The Waffle House has a jukebox that plays music. They make up to $0.25 per song for their financial benefit.
And what about a Karaoke bar? Isn't that a business establishment that attracts customers by having people sing songs?
I've also been to a piano bar where a couple of guys play just about any song by request... Putting down a couple bucks with your request gets them to play it sooner.
Should I call the police?
-- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
I really hope this series takes off. I haven't seen a decent "poke the object" game for years. I used to love those LucasArts (and Sierra) games. Hit the Road, Monkey Island, and Day of the Tentacle were some of the funniest games I've ever played.
Nowadays, people think that the only way a game can take off is with massive amounts of violence and online capability.
But I think the truth is that people just want a game that doesn't reach an ending.
It can be the same game with the same characters, but as long as there is a steady flow of new things to do, people will continue playing. Hence the success of WoW and GTA.
As long as these games continue to come out in a steady flow, I think this "miniseries" idea has potential.
-- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
But, you may ask next, is the Wikipedia accurate enough? After all, there is an ongoing controversy over whether its accuracy is the equal of a traditional encyclopedia.
And we all know that the encyclopedia is 100% spot on. No matter how much all translations and versions contradict each other. Like the bible.
Maybe I'm being too crass. Maybe they're right. Maybe thousands of years from now, people will think that Steve Colbert was the son of God. Who knows.
Either way, I think Wikipediology is a pretty interesting concept. I think that beyond using it as a historical resource, it's fascinating to see how something can grow and change when thousands of people are influencing it. Like the stock market, it becomes an 'entity' of sorts. I think true anthropological benefit would lie in studying how it has evolved.
I think the same could also be said about slashdot. Imagine a study on the evolution of trolls, annonymous cowards, and karma whores. Call it Slashdotology.
-- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
I was wondering what are your thoughts on being an early adopter of wind energy?
Do you think that if enough people bought these windmills, the price per kWh could compete with the local power grid's? Will it ever?
With rising energy costs, global warming, and environmental concerns, I think the answer to your final question is a resounding "maybe".
This same energy-conservation trend has shown itself in hybrid vehicles. The first hybrids were priced almost twice the cost of regular vehicles. So people doing the math and asking themselves the same questions you are about wind power. However, as popularity grew and more hybrid vehicle models became available, the prices became more competitive. Even the government has gotten involved in many areas by offering tax cuts, toll leniencies, and access to restricted lanes as incentives. While many people would argue that it still isn't cost-effective to purchase a hybrid, there have been over a million sold.
I think there are other benefits that can be said about windmills. I remember reading a report once which showed that minor improvements to homes (new paint, adding walk-in closets, new windows) increased sale prices by way more than was invested. How much more could you get for a house when you tell a potential buyer that their electricity bill will be 20-90% less other homes because of the big fan in the backyard? I'm willing to bet it would sell for at least $10k more in most areas.
So returning to your second question, I think the outcome of windmills will indeed be determined by their popularity. If they catch on, I think production will diversify and the government will get involved to offer incentives. However, the article itself says "the SkyStream turbine is not meant to wean you from the grid completely".
-- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Are these new changes happening out of some desire to resemble the old Windows software as little as possible? Is there some kind of necessity to change the interface? Does it need a complete overhaul?
I'm sure lots of people are gonna respond to that with a resounding "YES", but I personally have gotten used to what it is. It took me years to learn the ins and outs of Office after computers stopped coming bundled with MS Word. Even now, I've done away with that side-by-side view in Outlook 2003 and moved everything back to the same way it was in 2000. This goes the same for most other programs which throw in an abundance of menus and graphics to try to make things TOO user friendly. Nine times out of ten, if there is an option for the "traditional view", I'll take it.
I dunno, maybe I'm just living in the past. I still use vi on Linux, I still use Notepad in windows whenever I can, and I don't feel any desire to get used to any "ribbons" flying across my screen.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise." ~Mao Zedong
On the other hand, I can imagine a whole lot of pro-choicers refusing to have these stem cells because no embryos were destroyed. They're utterly obsessed with aborting something, anything
Really? You know many pro-choicers? You have accounts and statistics supporting your claim? I could've sworn they were fighting for the right to choose, not a systematic requirement that all pregnant women must abort. Obsessed with aborting? I've never met anyone, no matter how pro-choice, that I would ever sat that about. And I've also never met anyone who has had an abortion who says it was an easy thing to do.
One side blames fetuses for all their problems and is obsessed with picking on the weak who can't fight back. The other side wants to save all babies and then let them fight for the remaining petty economic scraps or starve in the free market afterwards.
Neither side does any of that. One side believes we have a right to choose wether or not you should be forced to bring a child into the world when you can't take care of them. The other believes that its not an ethical choice and you are supposed to spend your life doing the best you can to take care of your child. These aren't a bunch of evil people arguing over which one can outdo the other... they are expressing the views that they believe are the right thing to do. Both sides have legitimate arguments, and to dismiss them all as hypocrites is to be just as bad as any extremist.
That's what makes this stem cell find so amazing... it offers a solution that can satisfy both sides. How often can a news headline say something like that?
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
People were increasingly making use of anonymous proxies that couldn't be easily blocked by corporate firewalls, bringing in their own wireless broadband services for use with a personal laptop or with a work PC or accessing instant messaging via mobile phones and PDAs.
"Organisations have valid concerns about security risks, but all you need is technology to secure the network perimiter properly," Arrigo said.
