I think you misunderstand his point (or perhaps I am giving him too much credit for asking a really good question). Mach speeds are a ratio of the speed of the aircraft to the speed of sound. Mach 6 therefore means "six times the speed of sound". OK, nothing difficult there; most people here probably knew that already. Here's the rub: what is the speed of sound? Hint: it's not the same at sea level and at the 0.1Mm you mention, because the speed of sound varies with the density of the atmosphere. In other words, Mach 6 at sea level (~4500 mph) is not the same speed as Mach 6 at, say, 100,000 feet above sea level (~4100 mph).
In my case, when I'm walking and it feels like each of my legs weighs as much as a Mini Cooper so I can't hardly walk, I know I'm dreaming. I actually remember the first time I realized, "Hey, this isn't right! Wait, I've had this dream before..."
Implanted devices can only be infected with viruses *IF* we leave open, listening communications ports on them. Personally, I think I'd rather have an RJ-45 jack under my armpit than a wireless network port, if the implanted device is essential to health and well-being (like an insulin pump or pacemaker).
"The more complicated the machinery, the easier it is to screw up the plumbing." --Scotty
Hope you enjoy your next job at McDonalds, Mr. Expert Camera Button Presser.
What part of "there is a world of difference between what a really good photographer like Ansel Adams produces and what I produce" did you not understand?
That's a great "next quarter profits" way of looking at things. You have a choice: stand up to the bully and *maybe* get the crap kicked out of you (but the bully has to back up his intimidation with action, which IMHO, tends to be the exception rather than the rule) or cower down and show the bully that you are an easy mark that he can keep tormenting because you won't ever stand up to him. In the long run, I'd rather get beat up once or twice than have the bully constantly picking on me. Especially if carry yourself in a way that says, "you're going to have to work to pick on me", bullies tend to leave you alone...or at least they usually left me alone when I was in school*
*There was one exception one time, but there were three of them, they wanted to fight, and even they backed off a little when they realized I wasn't an easy mark.
It's a privilege bestowed by Congress. It is explicitly optional in the Constitution.
You are arguing semantics. There are "certain inalienable rights" that the Founding Fathers decided were important enough that they included them in the Constitution (well, the Bill of Rights, anyway). Then, there are "rights" that are granted by law. For purposes of refuting what stonewallred said, there is no effective difference between a right and a privilege -- both are provisions in law granting some benefit to the populace. As you stated, a right cannot be revoked by Congress (unless they create an Amendment to the Constitution) whereas a privilege can, but that does not change the fact that stonewallred was wrong to assert that "All you can do is cry and cry some more.". Ummm...no. Actually, were (s)he to take my copyrighted materials, post them all over the web, etc., etc., I would have the legal right to drag his (her?) sorry butt to court and sue for whatever I and my lawyer thought we could convince a judge was reasonable.
Copyright explicitly exists for the sole purpose of improving the arts and sciences. Bribing the creators with a limited monopoly was the means to an end.
Yeah...and?:) Perhaps it would have been better to say that society as a whole has deemed that creative types are entitled to the privilege of decided how and when their creative works are to be distributed (although I see a bit of a disconnect between saying that compensation is irrelevant to copyright, but then saying that copyright exists as a means to bribe creative types to create). In any case, I don't think our views are actually that far apart. OTOH, I think stonewallred is way out in left field.
If photography was simply a matter of "pushing a button", professional photographers would be out of work. While I might enjoy photography (I do), and I might take some really good shots once in a while (I can dream...), there is a world of difference between what a really good photographer like Ansel Adams produces and what I produce.
In other words, your argument is little more than arrogant pretension, sorry.
Ummm, no. You may not like it, but copyright is very much an existent right. It is a right that is frequently abused and stretched to the breaking point in the U.S., but that does not negate the fact that our society as a whole has deemed that creative types should be compensated for their creative works.
do you pay the local authority for their work in creating that park for your personal profit?
Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. Every April 15th, whether I've made any money off of any photographs taken of said parks or not (since photography isn't my sole -- or even primary (tertiary, quaternary, etc.) -- source of income.
