being aware of the political movement.
I don't see why you think capitalism needs government (unless you confuse it with present-day mercantilism), but what I was referring to in my post was the notion of anarchism being absence of money and trade, which is ridiculous. The only thing the government provides for trade and capitalism is fiat money, and that isn't really a benefit.
Anarchism is absence of government, not absence of money. Well, absence of fiat money comes with absence of government, but money fared perfectly well before governments monopolised it.
The site is very slow so I can't verify it, but if I remember correctly the mini has much bigger (both size and resolution-wise) keys, which would affect yields enough to make up for the price difference. I don't think the electronics would have a huge effect, as most of the processing would be done on the computer side with the keyboard mostly functioning as the display.
Finally I'll be able to block annoying sounds from webpages and game installers!
There's also one other feature Vista will have, and that is the next version of DirectX (or WGF, whatever they end up calling it). If you're a Windows gamer, upgrading will not be optional.
I think it's safe to assume that all known security issues in WinXP will be fixed in Vista. Fixing vulnerabilities in the Vista beta probably doesn't have very high priority, as it's userbase is (at least supposed to be) limited.
The anthropic principle is a principle that explains nothing at all. It is non-falsifiable, and therefore not science. I'm asking why we exist, and you answer by saying, "given that we exist, things will look this way." I'm asking why isn't it the case that we don't exist at all? Especially given the fact (if fact it be) that it's 10^43 time more likely that we not exist.
The anthropic principle doesn't explain anything, but it is worth keeping in mind when you point to features in our universe that seem too perfectly adjusted to be of random origin, i.e. a perfectly adjusted universe does not prove a God created it.
But let me ask you this question--is it true that you have postulated the existence of an infinite number of things that we can never observe as a way of explaining away one thing that we might possibly observe some day?
Many-worlds QT could explain the single photon version of the double-slit experiment, i.e. there is some merit to it. That's more than can be said about ID.
Now the only way I see that I.D. could have any basis in reality is if another race created us. That doesn't explain how they came to be however, nor would it allow them to fine-tune the strong and weak nuclear forces, which you seem to think indicates some intelligence in the universe.
strong and weak nuclear forces are finely balanced. Any stronger, and the universe would consist of the near-equivalent of a neutron star at the center of the universe and nothing any where else.
This and other reasonings that somehow hint at intelligent designers, fall under the anthropic principle. The physical realm around us will by necessity seem perfectly fine-tuned to support us, because if it wasn't, we wouldn't be here to examine it. And if the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory holds true, then there exists an infinite number of universes, of which an infinite number is incapable of supporting our kind of life.
With AMD banning retail sale of OEM processors, they're getting harder and more expensive to find. Most places here sell retail at or below OEM prices, so I think it is correct to say that the cooler is essentially free.
When that joke was first made 256 MB probably felt like an insane amount of memory, and the TNT2 was very fast. So to answer your question, yes it can, as can any sub-100$ card sold today.;)
I agree that there is no point in completely turning off tv sets to save electricity, but turning them off for the night is a good idea because they are a potential (albeit miniscule) fire hazard. The older your set the bigger the risk.
My apologies, your question was sincere. I use the word libertarian to mean maximum personal freedoms, with minimal government. Therefore I do not believe a society where a minority of people are allowed to dictate rules to the rest of the populus is very libertarian, so from these two flavours meritocracy is closer to my views. I am however not a voter of the U.S. libertarians, but I do vote for the libertarians in my country. Sadly it seems libertarianism isn't very popular anywhere, but I have a feeling that will change in time.
I guess you're trying to point out the usual argument of regulations preventing monopolies? Or maybe you're aiming for insightful with a slightly vague question? Anyways, the market forces can and do break down monopolies. Take for example Microsoft. At the moment they have a pretty large market share, but open source is chipping away at it, and Google is a threat. Another example would be the monopolistic ISPs, WiFi and soon WiMax in combination with mesh networks will most likely circumvent and kill off their business. Government regulations in the case of RIAA and MPAA are in fact criminalising their direct competition in the media distributing business! When you really get down to it, government regulations have done nothing to prevent these monopolies (and in some cases reinforce them).
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't it amusing how commercial interests hinder innovation? I've been expecting DivX-capable players since 5 years ago.
:)
I'm not sure what kind of players you are expecting, but my DivX and Xvid capable Philips DVD player cost 99 euros when I bought it ~1½ years ago, today I can get a similarly priced MPEG4 capable DVD player which also plays DivX&Xvid. I think the bandwagon you're waiting for left without you.
For some reason the G-GP's post gave me a mental image of VM2 users having their mouse arm 10x the size of their other arm after prolonged usage. :P
Betty: Hmm? Tiger, tiger, tiger.
Betty: Hmm ! Bird. Birdie. Birdie, birdie. Hmm.
Betty: I am a great magician.
Betty: Your clothes are red !
Betty: Your clothes are black.
After that quote from Kung Pow, I think everyone sees the potential the combination of RFID hand implants and OLED clothes has!
All right, after reading that I understand your point. I had based my definition of anarchy on the wiktionary definition, without being aware of the political movement.
I don't see why you think capitalism needs government (unless you confuse it with present-day mercantilism), but what I was referring to in my post was the notion of anarchism being absence of money and trade, which is ridiculous. The only thing the government provides for trade and capitalism is fiat money, and that isn't really a benefit.