Now this statement isn't true at all. Anyone who has ever worked in network security realizes what a complete nightmare this is and that "technology" is having a hell of a tough time keeping up. This article is completely dismissing security as the reason for blocked websites. Leaky browsers and constantly exploited new technologies have made security a serious priority. (I'm not even gonna go into the irony that these comments were made by Microsoft execs...)
A company I had worked for recently had systematically blocked most popular online services over the past couple years. Myspace, hotmail, AIM, gmail... And I see the reason behind it considering we were in a sensative compartmented information facility that restricted external communication (not even allowed to have a cell phone). The company couldn't afford to have a large-scale information leak caused by viruses and/or non-secure communication.
However, there were always ways around. I could still check my old college email through their website, which was not on the restricted list. There were endless forums that were also left unrestricted (they left slashdot alone, thank god). And there was recently an incident within the company recently where someone was fired for pornography. So the general frustration stemmed from the fact that people could still spend all day on forums and looking up porn, but I wasn't even allowed to check my gmail, update my myspace, or send an IM. However, I'm sure the company would've like to block every forum, porn site, and web-based email site if they could. It's just not something that is in any way possible.
At any rate, I don't think most companies are blocking these sites because they are seen as unproductive, but rather for the risks that they pose.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He answers that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
"Computers aren't particularly good at learning, for example, or reasoning by analogy"
Computers aren't good at retaining knowledge and recognizing patterns? That's news to me... this statement is obviously made by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about...
A very strong and useful technique in AI is to create learning algorithms. Some of these, such as reinforcement learning, are actually quite effective. Using something like Monte Carlo methods to give it a randomness factor simulates human learning, and computers don't forget what they are taught. The difficulty with learning isn't that computers can't do it... it's being able to define an effective set of state-action pairs for the computer to learn upon.
I spent time researching natural language processing, sometimes using AI techniques that did exactly what this person claims computers aren't good at: reasoning by analogy. One method involved building a knowledge base which generalized input so that patterns can be found and the grammar could be recovered. The weakness in the system wasn't reasoning by analogy, in fact I'd say computers are much better at that than people. It was rather a lack of a real world model which allowed for a wider array of perception.
The reason this game is difficult is not based on a computer's inability to solve problems, rather that there are so many possibilities that we cannot effectively design algorithms that the can be put to use. This isn't even news, the same has been said about the game of Go for the longest time.
I think a more accurate statement for this person to make would've been: "The overwhelming complexity of poker makes it a difficult game to define in a way for a computer to be able to play effectively."
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
"Afterall, there's a company called Pods that owns www.pods.com that rents pods for people to move their stuff in and that was established in 1998. I'm sure they've trademarked 'pod.' It's so funny how Apple is sending to cease and desist letters to companies when they should send themselves one."
They can't sue them because PODS (Portable On-Demand Storage) isn't in the same realm of consumer goods as the iPod. RTFA: Apple has issued warnings to makers of other electronic devices containing the word 'pod.'
Call it a crazy double-standard, but I think its really more a problem with trademark law.
What I do think is ridiculous about this is that these companies, despite developing electronic devices, aren't even trying to rip off Apple. It looks like Jobs & company just want to flex their muscles to try to intimidate others.
There are all sorts of knock-off electronic devices (like the Super Shuffle) that play mp3s that Apple is steamed up about but cannot stop. Sure they develop a nearly identical product, but they slip through the cracks because they don't actually violate any trademarks.
This doesn't just happen with iPods. I remember a few years ago when I was in Europe at a Russian flea market, they had knock-offs of EVERYTHING: Milson leather jackets, PlanStation games, Adadis shoes, Pamasomic TVs... and I'm sure they now have their iPod knock-offs. And while I'm sure anyone caught doing this got in some sort of trouble, I think they butcher the names just enough to slip by on any trademark violation suit. I also think it ends up being a waste of time and money for large corporations to chase down these small-time bootleggers.
Meanwhile, an honest company like TightPod is getting reamed because of a three letter word.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
What the hell is Google thinking? Any mention of their name is great publicity and they should be happy with it. Instead they look like a bunch of corporate penny mongers trying to be a general inconvenience.
It almost reminds me of the time that Despair, Inc. patented the frowney emoticon:-( and threatened to charge anyone that used them. "Let our message to trademark violators be clear. Whether you are a 4th grade nothing using your momma's AOL account, or you are Time Magazine's 'Man of the Year', we are going to hunt you down, and when we do, we're really going to give you something to:-(® about."
The only difference is that Despair was only joking:-P.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
-Earth's Diameter: 12,756.274 km
-Pluto's Diameter: 2306±20 km
-Jupiter's Diameter: 142,984 km
-Proportion of Earth to Pluter: 12756.274 / 2306 = 5.531
-Proportion of Jupiter to Earth: 142984 / 12756.274 = 11.209
Hmm... Jupiter has over twice the proportional difference with Earth as Earth has with Pluto. So I guess Jupiter wouldn't really consider Earth a real planet.
Personally, I think we should leave the little guy alone. Throw UB313 in there as well. Just give it a cool name that fits in with that whole "my very educated mother..." thing.
Like the well learned and professional scientist said: "We'll call them dwarf planets or something".
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
In the very first paragraph, he establishes what a horrible person Jobs is for competing with Microsoft. And I suppose David was an asshole for standing up to Goliath? Needless to say, he doesn't even mention Bill Gates throughout the entire article.
