It's been suggested that some of our simplest consumers of CO2 are also the most efficient. A modified algae that would flourish in parts of the ocean where it is sparse today would tie up a lot of lose carbon and ultimately send it sinking to the bottom of the ocean.
-Physically demanding, resulting in a sense of pride and accomplishment (not waving a remote around) -Strength- and agility-building excercise -Completely open-ended gameplay, limited only by the imagination of the player -Near-infinite variety of environments, limited only by a very complicated set of growth algorithms
With all the games and TV shows and electronic toys available to them, I still see my neighbor's kids in a tree on a regular basis.
The only way the cops could catch them "in the act" would be to stake out the intended victim 24/7 until they attacked her. This risks exposing the police tail, with two possible results: the would-be rapist(s) fleeing and no charges at all being possible, or a vioent confrontation with the cops.
What's more, it essentially uses the intended victim as bait. If you tell her then you're telling a woman "hey, someone wants to rape you, we want to follow you around so we can arrest him when he tries it". That in itself is psychologically damaging.
Agreed. It's not so much misguided as it is unenforceable. I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea to track convicted rapists online, but it's certainly futile without direct monitoring of their internet activity.
No, the summary very poorly captures the point of the article, which you seemed to miss as well.
Vista's DRM does not erode our freedoms on the internet. Nor does anything else currently on the market. The DRM does, however, represent a change in the way companies think things should work, and that threatens to impact 'net freedom.
The article is a warning, not an accusation. It's a call for us to be mindful of the greedy corporations who will trample those freedoms given the opportunity. There is nothing wrong with a company using DRM--you have a choice not to accept it and the products that use it--until they shove it down your throat and force you to use it in everything, even content you produce yourself. So far, they haven't done that.
Bill Thompson warns readers that new DRM technology, especially that found in Vista, is damaging the freedoms that the internet was based on.
The article says:
...It is not that the features built into Windows are evil, as some of the more hyperbolic bloggers claim, nor even that they are unnecessary.
It is that they change the way our computers work and the way they relate to the network, and those changes could be used to take away our freedoms.
Thanks to the internet we are seeing an unprecedented shift of power from the centre to the people, a shift that we observe in the media, in politics and in the way large companies respond to their customers.
We need to ensure that the freedoms we currently enjoy online are preserved as the network evolves, or this shift could easily end up as minor historical footnote.
The article is a warning to be vigilant, not a cry of impending doom. It's worth reading. Just ignore the summary.
If there are errors in the report that other scientists can find, there is now incentive to find them and weed them out. It's the scientific process pushed forward by money.
Say the report lists 1,000 sources for its findings. Then say this reward results in 100 of those being found to be biased or scientifically unsound. By attrition, the other 900 stand up to heavy scrutiny fueled by cash rewards. The report is revised with the new findings and it is that much more solid.
Is that not what peer review does? Weed out the less reliable data in favor of that which cannot be (currently) refuted?
If a report were issued that global warming was not manmade and a thinktank offered a similar reward, would you also call it a bribe?
If (and this is a very strong IF) they do this right, what they are doing is using money to accelerate the scientific debate. If there are errors in the report that other scientists can find, there is now incentive to find them and weed them out. It's the scientific process pushed forward by money.
The downside of it will, of course, be that a lot of "scientists" will make wild claims in an attempt to collect on this cash and muddy the waters. But I think in the long run this might actually speed up the process by which we arrive at a definite conclusion to the debate and finally start seriously working on solutions.
If your goal isn't expanding the Linux install base, then I wasn't addressing you:)
My last line summed it up: if you want to convince people to use Linux, meet their needs. If you don't care that they continue using MS because they see no viable alternative, then you've got no reason to do anything for them.
Side note, unrelated to parent: I was wondering when my post would get its first troll point. Because it's just so obvious that's what I was doing.
I agree that one cannot expect Linux devs to develop something just because it's asked for. But I frequently see Linux pushed as being this superior alternative to Microsoft, yet it seems none of those pushing it are willing to do the work that THOUSANDS of non-developers have been saying needs to be done for them to be able to make a smooth transition to Linux (like Exchange functionality).
