I once bought some level_upper off a buddy, and I thought it was the real deal, but as soon as I took the first hit I knew it was laced with Lady Gaga. Now I'm hooked on pop music:( Just be careful where you buy your sound from guys.
When did the point of art become profit? I thought "art" was made because the author had some sort of passion or talent for what they were doing. If you're just making it to make a profit off of it, doesn't that just make it a product? Why do we keep calling this stuff art? I've seen pieces by "starving artist"-types whining and crying about how people are stealing all their work and not paying for it, etc etc, and every time I read them I find myself asking the question "Well, why are you trying 'art' as a career? Get a real job like the rest of us and do your art because you're in love with it, in your spare time."
Yeah, but you're proposing that the FCC not auction off the spectrum... that's crazy talk! There's no money in that for the FCC! Huh. Maybe the regulating agency shouldn't be getting paid by the people they're regulating.
Building wiring could be made out of gold instead of copper or aluminum, simply because gold has the lowest resistance of room-temperature wiring. A gold/copper alloy (or gold-plated copper) might be the best choice for plumbing (due to gold's corrosion resistance, platinum is another choice here). Gold plating would be an option for metal roofs, car parts (which don't experience significant wear), fences, hulls of ships, antennas, and general electronics.
Gold is over twice as dense as copper or steel. That much weight could be an issue in a lot of those applications, particularly roofing. There's a reason why we use very thin metal roofing material: weight. Adding even a very thin layer of gold to that could have a negative impact on weight constraints. Also, gold is highly malleable, which is bad for any parts that are load-bearing or sustain impact events.
From one way of thinking, Debian is Ubuntu stripped down in one specific way. If you don't want Ubuntu stripped down in that specific way, then you're possibly better off stripping down Ubuntu to what you want, rather than trying to add to Debian (and probably prune other things from Debian that you didn't want anyways).
I don't know what authentication mechanisms they have in place to make sure you are who you say you are, but if you can get the assistance of a male friend, I can't imagine they'd be too hard to circumvent.
PS. Hopefully you use a handle a little less obvious there than you do here:P
No, blasting through red lights like they're not there should be banned. Fortunately, it is. That's his entire point.
As far as not being smart enough to multitask goes, why is it that everyone insists on a least common denominator society? How about we just put into place a system whereby we punish people for doing bad things, and leave them alone until they do bad things? Would that be so awful?
For some reason, we really have some love affair with convicting people before they do anything wrong or harmful. That is, in essence, what you are doing any time you ban something outright. You've made them legally guilty of... not harming anyone yet. BUT THEY COULD!!! Just like them durn t'rrists could crash more of our planes into our buildings, so we criminally convict anyone who brings nailclippers onto an airplane. Again, let's go back to having laws exist so that when people do bad things, they can be brought to justice. The government can never put in place enough safeguards to preemptively protect us, without turning into a police-state such as the world has never (as far as I know) seen. So let's just abandon that pursuit altogether. There will be some inevitable deaths, and those are extremely regrettable, but a price has to be paid for freedom, and not in the form of soldiers dying halfway across the world. Some citizens will have to die for their freedom too. The world ain't perfect.
So your contention is that we should send a humanoid robot to the moon, because hand tools have been developed to fit the human form? Got news for you buddy, this robot isn't going up there with a Ryobi power drill and a Craftsman toolbox. Your arguments might have merit if it was a discussion of sending humans versus sending rovers, but it's not. It's about sending a bi-pedal robot versus sending a rover. No matter what we send up there, it will NOT be re-using all these technologies that you point to as having been designed around the human form. It will have a few dedicated appendages. I can't decide if you're a troll or not, but the debate here is about method of locomotion. The chassis we put our probes in isn't the point. Whether it's humanoid, a rover, or shaped like a box, the significant differentiating factor is how it gets around. Look at the state of humanoid robots here on earth. What makes you think they'd work any better on a relatively uncontrolled, chaotic surface like the moon's? Guess what? The moon isn't going to have even floors and nice staircases!
People assume that a download is worth less than a physical copy because they can't physically hold it, however if you consider the actual cost of a dvd the difference in cost will be a couple of cents at most.
Let's not forget about the printed booklet (which is vastly expensive if you listen to ubisoft), the box it's held in, the plastic wrap around that box, the cost of loading it onto a truck, moving said truck halfway across the US, unloading it from the truck again, and getting some highschool monkey to put it on the shelves. The shelf space itself may cost money too.
It's still bullshit that physical games cost so much, but that doesn't mean there are no costs involved with producing them.
How is the PS3 so inefficient? Downloadable games on the Wii are only 10 to 40 megs.
Mkay Mr. Troll. Here's how the PS3 is so "inefficient":
It has games that offer dozens (perhaps hundreds) of hours of visually rich, unique content. Oddly enough, you need gigs and gigs of textures and sounds and movies to achieve this.
Not everyone has game tastes that stop at Wii Tennis, with its grand total of 2 textures.