So then he goes on to attack the improvements over the past couple years:
He claimed that Apple shipped five "major" updates to OS X, including Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger, though I'd argue that virtually none of those were major updates at all. (Unless you count the cost. At $129 for each version, that's about $750 on Mac OS X upgrades since 2001. That kind of puts the cost of Windows in perspective.) But he counted Tiger on Intel as a sixth major release, because of the effort in porting the OS X code to a new platform (which, actually, had been in the works for a long time and wasn't the 210 day project Jobs claimed).
By that measure, Microsoft has improved Windows by a far greater degree. In the same time frame, it has shipped Windows XP Home Edition, Windows XP Professional Edition, Windows XP Professional x64 Edition, Windows XP Media Center Edition, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2004, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 (and 2005 UR2), Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005, Windows XP Home and Professional N Editions, Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2, absolutely a big Windows upgrade), Windows XP Embedded, Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs, and Windows XP Starter Edition in various languages
Am I missing something? XP, XP, XP, XP... the only differences between most being software bundles, hardware compatibility, and driver support. and he fails to mention that pretty much all of those also have a price tag well over $100.
Thanks to the 64-bit Xeon chip that will be shipping in the new Mac Pro systems, Leopard will be fully 64-bit enabled (unlike Tiger, which is only partially 64-bit and then only on certain Power PC systems). That means that OS X will finally do what Windows XP x64 Edition did last year: Run 32-bit and 64-bit applications natively, side-by-side. Good for them.
So Windows released a seperate 64-bit version (which you have to buy seperately as well) before Apple. Again, no big deal. Almost every product on the market is starting to move towards 64-bit support. Is Apple really "copying" Windows here?
It seems to me that all these arguments are really week and that this guy just wants to complain about Apple. I really think he could've used his time more productively.
It's important for you to understand, however, that I don't have Leopard. I'm basing this only on what Apple showed off at WWDC.
Maybe you should try it before you knock it.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Wow, look at the replies... I love how aroused everyone gets over the prospect of a possible government conspiracy. I think the government really does have its priorities, but monitoring 10 million computers to find out what porn sites people like to visit isn't one of them.
From the article:
"This vulnerability could impact government systems, private industry and critical infrastructure, as well as individual and home users"
I think that statement is pretty much an ordered list of government priorities when urging these security measures. Why is the government getting involved? They're looking out for their own interests. The average government worker is likely sitting on a windows workstation right now, surfing the internet with IE, creating a presentation in Powerpoint, running some calculations in Excel, or typing a document in Word... and they probably don't even have the administrative rights to run their own updates, so they sit around waiting for some IT grunt to get off his lazy ass and do it for them.
Even as we speak, I'm sitting at a Windows work station without version management and without admin rights. I have to use the company standards of IE and Office because I can't install Mozilla and OpenOffice. I don't even know if our IT department is aware that they need to run any patches. I haven't seen them do it since I've started working here. And what's worse, I'm working for a government contractor which is always making a lot of fuss about security!
Which brings me to my next point. The government is also looking out for industry and commerce. I'm sure you've noticed the U.S. economy isn't what it used to be. The last thing this country needs is a cyber attack wreaking havoc among businesses and putting even less trust in online commerce than there already is.
Actually, the DHS has funded open source security auditing. Its true, they have never made it an imperative critical update, but you have to take into account the users and usages of open-source products. If you've installed and/or administrated Linux, its very likely you have enough know-how that you don't need a government warning to get you to stay on top of security patches.
Windows, however, is the most widely used operating system, especially for people who don't have the first clue about security or administration. How many Windows users out there use Administrator as their standard account? People like that need to be warned about the importance of updates.
While I'm not going to deny the possibility that they do have more up their sleeves, I think the past couple years have made me less likely to don the tin foil. With the terrorist attacks, resulting WMD wars, Gee Dubya elections, and blatant fear-tactics, I've really begun to realize that "government intelligence" truly is an oxymoron.
--
Take off every sig. Move sig for great justice.
I don't want to get flamed by saying people are asking dumb questions, but everyone just needs to stop relying on simple arithmetic when dealing with the size of space... The concepts involved are far more complicated than that.
One thing people don't seem to be grasping is that with the Big Bang model, the size of the universe isn't measured by the distance between two particles floating on the "edge". It is actually a measure of the width of the "fabric" of the known universe, space-time. Its difficult to grasp this since it is not something easily perceived.
The real reason for the size of the universe being so much larger is that the laws governing the size of space-time are not the same as the laws of spacial relativaty, and therefore are not constrained to the upper bound of the speed of light.
The best analogy that I've heard is the ant on the balloon example. The idea is that you picture an ant sitting on a balloon with a bread crumb an inch away. If you were to blow up the balloon to twice its size, the bread crumb wouldn't necessarily move to a distance of two inches from the ant.
In this example, we are the ants and we are watching the galaxies, represented by the bread crumb, moving away from us. However, the fabric of existence is expanding at a much larger rate.
The "what's beyond the edge" question is essentially a pointless question when dealing with space-time. There is no "edge" because nothing can possibly exist outside of the realm of spacetime.
And if that concept doesn't satisfy the question, then a simple-minded answer would be that an "edge" can never be reached as space-time is always expanding faster than any particle could possibly hope to keep up with it.
-- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
IMHO, Matt Damon has become so typecast that he plays the same character in every movie. I don't think he's changed his style in any role from Mr. Ripley, Mr. Bourne, Mr. Loki, Mr. Hunting, and Private Ryan. Matt Damon fans can argue till they're blue in the face, but I just cannot see him joining the ranks of George Takei, Leonard Nimoy, and Patrick Stewart. What next, playing the role of Lance Armstrong?