Like I say, it's a question of what you want. Most of us who are looking to use Linux don't have the time or expertise to develop the apps we need; We have to choose from what's out there. If you (generic developer) are interested in seeing more people move to Linux for whatever reason--sticking it to Microsoft, increased use of open standards, et cetera--then it's up to you to give us the tools to switch.
Imagine being one of the devolopers to bring an Exchange or AD to Linux. Think about what that would look like on a resume. If that's not incentive to do it, I can't think of much better (besides a big wad of cash)
I *thought* the great strength of OSS was the ability of the community of users to contribute directly to its development either by direct development or by conversing with the developers. When some says "Linux would work for me/my company IF..." the development community really needs to sit up and pay attention if they want to continue to grow their userbase and be taken seriously.
All too often the reaction to just such a statement is...well, what the parent says. "It can't/won't be done, you need to just use what we/they give you, you're doing it wrong." The response of the user raising the issue is almost always to drop Linux and return to Windows, which does what they need without the hoops of Terminal Services and incomplete WINE compatibility.
You want more people using Linux? Listen when they ask for something.
They left out crucial information on playing as Germans. The *only* way to learn how that faction works is to start up a skirmish and experiment with it.
Problem: minivans aren't build for use on anything but roads. True SUVs (which my XTerra is) are designed for at least light offroad use. I wouldn't dare drive my father's Astro to the places I drive my XTerra to go fishing.
Oh, and I get better mileage than my father does. Of course, he can haul about twice as much stuff, but that's not what I need.
I think the season ends there shortly before it starts here. I haven't been paying attention, I don't get SciFi (I refuse to pay $50 a month for 100 channels, five of which I will watch)
The TAUIP and TAUCP unit packs are great compliations of balanced 3rd party units. On the rare occasion that we play TA at my LAN parties, TAUIP is the pack of choice.
I do recall back in 2000 there being a stupid amount of overpowered units...I especially remember one that had an insane ground speed that could be used to simply bypass base defenses and go straight for a commander. You had to literally wall in your main base to defend against them.
Of course, no game that can be modded is immune to such things. Two examples:
The grappling hook on Quake. If you didn't know how to use it and no one would tell you, you were at a distinct disdvantage.
The various Counter-Strike mods that give permanent abilities for kills. Take the WarCraft 3 mod, for example...specifically when experience is retained. Players who dominate a server and play regularly have abilities that can't be matched by new joins, completely unbalancing play.
I assume in the UK it's legal for you to capture the feed with your PC, so I fail to see a distinction between you recording it yourself and downloading it via torrent.
We Yanks, on the other hand, currently have no way to see the Doctor in a timely manner without the aid of torrents.
Something tells me the majority of non-British Dr. Who fans will continue to obtain the show by less...contstraining means.
Eventually they'll figure it out: until we can download it and watch it in the viewer of our choice as often as we want when we want, we will continue to obtain copies of such content by other means than theirs.
i don't care if you or anyone else drives an suv - but i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that your experience is not the norm in this regard.
I agree. I have a wife, two kids, and a large dog that frequently travels with us. I regularly pull trailers for various purposes. I do get a lot of the utility out of SUVs, which a lot of drivers can't say.
I cringe every time I see someone drive an Expedition 30 miles to work alone. SUVs are status symbols, and every soccer mom in the country seems to think she needs one to drive two or three or four kids to practice. Fathers buy them for their daughters because they think them to be safer due to their mass, even though nearly every SUV I've seen in a serious accident ended up laying on its roof.
What's worst about it is the number of drivers who get in a large SUV and drive it like it's a car. News flash, people: it's not. It doesn't accelerate or stop as quickly as the commuter car you traded in, your perspective is substantially different and you probably have more blind spots. Please stop trying to kill the rest of us on the road just so that you can feel safer or more important. Thank you.
