Your argument is nonsense. You claim (no citations) that both programs underestimate their non-fatal incidents. You then make the bizarre leap that because this is the case (again, there is no proof of this), and because the shuttle has had more recent fatalities, that the shuttle must be "dangerously fragile" relative to the Soyuz, which, per your analysis, can "tolerate failure better, even though it may also be more prone to those failures". You have absolutely no basis upon which to make these judgements. In fact, I would suggest that the statistics show that the shuttle is actually quite a bit more reliable than Soyuz. The only reason the fatality rates are similar between the two platforms is because the shuttle crew is 7 while the Soyuz crew is only 3. So, each shuttle fatal incident kills more than twice as many astronauts as does each Soyuz fatal accident. This means that in order to have the same fatality rate (which, statistically, they do) the shuttle must have fewer than one half the accidents (which, statistically, it does). Therefore, the shuttle is twice as reliable as Soyuz.
Since the EU seems to be the only organization with a backbone willing to stand up to Microsoft
Since when is extorting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H levying huge "fines" demonstrating a backbone? Seriously, how much courage does it take to tell Microsoft they have to pay $600M in fines to continue to do business in Europe? If they really wanted to show backbone they would simply say that Microsoft products could no longer be sold in Europe. Period. But as we all know, it's much easier, and of course much more profitable for the commission, to just keep fining them. How brave of them.
First, it amuses me to no end to see how people on this board are bending over backwards to justify/rationalize Google's actions. Face it, if Microsoft did the same thing you would be screaming for Ballmer to go to jail.
Second, it seems to me that Google has the GPS coordinates of every picture taken. It *should* be possible (especially for someone as all-knowing and all powerful as Google) to verify if any given GPS coordinate is on private property or a public way. Then, in an automated fashion, pictures taken by mistake could be deleted without ever uploading them. Hmmm, that sounds to me like something a company with scruples and ethics would do... but for some reason Google didn't.
Well, I wouldn't call that over-reaching. Granted, the origin of life is a different topic than the subsequent evolution of millions of species. But there's an obvious relation between the two.
Actually, I disagree, and this is one of my primary complaints with the evolution evangelizers. It is not at all *obvious* that just because evolution is driven by random mutations and natural selection, that the origins of life are in any way related to the same or even a similar process (i.e. random change with some selection criteria). It sometimes seems to me that evolutionists are so proud of the theory of evolution (yes it is elegant and there is much evidence supporting it, though I submit there is much we still do not know and have not yet proven) that they want to apply the same principals to the completely different question of how life began. And of course in the process, the theories the biologists come up with are really not much different than the "God did it" explanation, as both explanations lack evidence or any scientific corroboration and require great leaps of "faith".
Anyhow, I think we would all be better off if both sides of the "origins of life" debate were a lot less dismissive of each other and acknowledged that, lacking evidence, both sides only have theories. And let's stop convolving the origin of species with the origins of life debates, as that is not helpful either.
Look, I've no doubt you've had this drilled into you a million times, but Evolution says nothing about the origin of life
Well, I usually stay out of these evolution-ID discussions, but I had to comment here. You are of course correct that evolution says nothing about life's origins. Frankly, it has always been my view that evolution and creationism (not the specifics as written in scripture, but the more general belief in a creator) are not mutually exclusive, as they really address different questions.
With all of that said, I have to say that the evolution crowd is often guilty of over-reaching by concocting hypothetical ways life may have originated. See Richard Dawkin's "The Blind Watchmaker" for a really good chuckle about how life began as clay.
It's all about combining your various music file collections into one virtual collection. This device is cool because it can merge all your disparate collections into one big playlist, regardless of format (and regardless of whether some of the content is DRM'd).
BTW, it is *not* helpful to keep blaming DRM for everything and anything. It only dilutes the argument against DRM when your claims are false, giving ammunition to its defenders.
I will hasten to point out the same holds true for Windows. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean it's great stuff -- just that it's managed to become a defacto standard.
... but it certainly confirms my strong aversion to putting anything Adobe on my machines. Seriously, who hasn't noticed how invasive and hoggish Adobe's stuff is? I cringe when I click a link to a PDF in a website, causing Adobe reader to launch inside the browser. It brings any machine to its knees as it consumes every available resource while rendering a simple document. And Adobe Elements (that's their "lightweight" photo product) takes the better part of a minute to start up on my dual core, 2GB box (non-RAIDed SATA drive). I guess it shouldn't surprise me that they have security problems as well... slow software is usually sloppy software, and sloppy software is usually insecure software.