Anarchism is absence of government, not absence of money. Well, absence of fiat money comes with absence of government, but money fared perfectly well before governments monopolised it.
anarchists (not commies, much more left wing than those boy-scouts).
As an anarchist, I am offended by that.
The site is very slow so I can't verify it, but if I remember correctly the mini has much bigger (both size and resolution-wise) keys, which would affect yields enough to make up for the price difference. I don't think the electronics would have a huge effect, as most of the processing would be done on the computer side with the keyboard mostly functioning as the display.
I hold the idea that the AIDS is not a viral disease, but is a metabolic disorder precipitated by an exaggerated way of life.
Thus it's orety well proven that indeed the HIV virus is the cause of AIDS.
I don't think these statements contradict each other, because AIDS isn't a virus, HIV is?
[/joke][/joke]
Everything anyone has said since this post has been a doublejoke!
After their IPs posted on slashdot? They'll vote to make port scanning illegal...:p
:)
I'm pretty sure it is already...
http://slashdot.org/~jackthompson/
Application level audio control
Finally I'll be able to block annoying sounds from webpages and game installers!
There's also one other feature Vista will have, and that is the next version of DirectX (or WGF, whatever they end up calling it). If you're a Windows gamer, upgrading will not be optional.
I think it's safe to assume that all known security issues in WinXP will be fixed in Vista. Fixing vulnerabilities in the Vista beta probably doesn't have very high priority, as it's userbase is (at least supposed to be) limited.
And frankly this should include what to do if the enemy manages to infiltrate the Internet as we know it.
I don't think that means what you think it does.
The anthropic principle is a principle that explains nothing at all. It is non-falsifiable, and therefore not science. I'm asking why we exist, and you answer by saying, "given that we exist, things will look this way." I'm asking why isn't it the case that we don't exist at all? Especially given the fact (if fact it be) that it's 10^43 time more likely that we not exist.
The anthropic principle doesn't explain anything, but it is worth keeping in mind when you point to features in our universe that seem too perfectly adjusted to be of random origin, i.e. a perfectly adjusted universe does not prove a God created it.
But let me ask you this question--is it true that you have postulated the existence of an infinite number of things that we can never observe as a way of explaining away one thing that we might possibly observe some day?
Many-worlds QT could explain the single photon version of the double-slit experiment, i.e. there is some merit to it. That's more than can be said about ID.
Now the only way I see that I.D. could have any basis in reality is if another race created us. That doesn't explain how they came to be however, nor would it allow them to fine-tune the strong and weak nuclear forces, which you seem to think indicates some intelligence in the universe.
Fact is, there has never been an experiment with macro-evolution - until there is, Macro-Evolution is simply a theory and, IMO, a weak one at that.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB901.html
Here is the rest of creationist claims and their counter-arguments. Next time you're being brainwashed by creationists, try looking up their arguments there, and see if it's already been shot down.
strong and weak nuclear forces are finely balanced. Any stronger, and the universe would consist of the near-equivalent of a neutron star at the center of the universe and nothing any where else.
This and other reasonings that somehow hint at intelligent designers, fall under the anthropic principle. The physical realm around us will by necessity seem perfectly fine-tuned to support us, because if it wasn't, we wouldn't be here to examine it. And if the many-worlds interpretation of quantum theory holds true, then there exists an infinite number of universes, of which an infinite number is incapable of supporting our kind of life.
With AMD banning retail sale of OEM processors, they're getting harder and more expensive to find. Most places here sell retail at or below OEM prices, so I think it is correct to say that the cooler is essentially free.
99% of the time it would show pictures of pocket lint. Unless people start walking around with phones hanging around their neck. :)
When that joke was first made 256 MB probably felt like an insane amount of memory, and the TNT2 was very fast. So to answer your question, yes it can, as can any sub-100$ card sold today. ;)
I agree that there is no point in completely turning off tv sets to save electricity, but turning them off for the night is a good idea because they are a potential (albeit miniscule) fire hazard. The older your set the bigger the risk.
I thought the Klingons taught us a thing or two with the Praxis Explosion?
;)
This might come as a shock, but Star Trek isn't the best place for learning physics...
My apologies, your question was sincere. I use the word libertarian to mean maximum personal freedoms, with minimal government. Therefore I do not believe a society where a minority of people are allowed to dictate rules to the rest of the populus is very libertarian, so from these two flavours meritocracy is closer to my views. I am however not a voter of the U.S. libertarians, but I do vote for the libertarians in my country. Sadly it seems libertarianism isn't very popular anywhere, but I have a feeling that will change in time.
I guess you're trying to point out the usual argument of regulations preventing monopolies? Or maybe you're aiming for insightful with a slightly vague question? Anyways, the market forces can and do break down monopolies. Take for example Microsoft. At the moment they have a pretty large market share, but open source is chipping away at it, and Google is a threat. Another example would be the monopolistic ISPs, WiFi and soon WiMax in combination with mesh networks will most likely circumvent and kill off their business. Government regulations in the case of RIAA and MPAA are in fact criminalising their direct competition in the media distributing business! When you really get down to it, government regulations have done nothing to prevent these monopolies (and in some cases reinforce them).