It's a 2WD V6. I (like the vast majority of SUV drivers) have no use for 4WD. That will account for the improved mileage. And like I said, this vehicle surprised me by performing better than the sticker said.
Slashdot Mirror
One word:
algae.
It's been suggested that some of our simplest consumers of CO2 are also the most efficient. A modified algae that would flourish in parts of the ocean where it is sparse today would tie up a lot of lose carbon and ultimately send it sinking to the bottom of the ocean.
-Physically demanding, resulting in a sense of pride and accomplishment (not waving a remote around)
-Strength- and agility-building excercise
-Completely open-ended gameplay, limited only by the imagination of the player
-Near-infinite variety of environments, limited only by a very complicated set of growth algorithms
With all the games and TV shows and electronic toys available to them, I still see my neighbor's kids in a tree on a regular basis.
...shortly followed by the suicides of thousands of Catholic priests.
The only way the cops could catch them "in the act" would be to stake out the intended victim 24/7 until they attacked her. This risks exposing the police tail, with two possible results: the would-be rapist(s) fleeing and no charges at all being possible, or a vioent confrontation with the cops.
What's more, it essentially uses the intended victim as bait. If you tell her then you're telling a woman "hey, someone wants to rape you, we want to follow you around so we can arrest him when he tries it". That in itself is psychologically damaging.
"Yes, officer, my screen name is 'Optix.'"
*goes home*
www.yahoo.com
No, the summary very poorly captures the point of the article, which you seemed to miss as well.
Vista's DRM does not erode our freedoms on the internet. Nor does anything else currently on the market. The DRM does, however, represent a change in the way companies think things should work, and that threatens to impact 'net freedom.
The article is a warning, not an accusation. It's a call for us to be mindful of the greedy corporations who will trample those freedoms given the opportunity. There is nothing wrong with a company using DRM--you have a choice not to accept it and the products that use it--until they shove it down your throat and force you to use it in everything, even content you produce yourself. So far, they haven't done that.
I suppose it's only appropriate that /. editors only read the summary of the article, just like the rest of us :D
Do you really think there haven't been a number of rewards that said "The first person who proves _____ gets $x"?
Your reading comprehension needs some work.
If there are errors in the report that other scientists can find, there is now incentive to find them and weed them out. It's the scientific process pushed forward by money.
Say the report lists 1,000 sources for its findings. Then say this reward results in 100 of those being found to be biased or scientifically unsound. By attrition, the other 900 stand up to heavy scrutiny fueled by cash rewards. The report is revised with the new findings and it is that much more solid.
Is that not what peer review does? Weed out the less reliable data in favor of that which cannot be (currently) refuted?
Funny, I thought it was a long-standing practice to offer rewards for proof or disproof of something in science.
If a report were issued that global warming was not manmade and a thinktank offered a similar reward, would you also call it a bribe?
If (and this is a very strong IF) they do this right, what they are doing is using money to accelerate the scientific debate. If there are errors in the report that other scientists can find, there is now incentive to find them and weed them out. It's the scientific process pushed forward by money.
The downside of it will, of course, be that a lot of "scientists" will make wild claims in an attempt to collect on this cash and muddy the waters. But I think in the long run this might actually speed up the process by which we arrive at a definite conclusion to the debate and finally start seriously working on solutions.
If your goal isn't expanding the Linux install base, then I wasn't addressing you :)
My last line summed it up: if you want to convince people to use Linux, meet their needs. If you don't care that they continue using MS because they see no viable alternative, then you've got no reason to do anything for them.
Side note, unrelated to parent: I was wondering when my post would get its first troll point. Because it's just so obvious that's what I was doing.
Hint: if you don't agree with it, use Overrated.
I agree that one cannot expect Linux devs to develop something just because it's asked for. But I frequently see Linux pushed as being this superior alternative to Microsoft, yet it seems none of those pushing it are willing to do the work that THOUSANDS of non-developers have been saying needs to be done for them to be able to make a smooth transition to Linux (like Exchange functionality).
