"And because her husband tries to kill her, she loses her will to live."
I didn't see it that way at all. I saw her death as directly caused by Anakin, who was in such a blind rage (perhaps "controlled by the dark side" is a better way to put it) that he killed her for siding with the Jedi and didn't even realize it until the Emperor told him what he had done. Hence the "NooOoooooOooo!"
I never saw her as week..
What I found confusing is that later on Vader doesn't seem to know Leia is his daughter, yet he knows Luke is his son.
..obviously a gigantic pyramid as displayed by the photographic evidence. Also, somehow those rocks there are supposed to be "polished cubes"... Reminds me of "America's Stonehenge" (a.k.a. "Mystery Hill")
It doesn't appear to be a Caesarian shift. The "smith(y)code" implys a Vignere, but if that's the correct key it's using a non-standard table. The length is prime if you take out smithycode (31), and with it (40/41) depending on if there is a y. I haven't found a column layout that does anything special.. anyone else have any ideas?
What type of thermal transfer were you talking about? Radiant, convection?:)
Actually, you argument is solved easily when you insert the omitted word. Air.
"You are letting the cold air in." The outside air has less heat than the inside air, so relatively, it's cold. And if it's perhaps windy, you could indeed allow colder *air* in.
I would say no, you can't let the cold in, but you can let the cold air in. It's all in the details, a CS major sould know that:)
If you are going to link something, maybe it should at least reference something relating to what you are talking about in that context. What does the EE have to do with Cray? The wikipedia article does not mention them.
For instance, John F Kennedy.. I'm sure he had emotions. What does that have to do with anything?
They just left out the ending. It's really:
'The Cray motto is: adapt the system to the application - not the application to the system.'" Why? Because hardare costs more to change!"
..not to mention that English is about as fluid a language as you can find. It was never strictly formalized and has generally been shaped by the influence of numerous other languages. It consists of a preponderance of idioms that come from very different background that sometimes didn't translate correctly into English, but were adopted anyway. Just try, for instance, to determine the absolutely correct origin for "let the cat out of the bag."
The same problem arises with terms like irony. Yes, they meant something different 100 years ago. They no longer mean that because they are no longer used that way. Get over it, move on. Doubly true for spelling (although, I would argue the Americans are in fact wrong in many instances since a lot of their spelling variations come from Webster).. however, you never see any of these sorts who want to seem intelligent and adhear to proper archaic word usage denegrate someone for using the word "check" or "favorite".
If I took the time to write everything in proper old or middle english, no one would be able to read it.. why are there no complaints that things have changed from that period?
I support the concept of a patent on a product only for such a time as the exclusivity of that product generates revenues that equal its development costs. After that point, there is no longer a patent.
The only purpose a patent can serve is to offset the cost of development for a new or novel concept that otherwise would not be funded.. However, once the company has recouped its development costs, they should then be on a level playing field with competitors. I would venture to say that competitors should be able to ready competing products for market on the day the patent expires.
Furthermore, if you fail to develop your idea into a marketable product in a certain amount of time, the patent is lost.
Research isn't stifled, the market determines who has the best implementation (just because you came up with the idea doesn't mean you'll be the best person to create it), and submarine patents are addressed. Also, this insures that if the idea is revolutionary enough, the originator can bring that product to market and compete with the large corporate conglomorates while they recoup their development costs. Being quicker to market can help them establish brand name, etc.
I say, give them a year to bring the product to the people, after that, the patent is valid only until the financial quarter where profit from the invention meets or exceeds documented development cost, with a maximum of two years. That means the longest any one patent can be held is 3 years.
Intangibilities cannot be patented, only produceable, tangible end product performing a unique function.
Those two steps will do nothing for you. Your mail is still in storage on Google servers, there may be a copy on the SMTP server from where it was sent, and it could have been grabbed anywhere in between.
Passive solutions, like some of the GPG and PGP apps, which automaticly look up a recipients address and encrypt accordingly, then seemlessly unencrypt at the destination are a good idea, but not widely used or accepted, and your average person doesn't even see why they should bother.
Unfortunately, until encryption is completely passive, end-point to end-point or trusted-server to trusted-server, and included in every email client, email is going to be insecure because people can't be bothered with an additional step.
Okay, maybe it is just me, but this "signal to noise" meme just has to go. It doesn't fit the situation the way most people seem to be using it.
Noise can be filtered, and implys that the underlying information is present, but obscurred.
