Personally my favorite way to increase efficiency has been around a long time... ETHERNET!! Don't get me wrong, I use WiFi for things that NEED WiFi (ChromeCast, laptops carried to strange places, visiting friends that want to use their Sprint (shitty network) smartphones, etc...). But.. for stationary things that can do ethernet... it's no contest, ethernet for the win!! With a little creativity you CAN find a place to run the cable and it IS worth it!
Wouldn't increasing the symbol rate also increase the bandwidth used? Or are you sugesting a different kind of modulation too? In that case isn't it the different modulation that is saving the bandwidth, not the increasing of the symbol rate?
That's the first thing I was looking for too, I wanted to see the frequency range to see if it was an amateur band. This time it isn't (thankfully?). On the other hand, how much activity is there on the microwave amateur bands? Maybe sharing it (with the part 15 services on a secondary basis) would make it less attractive to comercial interests that might take away our access completely? I don't know. Just a thought.
That assumes that these genes are the ONLY way for cells to specialize and that it could never happen without them. How often are questions of genetics THAT simple? More likely these genes turned out to be helpful to a process which was already occuring and that is why evolution preserved them.
Have our ancestors carried these genes for millions of years? By most counts our species is only about 1 million years old so I would believe it if someone told me we carried genes that were only 100s of thousands of years old. Then again, we could have inheritted this from our non-homosapien ancestors so I would believe milliions of years too. Maybe I should stfu and rtfu?
>>"This is why our justice system when it is working, doesn't try to fully compensate the victim. As the hurt party they will demand more then what is fair."
What is fair? The penalty must be higher than the amount stolen. Otherwise, what is the deterent? A thief could just hold on to the loot for a while until it is clear that he/she got away with it. If caught, just return it and try again another day. Of course in the real 'justice' system the penalty to the thief is not just making a payment to the victim. There is jail time. So.. instead of the thief being punshed by being forced to overcompensate the victim all of society is punished by being forced to house, feed and guard the thief. (or at least pay those who do). Meanwhile the thief is producing nothing of value (stuck in a room) from which the victim or society in general could benefit.
Reading many of the comments it would seem people think Bitcoin is nothing other than something to mine for money and then argue it is pointless. Well, yeah, that would be pretty pointless. A few mentioned it's being 'untraceable' and so good for buying drugs. I don't really think so. The record of every transaction is out there for everyone to see. Sure, individual transactions are anonymous but if law enforcement agencies can manage to find out who was involved in one transaction they can start leaning on people until they have the one they are after. I wouldn't recommend using Bitcoin as a way to commit a crime!
Where I see value in bitcoin is the ability to perform transactions with little or no fees. Why do I have to pay on average $3.00 every time I use another bank's ATM? What did the transaction actually cost the 3rd party bank and any other middlemen to complete? That has to be 99.99...% profit. How about credit card merchant fees, Paypal fees when one person sends money to another outiside of Ebay? Don't get me wrong, I'm not against companies getting a profit for providing a service but when the transaction is 100% digital the real cost must be vanishingly close to zero. That means the profit margin these banks are charging must be rediculous! Besides, even if the fees the banks are charging aren't rediculously high (unlikely) If others are willing to provide that service to the community for free or lower cost then why is it worth paying the banks to do so?
That's what I hope to be someday using Bitcoin or some other virtual currency for... real honest day to day transactions. At the moment though I haven't seen the things I normally pay for on a day to day basis available for Bitcoin. Maybe someday...
>> Putin is trying to rebuild the USSR. Piece by piece, little by little. Assuming all the same human rights issues as the original USSR that would be a bad thing
If you believe the Russian side of the story the Crimea region is more Russian and would have kept Yanukovich. The rest of Ukraine was making the decision for all of Ukraine by ousting him. I have no idea if this is true, not my side of the world. I think you are saying that it isn't true. In that case... Out with Russia!!
I would put the liberty of individuals over that of nations any day. Nations by their nature limit the liberty of individuals. By chosing the government that best represents them people can keep this limitation to a minimum. Of course.. my neighbor might not have the same ideas I do. We can't all get our own micro-nation. Still, if a whole region leans a different way than the rest of their nation maybe that region shouldn't be a part of the nation. It could be it's own nation with Yanukovich as leader. Or it could be a part of Russia. That should be worked out by the people who live there.
Again, I don't claim to know what the people of Crimea want. For all I know everything I ever read about them leaning towards Russia is BS propoganda propogated by people who report directly to Putin. Or not... But if I am to be outraged at what Russia is doing it is better to hear that Russia is imposing their will on people who don't want it rather than reading that one nation (artificial grouping of people) moving the border (artificial line in the sand) between itself and another is a violation of 'liberty'.