No I wouldn't. People only whine about franchise milking when they're secretly not getting what they wanted. Nobody complains about getting what they want. The "franchise milk" people are the ones who are pissed off because they didn't get what they wanted, can't put their finger on why, and want something to bitch about.
Probably a combination of not having to pay for the fan-made remake, nostalgia from when we played these games as children, and delight at seeing a long-dead game formula we loved revived. Try getting a good adventure game like the old Lucasarts point-and-click adventures. It's not EA or Activision stepping in to give us what we want. It's the indies. That's why people love indies.
And subsequently lose potential searchers to Bing or Yahoo because they couldn't find what the wanted to find on Google? Uhhhhh, let's just stick with items #1 and #4.
It was never meant to be a win for performance o.O Of course it's going to be slower. The cryptographic checks alone will make it slower. It's intended to prevent DNS hijacking attacks.
Well, as I pointed out, there are other quantum effects that have lead to drastic changes in our entire way of life, as we have learned to harness them. Discarding any new discovery with the word "quantum" in the name as being useless on our scale is silly. Thing is, in order to impress a layman, you have to have an immediate application that they can hold in their hand. When the laser was invented, we didn't have CD drives, and the laymen were "meh" about lasers too. It's the nature of new discoveries that they don't have applications that make sense to laymen yet. Application comes after discovery (sometimes decades after, as in the case of the laser, I believe).
I can certainly see your point, as I too have seen a parade of "ooh neato" discoveries floating by on the stream of science, never to be heard from again, but again, don't pan them out of hand.
Indeed, and in fact this concept plays a large role in the middle book of the Revelation Space series by Alastair Reynolds (which I recommend that you read, if you have not).
Fine, their "allegedly shady" acts. My point still stands. Nobody expected them to walk up to Congress and say "yeah, we totally grabbed all this wifi data that people didn't know we were taking." I'm not even making any statements about the morality or legality of Google's actions. I'm just saying, the content of TFS is in no way surprising.
FWIW, I metamodded you up, so don't take this in any way personally.
A major corporation fibs to the government about their shady acts? Say it isn't so! We all knew this was going to be how it went down from the time the Wi-fi sniffing was first announced. There's no surprise here. There really isn't much more to say about it. We've covered the shadiness of the whole thing at length in other stories, and it's really barely news at all that Google is trying to snow Congress about it...
Slashdot Mirror
I think you've got it backwards, sir. IP is the competitive edge these days.
I once bought some level_upper off a buddy, and I thought it was the real deal, but as soon as I took the first hit I knew it was laced with Lady Gaga. Now I'm hooked on pop music :( Just be careful where you buy your sound from guys.
When did the point of art become profit? I thought "art" was made because the author had some sort of passion or talent for what they were doing. If you're just making it to make a profit off of it, doesn't that just make it a product? Why do we keep calling this stuff art? I've seen pieces by "starving artist"-types whining and crying about how people are stealing all their work and not paying for it, etc etc, and every time I read them I find myself asking the question "Well, why are you trying 'art' as a career? Get a real job like the rest of us and do your art because you're in love with it, in your spare time."
Yeah, but you're proposing that the FCC not auction off the spectrum... that's crazy talk! There's no money in that for the FCC!
Huh. Maybe the regulating agency shouldn't be getting paid by the people they're regulating.
Building wiring could be made out of gold instead of copper or aluminum, simply because gold has the lowest resistance of room-temperature wiring. A gold/copper alloy (or gold-plated copper) might be the best choice for plumbing (due to gold's corrosion resistance, platinum is another choice here). Gold plating would be an option for metal roofs, car parts (which don't experience significant wear), fences, hulls of ships, antennas, and general electronics.
Gold is over twice as dense as copper or steel. That much weight could be an issue in a lot of those applications, particularly roofing. There's a reason why we use very thin metal roofing material: weight. Adding even a very thin layer of gold to that could have a negative impact on weight constraints. Also, gold is highly malleable, which is bad for any parts that are load-bearing or sustain impact events.
From one way of thinking, Debian is Ubuntu stripped down in one specific way. If you don't want Ubuntu stripped down in that specific way, then you're possibly better off stripping down Ubuntu to what you want, rather than trying to add to Debian (and probably prune other things from Debian that you didn't want anyways).
Yeah, as though somehow by having a "statement" of your "mission" prevents you from acting differently...
They'd never make it through the approval process.
I don't know what authentication mechanisms they have in place to make sure you are who you say you are, but if you can get the assistance of a male friend, I can't imagine they'd be too hard to circumvent.
:P
PS. Hopefully you use a handle a little less obvious there than you do here
No, blasting through red lights like they're not there should be banned. Fortunately, it is. That's his entire point.
As far as not being smart enough to multitask goes, why is it that everyone insists on a least common denominator society? How about we just put into place a system whereby we punish people for doing bad things, and leave them alone until they do bad things? Would that be so awful?
