Not really. I've used Google Desktop on Windows and it gives you the option to turn off sending stuff to Google servers. Meaning that is does send "stuff" to Google by default? That pretty much justifies everyone's concerns then.
One reason the "intelligent design" arguments are crap to me, is that my experience as a programmer tells me that the more complex a program is, the more "evolution" dominates over "design" in its creation
If you're saying that the organisms in this world are far too complex to have possibly have been designed by any group of IT professionals, I agree with you. However, I don't think that is what intelligent design proponents claim.
And inefficient. With 4MW in and 300 bhp out, I make that out to be about 5.6% efficient. Considering that steam-powered gensets can hit 30-35% efficiency easily, and that fuel is getting increasingly rare, this reeks of bad idea.
They're trying to break a speed record. I don't think they intend to start mass producing these as a solution to the world's environmental problems. The all time land speed record was set by a vehicle that got 0.04mpg using 4.8Gal/sec of fuel. I can't find the actual efficiency, but despite the large size of the vehicle, that sounds pretty inefficient.
That's not the point. The point is that everything is (or at the least should be) equal before the law, and any transgression of the law should be investigated and pursued.
Okay, so RIAA is picking and choosing whom to prosecute. They're a private entity and they can go after whomever they want. Of course they're going to go after the easier targets first. I'm not saying that's "A Good Thing", but what's the alternative -- force them to prosecute everyone?
11Then I saw another beast, coming out of the earth. He had two horns like a lamb, but he spoke like a dragon. 12He exercised all the authority of the first beast on his behalf, and made the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed. 13And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men. 14Because of the signs he was given power to do on behalf of the first beast, he deceived the inhabitants of the earth. He ordered them to set up an image in honor of the beast who was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15He was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that it could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. 16He also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, 17so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name.
18This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666.
I've heard many interpretations of this, but the bottom line is, many Christians will resist to the death any attempt to be "marked" or "implanted" because of this passage. I don't see forced RFID implants happening in this country any time soon.
So you're saying that 2 girls who share music and are reported to the RIAA should not be because of their dad?
Hmmm, are you saying that everyone else shouldn't have been victimized, but these girls should be because of their dad?
I honestly don't know, has GWB said anything strongly pro-copyright or anti-music sharing? Or are we just painting him with a broad "pro-big-business" brush? Admittedly, I don't have a very strong opinion on the issue - even though I have personal friends who are indie musicians with copyrighted music. It's interesting that musicians themselves seem pretty split on the issue. Some indie bands figure they won't make much money unless they can build an audience, and are willing to give up some sales to do that. OTOH, creating an album does cost money, and more money can usually make for a better final product. The big signed artists probably don't care about copying because they make most of their money off concerts while album profits go mostly to the label.
The average IQ of first-born men was 103.2, they found.
Second-born men averaged 101.2, but second-born men whose older sibling died in infancy scored 102.9.
And for third-borns, the average was 100.0. But if both older siblings died young, the third-born score rose to 102.6.
Okay, an IQ of 100 is the average, right? If the lowest - scoring group out of 1st born, 2nd born, and 3rd born men averaged 100, that would mean either 4th and later born men, and all women combined, must average lower than 100, right? I'm not really arguing that women have lower IQs, but rather wondering how they "normalized" the test to get results like that.
In future you will see only what Google wants you to see. With its increasing dominance of both access to web content and content itself, Google is becoming the new global censor, answerable to no-one but its shareholders. This is very, very scary
That assumes that Google is the only source of information, doesn't it? But there are many other players. None nearly as large, but there are many. And when you say "answerable only to shareholders"... to whom do you think they should be answerable? Governments? They already are because governments have the power to block them or shut them down. The people? They already are because if no one uses google, they get no ad revenue.
... to a game like this since I read the pre-release hype about Halo. Now I'm just waiting for MS to buy EA Games and make Spore Xbox360 only or Vista only (meaning I'll probably never buy it).
Today, XP works. What happens after MS end-of-life's it? What happens when your computer dies off and you need new hardware, but can't get any more XP licenses?
Run linux! Oh, wait, was that a rhetorical question?
Good grief! Can it get any more "gray area" than this? So there is a law against using government email for political purposes and a law requiring all official, non-political email to be stored. I would imagine there are many emails (regarding appointments, for example) that could go either way. "Hey, how do you think it will make us look if we appoint this guy for this position?" Is that "official" or "political"? And were the emails "destroyed", or were they just not archived? (c'mon slashdot, this is our subject area - we know you don't shred emails). I'd like all the Bush opponents out there to take a minute and imagine hearing these same allegations against Clinton (or whatever administration you would support). I'll admit, if I'd heard the same news about Clinton, I'd be a lot more suspicious, but so far, this is just an allegation of not preserving emails. The implication is that this is part of some big cover-up or scandal, but nothing specific is mentioned. It's just more "Bush Dynasty = Big Oil = Big Conspiracy".
Begging your pardon, but that alone isn't a great reason not to watch the movie.
Pardon granted. I did read your entire post and you make an interesting point. However, I don't believe I need any particular reason NOT to watch it, I need a reason TO watch it. It would take many lifetimes to take in all the potentially informative media I have access to, but I only have 1, and I'm halfway through it already (and that's an optimistic estimate!)
Well, fortunately, this is not a Politically-based documentary...