I'm just a little naturally suspicious when people talk about liberty when it comes to nations or other artificial entities (like corporations) as opposed to individual rights. How many serfs have died defending the lands of their lords from yet another group of lords that just would have made them their own serfs?
> Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
I'm sure she would. And I suppose the schools are all going to buy software for the students then? Or perhaps the students will stay after and do all their work at school. What a self-serving bi**h.
Well... you could just call it the American Revolution and refer to them as the founding fathers or something like that which pretty much everyone else does. Usually when one names something as you did it's to belittle, like only George Washington wanted a revolution. That war was all his fault...
Also, my understanding is that George Washington was very much against political parties and the two party system in particular. It's my personal opinion that he was absolutely right and the two party system is a huge part of the reason our 'democratic republic' has gotten so far out of the people's control. I think it's a big contributor to the people's apathy. The two parties just play the voters against each other, everyone votes for one of them even though they don't like it just to try to keep the other out while they both are totally corrupt. Individual politicians get away with murder since the voters only choice is to back the other party.
That being said I would argue that this is NOT the system that George Washington fought for and all the more reason not to call it his revolution.
And then there is the fact that for his time during the revolution he is mostly famous for losing battles... And the fact that it is an entirely different small handful of people that are famous for their roles in the declaration of independance, surely a more defining role in the revolution. Oh.. and then of course there is the constitutional convention which was practically a revolution itself thus driving home the point that this is not the system created by "George Washington's Revolution"
Yah, mentioning the nations entire history would be rather silly but calling it George Washington's revolution? That's kind of like calling the automobile "Rudolf Diesel's vehicles"
"Oh, well if it doesn't work for cyborg_monkey, then it definitely should be no good for anyone else. You pompous asswipe."
TFTFY
Oh, and btw, it works great for me! And my daughter loves it too! But I suppose nobody should every try to market it to us because it doesn't mesh well with the physiology of a few unfortunate people including at least one who wines too much.
George Washington's revolution? Yeah, he started it, he lead it and he shaped the ideas that came out of it. All by himself! And over 200 years later those ideas are still what our government today runs on!
But in a natural world, you don't have the big feast of hundreds of acres of food for a single species
Actually forrests often grow that way. If not a single species of tree then a small number of species all in close proximity. Actually... better yet, how about grasslands? Yes, I'm sure there are multiple species of grass in there but there have to be many many of the same species in close proximtiy across the whole area.
All I see is one government trying to take control of a group of people from another government. What do the people want? I keep reading that the people who inhabit the part of Ukraine that Russia is invading are mostly cold-war era Russian transplants who would like to make their "new" home a part of Russia anyway.
Or, maybe this is all a lie. Maybe that area is still more Ukranian than Russian, or at least maybe they don't really want to be Russian. Or, maybe Russia is going to take all of Ukraine. Until someone makes these points we aren't talking about liberty. We are talking about two small groups of people (two governments) fighting over who gets to control a larger group. If you want to talk about liberty then let's hear what the people who live there want.
So because some parents can't be bothered to know how their devices work and not give their kids the opportunity to do this the rest of us have to enter our passwords more often.
I have a kid and (and an Android phone) yet I still think this is BS!
Didn't Microsoft start when Bill Gates took a bunch of freeware code from a computer club, ported it to a new platform, copyrighted it all and called it his own? That's not quite how I remember Google starting out.
I wasn't necessarily saying that the ACLU is against the second amendment. I was more thinking that Republicans tend to be for that particular right while Democrats tend to be against it. Thus a lot of the NRA's money goes for supporting Republican candidates, if not directly then by petitioning their own members to vote for them. Even though the Republicans seem to be hell bent against pretty much every other right.
Democrats (until recently) at least seemed to be for civil liberties (with that one exception). I don't know as much about what the ACLU does with their money but I am guessing a lot of it goes to supporting Democrats. If so then supporting both organizations, even with the non-conflicting goal of supporting ALL of our liberties could just be canceling out one side of your money against the other.
And that is how the 2-party system lizards ALWAYS win...
Slashdot Mirror
Personally my favorite way to increase efficiency has been around a long time... ETHERNET!! Don't get me wrong, I use WiFi for things that NEED WiFi (ChromeCast, laptops carried to strange places, visiting friends that want to use their Sprint (shitty network) smartphones, etc...). But.. for stationary things that can do ethernet... it's no contest, ethernet for the win!! With a little creativity you CAN find a place to run the cable and it IS worth it!