Ah, the white knight effect [slashdot.org]. When I speak in straight terms to someone who identifies as a woman, some guy inevitably crawls out to criticise me for being too harsh. Yet when I speak to someone who identifies as a man or who does not identify their gender, it's much more likely that the argument proper is tackled.
I'd have thought you were a jerk for your post whether you were talking to a man, a woman, or a third-unspecified-gender-purple-skinned-nine-eyed-alien-from-Gliese531.
My Suzuki V-Strom (650cc, 478 pounds wet) is obviously much more powerful than my Nissan Frontier (4L, somewhere over 5000 pounds, but I'm too lazy to look up exactly how much) since it can absolutely smoke my pickup in the quarter mile.
Wait, no...my Nissan Frontier is obviously much more powerful than my V-Strom because I can carry so much more in it (four people, plus whatever I can fit in the bed, plus ten thousand pounds towing weight).
Ummm...wait...what was I saying again?
Ultimately, different tools are better suited to different tasks. Arguing that one tool is "more powerful" because it is better at some arbitrary task is just stupid.
Advertising is just a Jedi mind trick; it's only effective in the way you suggest if you are rather weak-minded.
Personally, I find that advertising is only effective once I am already in the market for something (i.e., my car just threw a transmission, and now I am shopping for another one). It is very rare indeed that I see an ad for something and start thinking, "Wow...I could really use one of those." YMMV, of course, but if you often find yourself desperately "needing" something once you saw an ad for it -- even though you were perfectly happy without it until you saw the ad -- then I have a couple of droids that you aren't looking for.
I'd like to file a bug report:
$ gcc -o frickinLaser.exe frickinLaser.cppfrickinLaser.cpp:1:9: error: #include expects "FILENAME" or
frickinLaser.cpp:2:9: error: #include expects "FILENAME" or
frickinLaser.cpp:3: error: '::main' must return 'int'
frickinLaser.cpp: In function 'int main()':
frickinLaser.cpp:5: error: 'queue' is not a member of 'std'
frickinLaser.cpp:5: error: expected `;' before 'Q'
frickinLaser.cpp:6: error: 'Q' was not declared in this scope
frickinLaser.cpp:9: error: return-statement with no value, in function returning 'int'
$
You seem to be suffering from two misguided assumptions. First, you misunderstand the role of the police in our society. Second, you are setting up a false dichotomy.
The police exist to provide the illusion that if you commit a crime, you will go to jail. As long as would-be criminals believe that if they break the law, they will be caught and punished (or at least, that there is an unacceptably high likelihood that they will be caught and punished), they have an incentive not to commit the crime. When you leave a "low-hanging fruit" crime unpunished, you are telling criminals that they can get away with crimes, as long as they aren't murder, rape or kidnapping. That's got Bad Idea written all over it.
While I seriously doubt that anyone on/. is going to argue that the alleged theft of a cell phone (even an eagerly anticipated prototype cell phone from a well-known company with bajillions of eager fanbois) is more important than a murder or rape, it's just plain stupid to argue that all cops should only work on murder and rape cases until the backlog is gone. Think about it for a second -- next time you get in a car wreck or you find someone breaking into your house, do you want the cops to refuse to investigate the accident because there is an unsolved murder that the entire freaking department is working? You will end up with anarchy, and I'll wager that the rate of murders and rapes would skyrocket because the criminals know that the po-po won't respond to calls because the murder and rape cases on the books are "a higher priority" than a simple breaking-and-entering call. And, every once in a while, a seemingly low-priority case ends up leading to the arrest and conviction of a big-ticket criminal.
The police department must try to strike a balance. When a crime has potentially been committed, they have to investigate -- even the lower priority cases -- because it is impossible to solve every crime...but as long as a reasonably high percentage of them are solved, it is more advantageous to most people, most of the time, to obey the law.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you misunderstand his point (or perhaps I am giving him too much credit for asking a really good question). Mach speeds are a ratio of the speed of the aircraft to the speed of sound. Mach 6 therefore means "six times the speed of sound". OK, nothing difficult there; most people here probably knew that already. Here's the rub: what is the speed of sound? Hint: it's not the same at sea level and at the 0.1Mm you mention, because the speed of sound varies with the density of the atmosphere. In other words, Mach 6 at sea level (~4500 mph) is not the same speed as Mach 6 at, say, 100,000 feet above sea level (~4100 mph).