If the information isn't present in the first place, it can't be revealed by filtering. Thats just a lower signal strength.. If we want to be geeky and use geeky terms, we should probably be saying quality content on USENET is just a few dB above the noise floor..
As I understand it, you can patent an improvement to an already existing patent..
SO
Someone quickly file for a patent on collecting user reviews by allowing them to comment via web forms AND rate the product on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 to 5, or by using stars to denote product satisfaction.
Then, donate the patent to someone who can be trusted with it.
...just don't get the idea of a "spoof" sometimes.. I highly doubt Webber, Elton John or Williams played an active role, but apparently Lucas and Anthony Daniels have already seen bits of the performance.
By the way, everything is sold out except for Wednesday at 8pm.
I don't get too concerned about these Tier 1s complaining and threatening. The way I see it, the groundwork for making them null and void has already been laid.
So they turn off a pipe or two, even some big ones.. The technology to recreate them, or to go around them, is not nearly as expensive as it used to be, and is far more prevelent, and needed much more than it was when they first laid it in.
I can't think of many scenarios where the internet user community will not find a way to "make it work".
Google and MS are pushing wireless meshing.. Networks can exist in topologies that don't require backbones. Anyone who's ever used amateur packet radio networks know its not really rocket science.. I'm pretty sure that somewhere people could dig up open, standardized protocols for packet switching and transmission control and things like that (sarcasm). Possibly even freely available software to make it work. (more sarcasm).
Its just the same thing as the DRM situation.. they come up with a new method, two weeks later someone has a workaround. If they start turning off the "pipes", people will just build "pipes" around them.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be quite beneficial in the long run, sparking interest and development into a "people's" infrastructure that was fault tollerant and cheaper than current solutions. The resulting development might even bring the price down for getting "pipes" to developing areas and help them bootstrap themselves into the digital world.
Its so clear.. Its almost as if the underlying technology the internet uses was *designed* to allow people to join unlike networks together and route packets as they needed.. (whump)
Slashdot Mirror
So, basicly you are describing SecondLife?
"And because her husband tries to kill her, she loses her will to live."
I didn't see it that way at all. I saw her death as directly caused by Anakin, who was in such a blind rage (perhaps "controlled by the dark side" is a better way to put it) that he killed her for siding with the Jedi and didn't even realize it until the Emperor told him what he had done. Hence the "NooOoooooOooo!"
I never saw her as week..
What I found confusing is that later on Vader doesn't seem to know Leia is his daughter, yet he knows Luke is his son.
"Lady only here because she sleeping with director"
..obviously a gigantic pyramid as displayed by the photographic evidence. Also, somehow those rocks there are supposed to be "polished cubes". .. Reminds me of "America's Stonehenge" (a.k.a. "Mystery Hill")
It doesn't appear to be a Caesarian shift. The "smith(y)code" implys a Vignere, but if that's the correct key it's using a non-standard table. The length is prime if you take out smithycode (31), and with it (40/41) depending on if there is a y. I haven't found a column layout that does anything special.. anyone else have any ideas?
alt+0163 = "£"
*or*
£ in HTML.
Sounds like a Caddy CD-ROM to me.. although he may have had a floptical, I doubt it. Damn, you were a kid then? I'm old.
I saw a demonstration of this in the biography "Total Recall".
What type of thermal transfer were you talking about? Radiant, convection? :)
Actually, you argument is solved easily when you insert the omitted word. Air.
"You are letting the cold air in." The outside air has less heat than the inside air, so relatively, it's cold. And if it's perhaps windy, you could indeed allow colder *air* in.
I would say no, you can't let the cold in, but you can let the cold air in. It's all in the details, a CS major sould know that :)
If you are going to link something, maybe it should at least reference something relating to what you are talking about in that context. What does the EE have to do with Cray? The wikipedia article does not mention them.
For instance, John F Kennedy.. I'm sure he had emotions. What does that have to do with anything?
They just left out the ending. It's really: 'The Cray motto is: adapt the system to the application - not the application to the system.'" Why? Because hardare costs more to change!"
..not to mention that English is about as fluid a language as you can find. It was never strictly formalized and has generally been shaped by the influence of numerous other languages. It consists of a preponderance of idioms that come from very different background that sometimes didn't translate correctly into English, but were adopted anyway. Just try, for instance, to determine the absolutely correct origin for "let the cat out of the bag."