Wouldn't increasing the symbol rate also increase the bandwidth used? Or are you sugesting a different kind of modulation too? In that case isn't it the different modulation that is saving the bandwidth, not the increasing of the symbol rate?
That's the first thing I was looking for too, I wanted to see the frequency range to see if it was an amateur band. This time it isn't (thankfully?). On the other hand, how much activity is there on the microwave amateur bands? Maybe sharing it (with the part 15 services on a secondary basis) would make it less attractive to comercial interests that might take away our access completely? I don't know. Just a thought.
That assumes that these genes are the ONLY way for cells to specialize and that it could never happen without them. How often are questions of genetics THAT simple? More likely these genes turned out to be helpful to a process which was already occuring and that is why evolution preserved them.
Millions ARE thousands! Many of them!
Have our ancestors carried these genes for millions of years? By most counts our species is only about 1 million years old so I would believe it if someone told me we carried genes that were only 100s of thousands of years old. Then again, we could have inheritted this from our non-homosapien ancestors so I would believe milliions of years too. Maybe I should stfu and rtfu?
>>"This is why our justice system when it is working, doesn't try to fully compensate the victim. As the hurt party they will demand more then what is fair."
What is fair? The penalty must be higher than the amount stolen. Otherwise, what is the deterent? A thief could just hold on to the loot for a while until it is clear that he/she got away with it. If caught, just return it and try again another day. Of course in the real 'justice' system the penalty to the thief is not just making a payment to the victim. There is jail time. So.. instead of the thief being punshed by being forced to overcompensate the victim all of society is punished by being forced to house, feed and guard the thief. (or at least pay those who do). Meanwhile the thief is producing nothing of value (stuck in a room) from which the victim or society in general could benefit.
yup, justice is served!
Somebody really opened up a can of dumb in this room didn't they!
What am I replying to? Everything!
So... you want to see John Mcaffee volunteering at childrens events?
What does it feel like to kill a man?
Hypothetically speaking of course...
Reading many of the comments it would seem people think Bitcoin is nothing other than something to mine for money and then argue it is pointless. Well, yeah, that would be pretty pointless. A few mentioned it's being 'untraceable' and so good for buying drugs. I don't really think so. The record of every transaction is out there for everyone to see. Sure, individual transactions are anonymous but if law enforcement agencies can manage to find out who was involved in one transaction they can start leaning on people until they have the one they are after. I wouldn't recommend using Bitcoin as a way to commit a crime!
Where I see value in bitcoin is the ability to perform transactions with little or no fees. Why do I have to pay on average $3.00 every time I use another bank's ATM? What did the transaction actually cost the 3rd party bank and any other middlemen to complete? That has to be 99.99...% profit. How about credit card merchant fees, Paypal fees when one person sends money to another outiside of Ebay? Don't get me wrong, I'm not against companies getting a profit for providing a service but when the transaction is 100% digital the real cost must be vanishingly close to zero. That means the profit margin these banks are charging must be rediculous! Besides, even if the fees the banks are charging aren't rediculously high (unlikely) If others are willing to provide that service to the community for free or lower cost then why is it worth paying the banks to do so?
That's what I hope to be someday using Bitcoin or some other virtual currency for... real honest day to day transactions. At the moment though I haven't seen the things I normally pay for on a day to day basis available for Bitcoin. Maybe someday...
>> Putin is trying to rebuild the USSR. Piece by piece, little by little.
Assuming all the same human rights issues as the original USSR that would be a bad thing
>> We are. Russia's modus operandi ...
Noted
>> Unexpectedly, Ukrainians overthrew Russia-supported Yanukovich
If you believe the Russian side of the story the Crimea region is more Russian and would have kept Yanukovich. The rest of Ukraine was making the decision for all of Ukraine by ousting him. I have no idea if this is true, not my side of the world. I think you are saying that it isn't true. In that case... Out with Russia!!
I would put the liberty of individuals over that of nations any day. Nations by their nature limit the liberty of individuals. By chosing the government that best represents them people can keep this limitation to a minimum. Of course.. my neighbor might not have the same ideas I do. We can't all get our own micro-nation. Still, if a whole region leans a different way than the rest of their nation maybe that region shouldn't be a part of the nation. It could be it's own nation with Yanukovich as leader. Or it could be a part of Russia. That should be worked out by the people who live there.
Again, I don't claim to know what the people of Crimea want. For all I know everything I ever read about them leaning towards Russia is BS propoganda propogated by people who report directly to Putin. Or not... But if I am to be outraged at what Russia is doing it is better to hear that Russia is imposing their will on people who don't want it rather than reading that one nation (artificial grouping of people) moving the border (artificial line in the sand) between itself and another is a violation of 'liberty'.