In my case, when I'm walking and it feels like each of my legs weighs as much as a Mini Cooper so I can't hardly walk, I know I'm dreaming. I actually remember the first time I realized, "Hey, this isn't right! Wait, I've had this dream before..."
Welcome to the planet. Find me one place on earth that isn't under threat of some kind of natural disaster.
What about the Canadians, eh?
Implanted devices can only be infected with viruses *IF* we leave open, listening communications ports on them. Personally, I think I'd rather have an RJ-45 jack under my armpit than a wireless network port, if the implanted device is essential to health and well-being (like an insulin pump or pacemaker).
"The more complicated the machinery, the easier it is to screw up the plumbing." --Scotty
No, you were just the only one brave enough to admit that you were ever bullied by a girl :p
Hope you enjoy your next job at McDonalds, Mr. Expert Camera Button Presser.
What part of "there is a world of difference between what a really good photographer like Ansel Adams produces and what I produce" did you not understand?
I was predisposed to be a sysadmin at an early age
You just made my day. That's absolutely priceless! 'Course, now I need to explain why keyboard is drenched with coffee to the hardware troll <grin>
That's a great "next quarter profits" way of looking at things. You have a choice: stand up to the bully and *maybe* get the crap kicked out of you (but the bully has to back up his intimidation with action, which IMHO, tends to be the exception rather than the rule) or cower down and show the bully that you are an easy mark that he can keep tormenting because you won't ever stand up to him. In the long run, I'd rather get beat up once or twice than have the bully constantly picking on me. Especially if carry yourself in a way that says, "you're going to have to work to pick on me", bullies tend to leave you alone...or at least they usually left me alone when I was in school*
*There was one exception one time, but there were three of them, they wanted to fight, and even they backed off a little when they realized I wasn't an easy mark.
It's a privilege bestowed by Congress. It is explicitly optional in the Constitution.
You are arguing semantics. There are "certain inalienable rights" that the Founding Fathers decided were important enough that they included them in the Constitution (well, the Bill of Rights, anyway). Then, there are "rights" that are granted by law. For purposes of refuting what stonewallred said, there is no effective difference between a right and a privilege -- both are provisions in law granting some benefit to the populace. As you stated, a right cannot be revoked by Congress (unless they create an Amendment to the Constitution) whereas a privilege can, but that does not change the fact that stonewallred was wrong to assert that "All you can do is cry and cry some more.". Ummm...no. Actually, were (s)he to take my copyrighted materials, post them all over the web, etc., etc., I would have the legal right to drag his (her?) sorry butt to court and sue for whatever I and my lawyer thought we could convince a judge was reasonable.
Copyright explicitly exists for the sole purpose of improving the arts and sciences. Bribing the creators with a limited monopoly was the means to an end.
Yeah...and? :) Perhaps it would have been better to say that society as a whole has deemed that creative types are entitled to the privilege of decided how and when their creative works are to be distributed (although I see a bit of a disconnect between saying that compensation is irrelevant to copyright, but then saying that copyright exists as a means to bribe creative types to create). In any case, I don't think our views are actually that far apart. OTOH, I think stonewallred is way out in left field.
If photography was simply a matter of "pushing a button", professional photographers would be out of work. While I might enjoy photography (I do), and I might take some really good shots once in a while (I can dream...), there is a world of difference between what a really good photographer like Ansel Adams produces and what I produce.
In other words, your argument is little more than arrogant pretension, sorry.
Ummm, no. You may not like it, but copyright is very much an existent right. It is a right that is frequently abused and stretched to the breaking point in the U.S., but that does not negate the fact that our society as a whole has deemed that creative types should be compensated for their creative works.
do you pay the local authority for their work in creating that park for your personal profit?
Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. Every April 15th, whether I've made any money off of any photographs taken of said parks or not (since photography isn't my sole -- or even primary (tertiary, quaternary, etc.) -- source of income.
Ah, the white knight effect [slashdot.org]. When I speak in straight terms to someone who identifies as a woman, some guy inevitably crawls out to criticise me for being too harsh. Yet when I speak to someone who identifies as a man or who does not identify their gender, it's much more likely that the argument proper is tackled.