::sigh::
Beam me up:
So Matt Damon will always be Matt Damon. So what? William Shatner will always be William Shatner and its worked for him! Now the question remains: will Matt Damon be able to follow the framework of Mr. Shatner's drawn-out, studdering, overacting character? Lets go to the footage!
William Shatner [Star Trek]: You.... killed my... son... you... Klingon... bastard
Matt Damon [Team America]: Maaaaatt Daaaamon
Maybe Damon will make an excellent Kirk. Besides, this being an odd-numbered Star Trek movie, it has every right to be a steaming heap of Ferengi dung and still keep the movies going strong. So maybe I should just watch the previews, eat my popcorn, take a nap, and wait for the sequel.
-- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Carbon, glass, and aramid fiber reinforced polymer rebars have been in use in combination with concrete structures for a while now. They are non-corrosive and have a high tensile strength, making them a better choice for steel. They are especially good for pre-stressed structures, such as concrete tubes which have the rebars stretched by a hydraulic machine and spun around as the concrete is poured so that it will cure under centripetal force (I think Modern Marvels on the History Channel did something about this).
Yet I still find it surprising that they are willing to build the entire bridge out of it. Despite all the hype about how much stronger FRP is than steel, I'm wondering how it will hold up in extreme conditions.
A couple months ago, I got into a discussion about the WTC collapse. One thing that was mentioned is that a large part of the collapse was due to the extreme temperatures of burning jet fuel weakening the elastic modulus of the steel-framed structure. I'm wondering if an FRP structure would've held out any better.
My guess is that while FRP is stronger than steel in ideal conditions, temperature has a more drastic effect on its properties. I suppose there less of a risk of this with a bridge, but I'm sure the decision to make buildings out of this material won't be far off. I think it would be most unfortunate if support beams started bending like straws should a fire break out.
I'm also wondering about the cost argument. Sure it may be cheaper material-wise... but how many construction crews are experts at extremely large scale plastic construction? How many are even willing to undertake such an endeavor? I'm sure they're going to need to spend a lot of money on experts and engineers, and hopfeully there won't be any serious oversights due to inexperience and human error.
And I won't even get started on the environmental impact. I agree with the previous posts covering that concern.
--- "A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
I know its a bit of a pointless argument since these lists are really just for entertainment. But I think there's a subtle detail missing:
Software piracy! ::dramatic music::
MPAA and the like are quick to quote numbers on how much revenue is lost due to illegal downloads and file sharing. Yet where are these statistics when it comes to determining a game's popularity and longevity? Industries are so quick to point these statistics out only when they cater to their own demands.
I know all my illegal downloads of "Spongebob Squarepants: Battle for Bikini Bottom" alone would've easily bumped it up from #67 to #66!
And yes, I know the stats on lost revenue are stupid since downloading a game illegally doesn't mean you would've paid for it.
I think the point I'm trying to make is that while they did try to take many factors into account, ultimately they're defining "popularity" as "sales" and I don't think that's entirely accurate.
---
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Not bad, but the coolest bags I've seen (I don't actually own any) are the Crumpler bags. I'm surprised they didn't get a nod. Their site is also pretty funny. Clay kitten shooting and the like. I think some of the posts below the article mention them (RTFPBTA?).
Now that I've promoted it on Slashdot, I'll sit back and watch my stocks soar!
In this contest you must write code that is as readable, clear, innocent and straightforward as possible, and yet it must fail to perform at its apparent function. To be more specific, it should do something subtly evil.
It's like having some large corporation lower 100,000 sub-management employee wages by $5 an hour instead of laying off one CEO who is making $500k per year.
Ok, I got it, I did the math wrong... How many posts will it take pointing this out before they start getting marked "redundant"?
It's too early for my brain to work with multiple-digit numbers =P. Nevertheless, I think everyone understands the point I'm trying to make.
"Politicians finally came up with a cheap, last-minute solution to control Global Warming: dropping a giant ice cube from the Halley's Comet in one of Earth's oceans every now and then. This fix worked for nearly a millennium, and so by the year 3000, Global Warming was considered by many a scientific fraud, like secondhand smoke."
~The Futurama Encyclopedia
It's wonderful that so many people are willing to say they want to make a difference. That's just as good as actually doing it! Studies also show that 74% of all Americans also say they want to start excersizing regularly, continue their education, spend time with their families, and find a cure for cancer. That's a load off my mind, I'll definitely sleep better tonight.
Regardless of that, the real problem isn't with the masses, its with the elite. My father is a plumbing and mechanics inspector in one of the richest counties in America. He recalls one house he inspected that had 7 heated swimming pools joined together with hottubs. The owner would keep them heated year-round just in case a random party broke out. He also had 10 furnace and airconditioning units in his 35,000 sqft. house that I'm sure he ran the hell out of. He also had a 6 car garage, one spot for each of his SUVs.
The real problem is, there are no limits on how much gasoline, electricity, or natural gas one person is allowed to use. Supplies are being wastefully depleted and turned into greenhouse gasses, and people are blaming the average consumer.
So when gas prices go up by 80%, this rich bastard probably won't even think twice. Meanwhile, an average person is being asked to "turn thermostats down in winter by 2 degrees, caulk around windows, combine driving trips when running errands... wash clothes in cold water, turn down water heater temperature, buy energy-efficient light bulbs, buy energy-efficient appliances, and buy energy-efficient cars." And this is a solution?
It's like having some large corporation lower 100,000 sub-management employee wages by $5 an hour instead of laying off one CEO who is making $500k per year.
Whoever said one person can't make a difference.