For some reason, we really have some love affair with convicting people before they do anything wrong or harmful. That is, in essence, what you are doing any time you ban something outright. You've made them legally guilty of... not harming anyone yet. BUT THEY COULD!!! Just like them durn t'rrists could crash more of our planes into our buildings, so we criminally convict anyone who brings nailclippers onto an airplane. Again, let's go back to having laws exist so that when people do bad things, they can be brought to justice. The government can never put in place enough safeguards to preemptively protect us, without turning into a police-state such as the world has never (as far as I know) seen. So let's just abandon that pursuit altogether. There will be some inevitable deaths, and those are extremely regrettable, but a price has to be paid for freedom, and not in the form of soldiers dying halfway across the world. Some citizens will have to die for their freedom too. The world ain't perfect.
I guess we all know what Gizmodo will be doing at the next major conference.
So your contention is that we should send a humanoid robot to the moon, because hand tools have been developed to fit the human form? Got news for you buddy, this robot isn't going up there with a Ryobi power drill and a Craftsman toolbox. Your arguments might have merit if it was a discussion of sending humans versus sending rovers, but it's not. It's about sending a bi-pedal robot versus sending a rover.
No matter what we send up there, it will NOT be re-using all these technologies that you point to as having been designed around the human form. It will have a few dedicated appendages.
I can't decide if you're a troll or not, but the debate here is about method of locomotion. The chassis we put our probes in isn't the point. Whether it's humanoid, a rover, or shaped like a box, the significant differentiating factor is how it gets around. Look at the state of humanoid robots here on earth. What makes you think they'd work any better on a relatively uncontrolled, chaotic surface like the moon's? Guess what? The moon isn't going to have even floors and nice staircases!
People assume that a download is worth less than a physical copy because they can't physically hold it, however if you consider the actual cost of a dvd the difference in cost will be a couple of cents at most.
Let's not forget about the printed booklet (which is vastly expensive if you listen to ubisoft), the box it's held in, the plastic wrap around that box, the cost of loading it onto a truck, moving said truck halfway across the US, unloading it from the truck again, and getting some highschool monkey to put it on the shelves. The shelf space itself may cost money too.
It's still bullshit that physical games cost so much, but that doesn't mean there are no costs involved with producing them.
at about ~10 to upwards of ~40gigs per game
How is the PS3 so inefficient? Downloadable games on the Wii are only 10 to 40 megs.
Mkay Mr. Troll. Here's how the PS3 is so "inefficient": It has games that offer dozens (perhaps hundreds) of hours of visually rich, unique content. Oddly enough, you need gigs and gigs of textures and sounds and movies to achieve this. Not everyone has game tastes that stop at Wii Tennis, with its grand total of 2 textures.
No I wouldn't. People only whine about franchise milking when they're secretly not getting what they wanted. Nobody complains about getting what they want. The "franchise milk" people are the ones who are pissed off because they didn't get what they wanted, can't put their finger on why, and want something to bitch about.
Probably a combination of not having to pay for the fan-made remake, nostalgia from when we played these games as children, and delight at seeing a long-dead game formula we loved revived. Try getting a good adventure game like the old Lucasarts point-and-click adventures. It's not EA or Activision stepping in to give us what we want. It's the indies. That's why people love indies.
And subsequently lose potential searchers to Bing or Yahoo because they couldn't find what the wanted to find on Google? Uhhhhh, let's just stick with items #1 and #4.
It was never meant to be a win for performance o.O Of course it's going to be slower. The cryptographic checks alone will make it slower. It's intended to prevent DNS hijacking attacks.
yeah if you don't mind google knowing every hostname you ever resolve...
One instance != "well established"
Well, as I pointed out, there are other quantum effects that have lead to drastic changes in our entire way of life, as we have learned to harness them. Discarding any new discovery with the word "quantum" in the name as being useless on our scale is silly. Thing is, in order to impress a layman, you have to have an immediate application that they can hold in their hand. When the laser was invented, we didn't have CD drives, and the laymen were "meh" about lasers too. It's the nature of new discoveries that they don't have applications that make sense to laymen yet. Application comes after discovery (sometimes decades after, as in the case of the laser, I believe).
I can certainly see your point, as I too have seen a parade of "ooh neato" discoveries floating by on the stream of science, never to be heard from again, but again, don't pan them out of hand.
Yeah, I mean, quantum tunneling? Quantum confinement? Those effects totally just cancel out and never do us any good!
C'mon guys. I've never seen a response so short-sighted as to discard a physics breakthrough so quickly.
Indeed, and in fact this concept plays a large role in the middle book of the Revelation Space series by Alastair Reynolds (which I recommend that you read, if you have not).
Fine, their "allegedly shady" acts. My point still stands. Nobody expected them to walk up to Congress and say "yeah, we totally grabbed all this wifi data that people didn't know we were taking." I'm not even making any statements about the morality or legality of Google's actions. I'm just saying, the content of TFS is in no way surprising.
FWIW, I metamodded you up, so don't take this in any way personally.
A major corporation fibs to the government about their shady acts? Say it isn't so! We all knew this was going to be how it went down from the time the Wi-fi sniffing was first announced. There's no surprise here. There really isn't much more to say about it. We've covered the shadiness of the whole thing at length in other stories, and it's really barely news at all that Google is trying to snow Congress about it...