Well, not to dispute your point, but this entire thread thoroughly bashes the US and the Bush administration, and there are +5 insightfuls as far as the eye can see. And contrary to your prediction about your own comment, you got modded up as well.
Ummm, I think you made a few mistakes. First, and most blatantly, those balloons need to be non-latex because some people have allergies. Second, Disneyland is evil because they make a profit based on their long-protected Mouse copyrights, so perhaps it would be better for the magical unicorns to whisk them instantly away to the Summer of Code, where they will be given a high-end laptop running Linux-du-jour, and a 3 month stipend to write more high quality code to give back to the community.
We were in the right when we bailed Kuwait out in Desert Storm, we dropped the ball when we didn't grow that into a lasting friendship between the US and Kuwait.
Hmmm, if I recall correctly, Desert Storm occured in 1991, so the time to "grow that into a lasting friendship" would have been from 1992 onward? Whose fault would that be, exactly?
A rich and powerful voice in the Middle East that had positive things to say about the US could have avoided this entire mess
By that "entire mess" I assume you mean the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, with the former being precipitated by 9-11? So following your statements to their logical conclusion, 9-11 was Clinton's fault? You should know that you can't say things like that around here.
It seems likely that such a mechanism would be used mostly later in life... after the reproductive years have passed. And so, evolution would not likely promote or demote this trait.
You are correct, which is why I am still here even though I often find myself in the distinct minority (and am usually roundly castigated for my heresy). That said though, you must admit it's about 80/20 in one direction. Pick a thread that discusses any news item that is Microsoft related and count the "pro-Microsoft" comments and the "anti-M$" comments. No contest. Never is. Ditto for a thread that discusses the Bush administration, or U.S. policies in general, or the RIAA/MPAA, or open source versus closed source, or Windows versus Linux, or patent law. I'm sure you know the list as well as I do if you've been around this board for a while.
I wonder how many more... before the government finally wakes up and realizes
You are operating under a false premise. The government *never* wakes up and realizes anything. It is up to the people to wake up and throw the bums out.
Moore's law did not reduce the cost of power supplies, monitors, DVD drives, keyboards, plastic cases or mice. And guess what, almost every one of those items I mentioned costs (significantly, as in twice) more than an OEM Windows license. If anyone should worry, it's Intel.
We own several of these Insignias and we are extremely satisfied. The picture is heads-and-tails better than the analog sets we replaced, they tune lots of digital channels (including HD) from our extended basis *analog* cable, and they have gobs of outputs. All in all, I think they are an excellent buy, even without a "name" brand printed on the plastic.
a 3G plan can *replace* wired network connections. Speeds of 180kB/s are pretty common,
Huh? I get 750KBps (that's 6Mbps) sustained and 1500KBps burst over my $50/month cable modem. I can't imagine cutting my speed by a factor of 4 (or more), and paying more, with bandwidth caps on top of all that! No, I'll keep my wired connection, thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
Your argument is nonsense. You claim (no citations) that both programs underestimate their non-fatal incidents. You then make the bizarre leap that because this is the case (again, there is no proof of this), and because the shuttle has had more recent fatalities, that the shuttle must be "dangerously fragile" relative to the Soyuz, which, per your analysis, can "tolerate failure better, even though it may also be more prone to those failures". You have absolutely no basis upon which to make these judgements. In fact, I would suggest that the statistics show that the shuttle is actually quite a bit more reliable than Soyuz. The only reason the fatality rates are similar between the two platforms is because the shuttle crew is 7 while the Soyuz crew is only 3. So, each shuttle fatal incident kills more than twice as many astronauts as does each Soyuz fatal accident. This means that in order to have the same fatality rate (which, statistically, they do) the shuttle must have fewer than one half the accidents (which, statistically, it does). Therefore, the shuttle is twice as reliable as Soyuz.
Who is going to design and make all those little teeny space suits?
First, it amuses me to no end to see how people on this board are bending over backwards to justify/rationalize Google's actions. Face it, if Microsoft did the same thing you would be screaming for Ballmer to go to jail.
... but for some reason Google didn't.