-- "Man Bites Dog Then Bites Self"
Slashdot Mirror
The Waffle House has a jukebox that plays music. They make up to $0.25 per song for their financial benefit.
And what about a Karaoke bar? Isn't that a business establishment that attracts customers by having people sing songs?
I've also been to a piano bar where a couple of guys play just about any song by request... Putting down a couple bucks with your request gets them to play it sooner.
Should I call the police?
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
I really hope this series takes off. I haven't seen a decent "poke the object" game for years. I used to love those LucasArts (and Sierra) games. Hit the Road, Monkey Island, and Day of the Tentacle were some of the funniest games I've ever played.
Nowadays, people think that the only way a game can take off is with massive amounts of violence and online capability. But I think the truth is that people just want a game that doesn't reach an ending. It can be the same game with the same characters, but as long as there is a steady flow of new things to do, people will continue playing. Hence the success of WoW and GTA.
As long as these games continue to come out in a steady flow, I think this "miniseries" idea has potential.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Maybe I'm being too crass. Maybe they're right. Maybe thousands of years from now, people will think that Steve Colbert was the son of God. Who knows.
Either way, I think Wikipediology is a pretty interesting concept. I think that beyond using it as a historical resource, it's fascinating to see how something can grow and change when thousands of people are influencing it. Like the stock market, it becomes an 'entity' of sorts. I think true anthropological benefit would lie in studying how it has evolved.
I think the same could also be said about slashdot. Imagine a study on the evolution of trolls, annonymous cowards, and karma whores. Call it Slashdotology.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
With rising energy costs, global warming, and environmental concerns, I think the answer to your final question is a resounding "maybe".
This same energy-conservation trend has shown itself in hybrid vehicles. The first hybrids were priced almost twice the cost of regular vehicles. So people doing the math and asking themselves the same questions you are about wind power. However, as popularity grew and more hybrid vehicle models became available, the prices became more competitive. Even the government has gotten involved in many areas by offering tax cuts, toll leniencies, and access to restricted lanes as incentives. While many people would argue that it still isn't cost-effective to purchase a hybrid, there have been over a million sold.
I think there are other benefits that can be said about windmills. I remember reading a report once which showed that minor improvements to homes (new paint, adding walk-in closets, new windows) increased sale prices by way more than was invested. How much more could you get for a house when you tell a potential buyer that their electricity bill will be 20-90% less other homes because of the big fan in the backyard? I'm willing to bet it would sell for at least $10k more in most areas.
So returning to your second question, I think the outcome of windmills will indeed be determined by their popularity. If they catch on, I think production will diversify and the government will get involved to offer incentives. However, the article itself says "the SkyStream turbine is not meant to wean you from the grid completely".
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Are these new changes happening out of some desire to resemble the old Windows software as little as possible? Is there some kind of necessity to change the interface? Does it need a complete overhaul?
I'm sure lots of people are gonna respond to that with a resounding "YES", but I personally have gotten used to what it is. It took me years to learn the ins and outs of Office after computers stopped coming bundled with MS Word. Even now, I've done away with that side-by-side view in Outlook 2003 and moved everything back to the same way it was in 2000. This goes the same for most other programs which throw in an abundance of menus and graphics to try to make things TOO user friendly. Nine times out of ten, if there is an option for the "traditional view", I'll take it.
I dunno, maybe I'm just living in the past. I still use vi on Linux, I still use Notepad in windows whenever I can, and I don't feel any desire to get used to any "ribbons" flying across my screen.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise." ~Mao Zedong
Neither side does any of that. One side believes we have a right to choose wether or not you should be forced to bring a child into the world when you can't take care of them. The other believes that its not an ethical choice and you are supposed to spend your life doing the best you can to take care of your child. These aren't a bunch of evil people arguing over which one can outdo the other... they are expressing the views that they believe are the right thing to do. Both sides have legitimate arguments, and to dismiss them all as hypocrites is to be just as bad as any extremist.
That's what makes this stem cell find so amazing... it offers a solution that can satisfy both sides. How often can a news headline say something like that?
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Now this statement isn't true at all. Anyone who has ever worked in network security realizes what a complete nightmare this is and that "technology" is having a hell of a tough time keeping up. This article is completely dismissing security as the reason for blocked websites. Leaky browsers and constantly exploited new technologies have made security a serious priority. (I'm not even gonna go into the irony that these comments were made by Microsoft execs...)
A company I had worked for recently had systematically blocked most popular online services over the past couple years. Myspace, hotmail, AIM, gmail... And I see the reason behind it considering we were in a sensative compartmented information facility that restricted external communication (not even allowed to have a cell phone). The company couldn't afford to have a large-scale information leak caused by viruses and/or non-secure communication.
However, there were always ways around. I could still check my old college email through their website, which was not on the restricted list. There were endless forums that were also left unrestricted (they left slashdot alone, thank god). And there was recently an incident within the company recently where someone was fired for pornography. So the general frustration stemmed from the fact that people could still spend all day on forums and looking up porn, but I wasn't even allowed to check my gmail, update my myspace, or send an IM. However, I'm sure the company would've like to block every forum, porn site, and web-based email site if they could. It's just not something that is in any way possible.
At any rate, I don't think most companies are blocking these sites because they are seen as unproductive, but rather for the risks that they pose.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He answers that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
"Computers aren't particularly good at learning, for example, or reasoning by analogy"
Computers aren't good at retaining knowledge and recognizing patterns? That's news to me... this statement is obviously made by someone who doesn't know what he's talking about...