I'm just a little naturally suspicious when people talk about liberty when it comes to nations or other artificial entities (like corporations) as opposed to individual rights. How many serfs have died defending the lands of their lords from yet another group of lords that just would have made them their own serfs?
Or at least I assume she was joking.
"...dont trust anyone...VM I rent." Yup, no inconsistancy there!
> Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis said she'd rather see companies pay more in taxes and fund schools that way, rather than relying on their charity or free software."
I'm sure she would. And I suppose the schools are all going to buy software for the students then? Or perhaps the students will stay after and do all their work at school. What a self-serving bi**h.
Well... you could just call it the American Revolution and refer to them as the founding fathers or something like that which pretty much everyone else does. Usually when one names something as you did it's to belittle, like only George Washington wanted a revolution. That war was all his fault...
Also, my understanding is that George Washington was very much against political parties and the two party system in particular. It's my personal opinion that he was absolutely right and the two party system is a huge part of the reason our 'democratic republic' has gotten so far out of the people's control. I think it's a big contributor to the people's apathy. The two parties just play the voters against each other, everyone votes for one of them even though they don't like it just to try to keep the other out while they both are totally corrupt. Individual politicians get away with murder since the voters only choice is to back the other party.
That being said I would argue that this is NOT the system that George Washington fought for and all the more reason not to call it his revolution.
And then there is the fact that for his time during the revolution he is mostly famous for losing battles... And the fact that it is an entirely different small handful of people that are famous for their roles in the declaration of independance, surely a more defining role in the revolution. Oh.. and then of course there is the constitutional convention which was practically a revolution itself thus driving home the point that this is not the system created by "George Washington's Revolution"
Yah, mentioning the nations entire history would be rather silly but calling it George Washington's revolution? That's kind of like calling the automobile "Rudolf Diesel's vehicles"
"Oh, well if it doesn't work for cyborg_monkey, then it definitely should be no good for anyone else. You pompous asswipe."
TFTFY
Oh, and btw, it works great for me! And my daughter loves it too! But I suppose nobody should every try to market it to us because it doesn't mesh well with the physiology of a few unfortunate people including at least one who wines too much.
George Washington's revolution? Yeah, he started it, he lead it and he shaped the ideas that came out of it. All by himself! And over 200 years later those ideas are still what our government today runs on!
May I buy you a history book?
No. I'm sure they were counting on it. Or more accurately their employers are. Patents last too long but they still don't last forever!
But in a natural world, you don't have the big feast of hundreds of acres of food for a single species
Actually forrests often grow that way. If not a single species of tree then a small number of species all in close proximity. Actually... better yet, how about grasslands? Yes, I'm sure there are multiple species of grass in there but there have to be many many of the same species in close proximtiy across the whole area.
Naturlly, It takes a lot longer.
"and also seem to be conflating what the GMO industry is doing right now with the underlying technology."
There's a lot of that going around. Isn't that what pretty much every anti-GMO person does?
All I see is one government trying to take control of a group of people from another government. What do the people want? I keep reading that the people who inhabit the part of Ukraine that Russia is invading are mostly cold-war era Russian transplants who would like to make their "new" home a part of Russia anyway.
Or, maybe this is all a lie. Maybe that area is still more Ukranian than Russian, or at least maybe they don't really want to be Russian. Or, maybe Russia is going to take all of Ukraine. Until someone makes these points we aren't talking about liberty. We are talking about two small groups of people (two governments) fighting over who gets to control a larger group. If you want to talk about liberty then let's hear what the people who live there want.
Lower transaction fees.
So because some parents can't be bothered to know how their devices work and not give their kids the opportunity to do this the rest of us have to enter our passwords more often.
I have a kid and (and an Android phone) yet I still think this is BS!
Didn't Microsoft start when Bill Gates took a bunch of freeware code from a computer club, ported it to a new platform, copyrighted it all and called it his own? That's not quite how I remember Google starting out.
I wasn't necessarily saying that the ACLU is against the second amendment. I was more thinking that Republicans tend to be for that particular right while Democrats tend to be against it. Thus a lot of the NRA's money goes for supporting Republican candidates, if not directly then by petitioning their own members to vote for them. Even though the Republicans seem to be hell bent against pretty much every other right.
Democrats (until recently) at least seemed to be for civil liberties (with that one exception). I don't know as much about what the ACLU does with their money but I am guessing a lot of it goes to supporting Democrats. If so then supporting both organizations, even with the non-conflicting goal of supporting ALL of our liberties could just be canceling out one side of your money against the other.
And that is how the 2-party system lizards ALWAYS win...