Second, it seems to me that Google has the GPS coordinates of every picture taken. It *should* be possible (especially for someone as all-knowing and all powerful as Google) to verify if any given GPS coordinate is on private property or a public way. Then, in an automated fashion, pictures taken by mistake could be deleted without ever uploading them. Hmmm, that sounds to me like something a company with scruples and ethics would do
Anyhow, I think we would all be better off if both sides of the "origins of life" debate were a lot less dismissive of each other and acknowledged that, lacking evidence, both sides only have theories. And let's stop convolving the origin of species with the origins of life debates, as that is not helpful either.
With all of that said, I have to say that the evolution crowd is often guilty of over-reaching by concocting hypothetical ways life may have originated. See Richard Dawkin's "The Blind Watchmaker" for a really good chuckle about how life began as clay.
convergence: the approach of an infinite series to a finite limit
Seems to me we can either have choice *or* convergence, but we cannot have choice *and* convergence, as they are opposites.
Definitions courtesy of dictionary.com
Apparently the concept of the market rejecting DRM is overblown?
Surely the number of rabbits who enjoy a daily cup of coffee is such a small population as to be statistically insignificant.
It's all about combining your various music file collections into one virtual collection. This device is cool because it can merge all your disparate collections into one big playlist, regardless of format (and regardless of whether some of the content is DRM'd).
BTW, it is *not* helpful to keep blaming DRM for everything and anything. It only dilutes the argument against DRM when your claims are false, giving ammunition to its defenders.
I will hasten to point out the same holds true for Windows. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean it's great stuff -- just that it's managed to become a defacto standard.
... but it certainly confirms my strong aversion to putting anything Adobe on my machines. Seriously, who hasn't noticed how invasive and hoggish Adobe's stuff is? I cringe when I click a link to a PDF in a website, causing Adobe reader to launch inside the browser. It brings any machine to its knees as it consumes every available resource while rendering a simple document. And Adobe Elements (that's their "lightweight" photo product) takes the better part of a minute to start up on my dual core, 2GB box (non-RAIDed SATA drive). I guess it shouldn't surprise me that they have security problems as well ... slow software is usually sloppy software, and sloppy software is usually insecure software.
Well, not to dispute your point, but this entire thread thoroughly bashes the US and the Bush administration, and there are +5 insightfuls as far as the eye can see. And contrary to your prediction about your own comment, you got modded up as well.
Ummm, I think you made a few mistakes. First, and most blatantly, those balloons need to be non-latex because some people have allergies. Second, Disneyland is evil because they make a profit based on their long-protected Mouse copyrights, so perhaps it would be better for the magical unicorns to whisk them instantly away to the Summer of Code, where they will be given a high-end laptop running Linux-du-jour, and a 3 month stipend to write more high quality code to give back to the community.
By that "entire mess" I assume you mean the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, with the former being precipitated by 9-11? So following your statements to their logical conclusion, 9-11 was Clinton's fault? You should know that you can't say things like that around here.
It seems likely that such a mechanism would be used mostly later in life ... after the reproductive years have passed. And so, evolution would not likely promote or demote this trait.
You are correct, which is why I am still here even though I often find myself in the distinct minority (and am usually roundly castigated for my heresy). That said though, you must admit it's about 80/20 in one direction. Pick a thread that discusses any news item that is Microsoft related and count the "pro-Microsoft" comments and the "anti-M$" comments. No contest. Never is. Ditto for a thread that discusses the Bush administration, or U.S. policies in general, or the RIAA/MPAA, or open source versus closed source, or Windows versus Linux, or patent law. I'm sure you know the list as well as I do if you've been around this board for a while.
The irony of posting such a comment on \. is mind boggling. The group-think on this forum is almost unparalleled.
Wow! I think (or rather, know) that I need to upgrade|replace my English parser to fully appreciate|understand your comment.
Moore's law did not reduce the cost of power supplies, monitors, DVD drives, keyboards, plastic cases or mice. And guess what, almost every one of those items I mentioned costs (significantly, as in twice) more than an OEM Windows license. If anyone should worry, it's Intel.
We own several of these Insignias and we are extremely satisfied. The picture is heads-and-tails better than the analog sets we replaced, they tune lots of digital channels (including HD) from our extended basis *analog* cable, and they have gobs of outputs. All in all, I think they are an excellent buy, even without a "name" brand printed on the plastic.