A very strong and useful technique in AI is to create learning algorithms. Some of these, such as reinforcement learning, are actually quite effective. Using something like Monte Carlo methods to give it a randomness factor simulates human learning, and computers don't forget what they are taught. The difficulty with learning isn't that computers can't do it... it's being able to define an effective set of state-action pairs for the computer to learn upon.
I spent time researching natural language processing, sometimes using AI techniques that did exactly what this person claims computers aren't good at: reasoning by analogy. One method involved building a knowledge base which generalized input so that patterns can be found and the grammar could be recovered. The weakness in the system wasn't reasoning by analogy, in fact I'd say computers are much better at that than people. It was rather a lack of a real world model which allowed for a wider array of perception.
The reason this game is difficult is not based on a computer's inability to solve problems, rather that there are so many possibilities that we cannot effectively design algorithms that the can be put to use. This isn't even news, the same has been said about the game of Go for the longest time.
I think a more accurate statement for this person to make would've been: "The overwhelming complexity of poker makes it a difficult game to define in a way for a computer to be able to play effectively."
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
"Afterall, there's a company called Pods that owns www.pods.com that rents pods for people to move their stuff in and that was established in 1998. I'm sure they've trademarked 'pod.' It's so funny how Apple is sending to cease and desist letters to companies when they should send themselves one."
They can't sue them because PODS (Portable On-Demand Storage) isn't in the same realm of consumer goods as the iPod. RTFA: Apple has issued warnings to makers of other electronic devices containing the word 'pod.'
Call it a crazy double-standard, but I think its really more a problem with trademark law.
What I do think is ridiculous about this is that these companies, despite developing electronic devices, aren't even trying to rip off Apple. It looks like Jobs & company just want to flex their muscles to try to intimidate others.
There are all sorts of knock-off electronic devices (like the Super Shuffle) that play mp3s that Apple is steamed up about but cannot stop. Sure they develop a nearly identical product, but they slip through the cracks because they don't actually violate any trademarks.
This doesn't just happen with iPods. I remember a few years ago when I was in Europe at a Russian flea market, they had knock-offs of EVERYTHING: Milson leather jackets, PlanStation games, Adadis shoes, Pamasomic TVs... and I'm sure they now have their iPod knock-offs. And while I'm sure anyone caught doing this got in some sort of trouble, I think they butcher the names just enough to slip by on any trademark violation suit. I also think it ends up being a waste of time and money for large corporations to chase down these small-time bootleggers.
Meanwhile, an honest company like TightPod is getting reamed because of a three letter word.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
What the hell is Google thinking? Any mention of their name is great publicity and they should be happy with it. Instead they look like a bunch of corporate penny mongers trying to be a general inconvenience.
:-( and threatened to charge anyone that used them. "Let our message to trademark violators be clear. Whether you are a 4th grade nothing using your momma's AOL account, or you are Time Magazine's 'Man of the Year', we are going to hunt you down, and when we do, we're really going to give you something to :-(® about."
:-P.
It almost reminds me of the time that Despair, Inc. patented the frowney emoticon
The only difference is that Despair was only joking
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
According to wikipedia:
-Earth's Diameter: 12,756.274 km
-Pluto's Diameter: 2306±20 km
-Jupiter's Diameter: 142,984 km
-Proportion of Earth to Pluter: 12756.274 / 2306 = 5.531
-Proportion of Jupiter to Earth: 142984 / 12756.274 = 11.209
Hmm... Jupiter has over twice the proportional difference with Earth as Earth has with Pluto. So I guess Jupiter wouldn't really consider Earth a real planet.
Personally, I think we should leave the little guy alone. Throw UB313 in there as well. Just give it a cool name that fits in with that whole "my very educated mother..." thing.
Like the well learned and professional scientist said: "We'll call them dwarf planets or something".
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
In the very first paragraph, he establishes what a horrible person Jobs is for competing with Microsoft. And I suppose David was an asshole for standing up to Goliath? Needless to say, he doesn't even mention Bill Gates throughout the entire article.
So then he goes on to attack the improvements over the past couple years:
He claimed that Apple shipped five "major" updates to OS X, including Cheetah, Puma, Jaguar, Panther, and Tiger, though I'd argue that virtually none of those were major updates at all. (Unless you count the cost. At $129 for each version, that's about $750 on Mac OS X upgrades since 2001. That kind of puts the cost of Windows in perspective.) But he counted Tiger on Intel as a sixth major release, because of the effort in porting the OS X code to a new platform (which, actually, had been in the works for a long time and wasn't the 210 day project Jobs claimed).
By that measure, Microsoft has improved Windows by a far greater degree. In the same time frame, it has shipped Windows XP Home Edition, Windows XP Professional Edition, Windows XP Professional x64 Edition, Windows XP Media Center Edition, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2004, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 (and 2005 UR2), Windows XP Tablet PC Edition, Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005, Windows XP Home and Professional N Editions, Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2, absolutely a big Windows upgrade), Windows XP Embedded, Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs, and Windows XP Starter Edition in various languages
Am I missing something? XP, XP, XP, XP... the only differences between most being software bundles, hardware compatibility, and driver support. and he fails to mention that pretty much all of those also have a price tag well over $100.
Thanks to the 64-bit Xeon chip that will be shipping in the new Mac Pro systems, Leopard will be fully 64-bit enabled (unlike Tiger, which is only partially 64-bit and then only on certain Power PC systems). That means that OS X will finally do what Windows XP x64 Edition did last year: Run 32-bit and 64-bit applications natively, side-by-side. Good for them.