Like I say, it's a question of what you want. Most of us who are looking to use Linux don't have the time or expertise to develop the apps we need; We have to choose from what's out there. If you (generic developer) are interested in seeing more people move to Linux for whatever reason--sticking it to Microsoft, increased use of open standards, et cetera--then it's up to you to give us the tools to switch.
Imagine being one of the devolopers to bring an Exchange or AD to Linux. Think about what that would look like on a resume. If that's not incentive to do it, I can't think of much better (besides a big wad of cash)
I *thought* the great strength of OSS was the ability of the community of users to contribute directly to its development either by direct development or by conversing with the developers. When some says "Linux would work for me/my company IF..." the development community really needs to sit up and pay attention if they want to continue to grow their userbase and be taken seriously.
All too often the reaction to just such a statement is...well, what the parent says. "It can't/won't be done, you need to just use what we/they give you, you're doing it wrong." The response of the user raising the issue is almost always to drop Linux and return to Windows, which does what they need without the hoops of Terminal Services and incomplete WINE compatibility.
You want more people using Linux? Listen when they ask for something.
They left out crucial information on playing as Germans. The *only* way to learn how that faction works is to start up a skirmish and experiment with it.
Problem: minivans aren't build for use on anything but roads. True SUVs (which my XTerra is) are designed for at least light offroad use. I wouldn't dare drive my father's Astro to the places I drive my XTerra to go fishing.
Oh, and I get better mileage than my father does. Of course, he can haul about twice as much stuff, but that's not what I need.
I think the season ends there shortly before it starts here. I haven't been paying attention, I don't get SciFi (I refuse to pay $50 a month for 100 channels, five of which I will watch)
The TAUIP and TAUCP unit packs are great compliations of balanced 3rd party units. On the rare occasion that we play TA at my LAN parties, TAUIP is the pack of choice.
I do recall back in 2000 there being a stupid amount of overpowered units...I especially remember one that had an insane ground speed that could be used to simply bypass base defenses and go straight for a commander. You had to literally wall in your main base to defend against them.
Of course, no game that can be modded is immune to such things. Two examples:
The grappling hook on Quake. If you didn't know how to use it and no one would tell you, you were at a distinct disdvantage.
The various Counter-Strike mods that give permanent abilities for kills. Take the WarCraft 3 mod, for example...specifically when experience is retained. Players who dominate a server and play regularly have abilities that can't be matched by new joins, completely unbalancing play.
I assume in the UK it's legal for you to capture the feed with your PC, so I fail to see a distinction between you recording it yourself and downloading it via torrent.
We Yanks, on the other hand, currently have no way to see the Doctor in a timely manner without the aid of torrents.
Something tells me the majority of non-British Dr. Who fans will continue to obtain the show by less...contstraining means.
Eventually they'll figure it out: until we can download it and watch it in the viewer of our choice as often as we want when we want, we will continue to obtain copies of such content by other means than theirs.
i don't care if you or anyone else drives an suv - but i'm gonna go out on a limb and say that your experience is not the norm in this regard.
I agree. I have a wife, two kids, and a large dog that frequently travels with us. I regularly pull trailers for various purposes. I do get a lot of the utility out of SUVs, which a lot of drivers can't say.
I cringe every time I see someone drive an Expedition 30 miles to work alone. SUVs are status symbols, and every soccer mom in the country seems to think she needs one to drive two or three or four kids to practice. Fathers buy them for their daughters because they think them to be safer due to their mass, even though nearly every SUV I've seen in a serious accident ended up laying on its roof.
What's worst about it is the number of drivers who get in a large SUV and drive it like it's a car. News flash, people: it's not. It doesn't accelerate or stop as quickly as the commuter car you traded in, your perspective is substantially different and you probably have more blind spots. Please stop trying to kill the rest of us on the road just so that you can feel safer or more important. Thank you.
I know. It's on my bookshelf :)
It's a 2WD V6. I (like the vast majority of SUV drivers) have no use for 4WD. That will account for the improved mileage. And like I said, this vehicle surprised me by performing better than the sticker said.