The same problem arises with terms like irony. Yes, they meant something different 100 years ago. They no longer mean that because they are no longer used that way. Get over it, move on. Doubly true for spelling (although, I would argue the Americans are in fact wrong in many instances since a lot of their spelling variations come from Webster).. however, you never see any of these sorts who want to seem intelligent and adhear to proper archaic word usage denegrate someone for using the word "check" or "favorite".
If I took the time to write everything in proper old or middle english, no one would be able to read it.. why are there no complaints that things have changed from that period?
I support the concept of a patent on a product only for such a time as the exclusivity of that product generates revenues that equal its development costs. After that point, there is no longer a patent. The only purpose a patent can serve is to offset the cost of development for a new or novel concept that otherwise would not be funded.. However, once the company has recouped its development costs, they should then be on a level playing field with competitors. I would venture to say that competitors should be able to ready competing products for market on the day the patent expires. Furthermore, if you fail to develop your idea into a marketable product in a certain amount of time, the patent is lost. Research isn't stifled, the market determines who has the best implementation (just because you came up with the idea doesn't mean you'll be the best person to create it), and submarine patents are addressed. Also, this insures that if the idea is revolutionary enough, the originator can bring that product to market and compete with the large corporate conglomorates while they recoup their development costs. Being quicker to market can help them establish brand name, etc. I say, give them a year to bring the product to the people, after that, the patent is valid only until the financial quarter where profit from the invention meets or exceeds documented development cost, with a maximum of two years. That means the longest any one patent can be held is 3 years. Intangibilities cannot be patented, only produceable, tangible end product performing a unique function.
Those two steps will do nothing for you. Your mail is still in storage on Google servers, there may be a copy on the SMTP server from where it was sent, and it could have been grabbed anywhere in between.
Passive solutions, like some of the GPG and PGP apps, which automaticly look up a recipients address and encrypt accordingly, then seemlessly unencrypt at the destination are a good idea, but not widely used or accepted, and your average person doesn't even see why they should bother.
Unfortunately, until encryption is completely passive, end-point to end-point or trusted-server to trusted-server, and included in every email client, email is going to be insecure because people can't be bothered with an additional step.
Okay, maybe it is just me, but this "signal to noise" meme just has to go. It doesn't fit the situation the way most people seem to be using it. Noise can be filtered, and implys that the underlying information is present, but obscurred. If the information isn't present in the first place, it can't be revealed by filtering. Thats just a lower signal strength.. If we want to be geeky and use geeky terms, we should probably be saying quality content on USENET is just a few dB above the noise floor..
The fact that you caught that boggles my mind.. but I did laugh enough to get funny looks from passers by..
As I understand it, you can patent an improvement to an already existing patent.. SO Someone quickly file for a patent on collecting user reviews by allowing them to comment via web forms AND rate the product on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 to 5, or by using stars to denote product satisfaction. Then, donate the patent to someone who can be trusted with it.
...just don't get the idea of a "spoof" sometimes.. I highly doubt Webber, Elton John or Williams played an active role, but apparently Lucas and Anthony Daniels have already seen bits of the performance. By the way, everything is sold out except for Wednesday at 8pm.
I don't get too concerned about these Tier 1s complaining and threatening. The way I see it, the groundwork for making them null and void has already been laid. So they turn off a pipe or two, even some big ones.. The technology to recreate them, or to go around them, is not nearly as expensive as it used to be, and is far more prevelent, and needed much more than it was when they first laid it in. I can't think of many scenarios where the internet user community will not find a way to "make it work". Google and MS are pushing wireless meshing.. Networks can exist in topologies that don't require backbones. Anyone who's ever used amateur packet radio networks know its not really rocket science.. I'm pretty sure that somewhere people could dig up open, standardized protocols for packet switching and transmission control and things like that (sarcasm). Possibly even freely available software to make it work. (more sarcasm). Its just the same thing as the DRM situation.. they come up with a new method, two weeks later someone has a workaround. If they start turning off the "pipes", people will just build "pipes" around them. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be quite beneficial in the long run, sparking interest and development into a "people's" infrastructure that was fault tollerant and cheaper than current solutions. The resulting development might even bring the price down for getting "pipes" to developing areas and help them bootstrap themselves into the digital world. Its so clear.. Its almost as if the underlying technology the internet uses was *designed* to allow people to join unlike networks together and route packets as they needed.. (whump)