So Windows released a seperate 64-bit version (which you have to buy seperately as well) before Apple. Again, no big deal. Almost every product on the market is starting to move towards 64-bit support. Is Apple really "copying" Windows here?
It seems to me that all these arguments are really week and that this guy just wants to complain about Apple. I really think he could've used his time more productively.
It's important for you to understand, however, that I don't have Leopard. I'm basing this only on what Apple showed off at WWDC.
Maybe you should try it before you knock it.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Wow, look at the replies... I love how aroused everyone gets over the prospect of a possible government conspiracy. I think the government really does have its priorities, but monitoring 10 million computers to find out what porn sites people like to visit isn't one of them.
From the article: "This vulnerability could impact government systems, private industry and critical infrastructure, as well as individual and home users"
I think that statement is pretty much an ordered list of government priorities when urging these security measures. Why is the government getting involved? They're looking out for their own interests. The average government worker is likely sitting on a windows workstation right now, surfing the internet with IE, creating a presentation in Powerpoint, running some calculations in Excel, or typing a document in Word... and they probably don't even have the administrative rights to run their own updates, so they sit around waiting for some IT grunt to get off his lazy ass and do it for them.
Even as we speak, I'm sitting at a Windows work station without version management and without admin rights. I have to use the company standards of IE and Office because I can't install Mozilla and OpenOffice. I don't even know if our IT department is aware that they need to run any patches. I haven't seen them do it since I've started working here. And what's worse, I'm working for a government contractor which is always making a lot of fuss about security!
Which brings me to my next point. The government is also looking out for industry and commerce. I'm sure you've noticed the U.S. economy isn't what it used to be. The last thing this country needs is a cyber attack wreaking havoc among businesses and putting even less trust in online commerce than there already is.
Shouldn't we be suspicious that the government has never openly declared critical Linux updates an imperative?
Actually, the DHS has funded open source security auditing. Its true, they have never made it an imperative critical update, but you have to take into account the users and usages of open-source products. If you've installed and/or administrated Linux, its very likely you have enough know-how that you don't need a government warning to get you to stay on top of security patches.
Windows, however, is the most widely used operating system, especially for people who don't have the first clue about security or administration. How many Windows users out there use Administrator as their standard account? People like that need to be warned about the importance of updates.
While I'm not going to deny the possibility that they do have more up their sleeves, I think the past couple years have made me less likely to don the tin foil. With the terrorist attacks, resulting WMD wars, Gee Dubya elections, and blatant fear-tactics, I've really begun to realize that "government intelligence" truly is an oxymoron.
--
Take off every sig. Move sig for great justice.
I don't want to get flamed by saying people are asking dumb questions, but everyone just needs to stop relying on simple arithmetic when dealing with the size of space... The concepts involved are far more complicated than that.
One thing people don't seem to be grasping is that with the Big Bang model, the size of the universe isn't measured by the distance between two particles floating on the "edge". It is actually a measure of the width of the "fabric" of the known universe, space-time. Its difficult to grasp this since it is not something easily perceived.
The real reason for the size of the universe being so much larger is that the laws governing the size of space-time are not the same as the laws of spacial relativaty, and therefore are not constrained to the upper bound of the speed of light.
The best analogy that I've heard is the ant on the balloon example. The idea is that you picture an ant sitting on a balloon with a bread crumb an inch away. If you were to blow up the balloon to twice its size, the bread crumb wouldn't necessarily move to a distance of two inches from the ant.
In this example, we are the ants and we are watching the galaxies, represented by the bread crumb, moving away from us. However, the fabric of existence is expanding at a much larger rate.
The "what's beyond the edge" question is essentially a pointless question when dealing with space-time. There is no "edge" because nothing can possibly exist outside of the realm of spacetime.
And if that concept doesn't satisfy the question, then a simple-minded answer would be that an "edge" can never be reached as space-time is always expanding faster than any particle could possibly hope to keep up with it.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
So I've got mixed feelings:
::sigh::
Beam me down:
IMHO, Matt Damon has become so typecast that he plays the same character in every movie. I don't think he's changed his style in any role from Mr. Ripley, Mr. Bourne, Mr. Loki, Mr. Hunting, and Private Ryan. Matt Damon fans can argue till they're blue in the face, but I just cannot see him joining the ranks of George Takei, Leonard Nimoy, and Patrick Stewart. What next, playing the role of Lance Armstrong?
Beam me up:
So Matt Damon will always be Matt Damon. So what? William Shatner will always be William Shatner and its worked for him! Now the question remains: will Matt Damon be able to follow the framework of Mr. Shatner's drawn-out, studdering, overacting character? Lets go to the footage!
William Shatner [Star Trek]: You.... killed my... son... you... Klingon... bastard
Matt Damon [Team America]: Maaaaatt Daaaamon
Maybe Damon will make an excellent Kirk. Besides, this being an odd-numbered Star Trek movie, it has every right to be a steaming heap of Ferengi dung and still keep the movies going strong. So maybe I should just watch the previews, eat my popcorn, take a nap, and wait for the sequel.
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Carbon, glass, and aramid fiber reinforced polymer rebars have been in use in combination with concrete structures for a while now. They are non-corrosive and have a high tensile strength, making them a better choice for steel. They are especially good for pre-stressed structures, such as concrete tubes which have the rebars stretched by a hydraulic machine and spun around as the concrete is poured so that it will cure under centripetal force (I think Modern Marvels on the History Channel did something about this).