I'd have thought you were a jerk for your post whether you were talking to a man, a woman, or a third-unspecified-gender-purple-skinned-nine-eyed-alien-from-Gliese531.
lol, I really didn't expect a fix; I was just trying to get a laugh :)
My Suzuki V-Strom (650cc, 478 pounds wet) is obviously much more powerful than my Nissan Frontier (4L, somewhere over 5000 pounds, but I'm too lazy to look up exactly how much) since it can absolutely smoke my pickup in the quarter mile.
Wait, no...my Nissan Frontier is obviously much more powerful than my V-Strom because I can carry so much more in it (four people, plus whatever I can fit in the bed, plus ten thousand pounds towing weight).
Ummm...wait...what was I saying again?
Ultimately, different tools are better suited to different tasks. Arguing that one tool is "more powerful" because it is better at some arbitrary task is just stupid.
...or to regularly delete your browsing history.
Maybe I belong in the tin-foil hat crowd, but I have my browser set to do this every time I close it.
Advertising is just a Jedi mind trick; it's only effective in the way you suggest if you are rather weak-minded.
Personally, I find that advertising is only effective once I am already in the market for something (i.e., my car just threw a transmission, and now I am shopping for another one). It is very rare indeed that I see an ad for something and start thinking, "Wow...I could really use one of those." YMMV, of course, but if you often find yourself desperately "needing" something once you saw an ad for it -- even though you were perfectly happy without it until you saw the ad -- then I have a couple of droids that you aren't looking for.
I'd like to file a bug report:
$ gcc -o frickinLaser.exe frickinLaser.cppfrickinLaser.cpp:1:9: error: #include expects "FILENAME" or frickinLaser.cpp:2:9: error: #include expects "FILENAME" or frickinLaser.cpp:3: error: '::main' must return 'int' frickinLaser.cpp: In function 'int main()': frickinLaser.cpp:5: error: 'queue' is not a member of 'std' frickinLaser.cpp:5: error: expected `;' before 'Q' frickinLaser.cpp:6: error: 'Q' was not declared in this scope frickinLaser.cpp:9: error: return-statement with no value, in function returning 'int' $
Yes, he did it on porpoise.
(Actually, what he typed was wrong in either case: "proposes", as in, "He proposes to his girlfriend tonight.").
If you want to trust the government like that then fine, but you are a minority in this respect.
Unfortunately, I doubt he is.
You seem to be suffering from two misguided assumptions. First, you misunderstand the role of the police in our society. Second, you are setting up a false dichotomy.
/. is going to argue that the alleged theft of a cell phone (even an eagerly anticipated prototype cell phone from a well-known company with bajillions of eager fanbois) is more important than a murder or rape, it's just plain stupid to argue that all cops should only work on murder and rape cases until the backlog is gone. Think about it for a second -- next time you get in a car wreck or you find someone breaking into your house, do you want the cops to refuse to investigate the accident because there is an unsolved murder that the entire freaking department is working? You will end up with anarchy, and I'll wager that the rate of murders and rapes would skyrocket because the criminals know that the po-po won't respond to calls because the murder and rape cases on the books are "a higher priority" than a simple breaking-and-entering call. And, every once in a while, a seemingly low-priority case ends up leading to the arrest and conviction of a big-ticket criminal.
The police exist to provide the illusion that if you commit a crime, you will go to jail. As long as would-be criminals believe that if they break the law, they will be caught and punished (or at least, that there is an unacceptably high likelihood that they will be caught and punished), they have an incentive not to commit the crime. When you leave a "low-hanging fruit" crime unpunished, you are telling criminals that they can get away with crimes, as long as they aren't murder, rape or kidnapping. That's got Bad Idea written all over it.
While I seriously doubt that anyone on
The police department must try to strike a balance. When a crime has potentially been committed, they have to investigate -- even the lower priority cases -- because it is impossible to solve every crime...but as long as a reasonably high percentage of them are solved, it is more advantageous to most people, most of the time, to obey the law.
We only have enough oil for 10-20 years more.
Call me cynical, but I've been hearing that for the last 30 years.
You mean it will be filled with recreational vehicles?
Texas, Schmexas. I live in Alaska, which if cut in half, would make Texas the third largest state in the country :D