Yet I still find it surprising that they are willing to build the entire bridge out of it. Despite all the hype about how much stronger FRP is than steel, I'm wondering how it will hold up in extreme conditions.
A couple months ago, I got into a discussion about the WTC collapse. One thing that was mentioned is that a large part of the collapse was due to the extreme temperatures of burning jet fuel weakening the elastic modulus of the steel-framed structure. I'm wondering if an FRP structure would've held out any better.
My guess is that while FRP is stronger than steel in ideal conditions, temperature has a more drastic effect on its properties. I suppose there less of a risk of this with a bridge, but I'm sure the decision to make buildings out of this material won't be far off. I think it would be most unfortunate if support beams started bending like straws should a fire break out.
I'm also wondering about the cost argument. Sure it may be cheaper material-wise... but how many construction crews are experts at extremely large scale plastic construction? How many are even willing to undertake such an endeavor? I'm sure they're going to need to spend a lot of money on experts and engineers, and hopfeully there won't be any serious oversights due to inexperience and human error.
And I won't even get started on the environmental impact. I agree with the previous posts covering that concern.
---
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
I tried a similar experiment but instead I used CDs that did play Kings of Leon to see if I could get them to stop.
I tried putting them in the microwave, throwing them across the room, smashing them with my head, and then eating them.
It worked! I never had to listen to the Kings of Leon again...
--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
"By God! Yes!"
I am rolling on the ground laughing and eagerly anticipating of what is sure to come. Slashdotters, this article is for you!
Please include any of the following:
- George Bush jokes
- Edwin "Buzz The Boxer" Aldrin jokes
- Futurama references
- Dr. Strangelove references
- 12 Monkeys references
- Something about Bill Gates (just because)
Please avoid the following:--
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
I know its a bit of a pointless argument since these lists are really just for entertainment. But I think there's a subtle detail missing:
::dramatic music::
Software piracy!
MPAA and the like are quick to quote numbers on how much revenue is lost due to illegal downloads and file sharing. Yet where are these statistics when it comes to determining a game's popularity and longevity? Industries are so quick to point these statistics out only when they cater to their own demands.
I know all my illegal downloads of "Spongebob Squarepants: Battle for Bikini Bottom" alone would've easily bumped it up from #67 to #66!
And yes, I know the stats on lost revenue are stupid since downloading a game illegally doesn't mean you would've paid for it.
I think the point I'm trying to make is that while they did try to take many factors into account, ultimately they're defining "popularity" as "sales" and I don't think that's entirely accurate.
---
"A man is asked if he is wise or not. He replies that he is otherwise" ~Mao Zedong
Not bad, but the coolest bags I've seen (I don't actually own any) are the Crumpler bags. I'm surprised they didn't get a nod. Their site is also pretty funny. Clay kitten shooting and the like. I think some of the posts below the article mention them (RTFPBTA?).
Now that I've promoted it on Slashdot, I'll sit back and watch my stocks soar!
--
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"
In this contest you must write code that is as readable, clear, innocent and straightforward as possible, and yet it must fail to perform at its apparent function. To be more specific, it should do something subtly evil.
system("c:\Program Files\Internet Explorer\iexplore.exe");Where's my prize?
--
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"
It's like having some large corporation lower 100,000 sub-management employee wages by $5 an hour instead of laying off one CEO who is making $500k per year.
Ok, I got it, I did the math wrong... How many posts will it take pointing this out before they start getting marked "redundant"?It's too early for my brain to work with multiple-digit numbers =P. Nevertheless, I think everyone understands the point I'm trying to make.
--
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"
"Politicians finally came up with a cheap, last-minute solution to control Global Warming: dropping a giant ice cube from the Halley's Comet in one of Earth's oceans every now and then. This fix worked for nearly a millennium, and so by the year 3000, Global Warming was considered by many a scientific fraud, like secondhand smoke."
~The Futurama Encyclopedia
It's wonderful that so many people are willing to say they want to make a difference. That's just as good as actually doing it! Studies also show that 74% of all Americans also say they want to start excersizing regularly, continue their education, spend time with their families, and find a cure for cancer. That's a load off my mind, I'll definitely sleep better tonight.
Regardless of that, the real problem isn't with the masses, its with the elite. My father is a plumbing and mechanics inspector in one of the richest counties in America. He recalls one house he inspected that had 7 heated swimming pools joined together with hottubs. The owner would keep them heated year-round just in case a random party broke out. He also had 10 furnace and airconditioning units in his 35,000 sqft. house that I'm sure he ran the hell out of. He also had a 6 car garage, one spot for each of his SUVs.
The real problem is, there are no limits on how much gasoline, electricity, or natural gas one person is allowed to use. Supplies are being wastefully depleted and turned into greenhouse gasses, and people are blaming the average consumer.
So when gas prices go up by 80%, this rich bastard probably won't even think twice. Meanwhile, an average person is being asked to "turn thermostats down in winter by 2 degrees, caulk around windows, combine driving trips when running errands... wash clothes in cold water, turn down water heater temperature, buy energy-efficient light bulbs, buy energy-efficient appliances, and buy energy-efficient cars." And this is a solution?
It's like having some large corporation lower 100,000 sub-management employee wages by $5 an hour instead of laying off one CEO who is making $500k per year.
Whoever said one person can't make a difference. --
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"
However, it is unlikely to ever be pushed to its limits
Give it a little while. Ten years ago, people thought 16MB of RAM was excessive. Ten years before that, 512KB was considered a luxury.--
"Man Bites Dog
Then Bites Self"