I assume you say that because the word "documentary" is inappropriate. I mean, just because he isn't promoting the agenda of either major party doesn't make it non-political. I'm sure the guy means well, but I don't share his views, I don't trust his facts, and I don't plan to watch this movie.
The patterns they suggested in the article were not as elegant as the Bayer filter (where each color formed an evenly spaced grid). They may be hiding the actual pattern for now or there may be some technical reason for those patterns that I don't understand, but I would suggest this pattern (C = Clear):
C G C G B C R C C G C G R C B C
it keeps the same 4clear:2green:1red:1blue ratio but the different color pixels all form a regularly spaced grid.
If you have a lump of anything of a known mass, why bother with the rest?
This is what I got from the article: the mass of a kilogram is not based on anything fundamental (like a number of atoms), it is based on the mass of a prototype. So no mass measurement can be more accurate than the most accurate measure of that prototype. The whole purpose of this project is to create a new prototype whose mass is known to an even higher degree of accuracy. They are doing this by counting atoms. Not literally, but they know the atomic structure and spacing of quartz crystal (apparently to a very high degree of accuracy) and the know the geometric volume of this sphere - that's why making the sphere so perfectly round is important. I assume a sphere is just the easiest shape to make with that kind of precision. If the sphere is 20cm in diameter and accurate to 35nm, then by my calculations it is accurate to about 1 in 2million. I expected more, but I guess they're still working on it.
It's kinda like finding out your house you're current building will cost twice as much as normal.
Do you just leave it half finished and abandon it or do you keep pumping money into it?
I believe that's called "sunk cost" in the business world. And in business, you ignore sunk cost. E.g., if you are $500,000 into leasing-to-own a million dollar machine, then find you can buy an equivalent machine new for less than the remaining half million, you dump the old machine for the new one. Or if you are $500,000 into a million dollar venture and then find that the project won't likely make even the remaining half million back, it doesn't make sense to finish it.
The real reason is lack of government support. Large scale public projects can rarely succeed until they receive government subsidies. In other words, 300,000,000 Americans all need to pitch in so that a large project can make it. As a prior proof of this, consider hydroelectric (and irrigation system) dams in America. They were privately funded prior to USACE/Bureau of Reclamations taking over and during that period they all failed - economically speaking. Once the govt. funded them, it was a different story. Despite still experiencing economic failure, they are still around today and churning out the juicy electrons.
Well that's disheartening. Are you saying hydroelectric is losing money? Then those subsidies contribute to the national debt, and eventually in some form or other we'll have to pay the piper. Or are you saying that it eventually became profitable, but not soon enough for a private company to have made the initial investment?
Maybe they can't recognize siblings at all. Maybe the genetics are close enough so that the plant can not distinguish its own root from that of its siblings.
What's the distinction here? I assume that when we talk about a plant "recognizing" something, we mean in some automatic, chemical way and not in the sense of "cognition".
The meaning in your post is infinitely small when viewed from outside your head. Could that explain why you are getting all metaphysical on us?
Sorry, please take that as a friendly jab. I'm sure your question had some valid meaning, but I could not deduce it from your post (and maybe it's just me that didn't get it).
Slashdot Mirror
If you're saying that the organisms in this world are far too complex to have possibly have been designed by any group of IT professionals, I agree with you. However, I don't think that is what intelligent design proponents claim.
Hmmm, are you saying that everyone else shouldn't have been victimized, but these girls should be because of their dad?
I honestly don't know, has GWB said anything strongly pro-copyright or anti-music sharing? Or are we just painting him with a broad "pro-big-business" brush? Admittedly, I don't have a very strong opinion on the issue - even though I have personal friends who are indie musicians with copyrighted music. It's interesting that musicians themselves seem pretty split on the issue. Some indie bands figure they won't make much money unless they can build an audience, and are willing to give up some sales to do that. OTOH, creating an album does cost money, and more money can usually make for a better final product. The big signed artists probably don't care about copying because they make most of their money off concerts while album profits go mostly to the label.
He turned me into a newt!
Sounds like you're a programmer. You must be thinking of the terms "localization" and "internationalization" (or l10n and i18n).
That assumes that Google is the only source of information, doesn't it? But there are many other players. None nearly as large, but there are many. And when you say "answerable only to shareholders" ... to whom do you think they should be answerable? Governments? They already are because governments have the power to block them or shut them down. The people? They already are because if no one uses google, they get no ad revenue.
... to a game like this since I read the pre-release hype about Halo. Now I'm just waiting for MS to buy EA Games and make Spore Xbox360 only or Vista only (meaning I'll probably never buy it).
... in minority report?
Run linux! Oh, wait, was that a rhetorical question?
Good grief! Can it get any more "gray area" than this? So there is a law against using government email for political purposes and a law requiring all official, non-political email to be stored. I would imagine there are many emails (regarding appointments, for example) that could go either way. "Hey, how do you think it will make us look if we appoint this guy for this position?" Is that "official" or "political"? And were the emails "destroyed", or were they just not archived? (c'mon slashdot, this is our subject area - we know you don't shred emails). I'd like all the Bush opponents out there to take a minute and imagine hearing these same allegations against Clinton (or whatever administration you would support). I'll admit, if I'd heard the same news about Clinton, I'd be a lot more suspicious, but so far, this is just an allegation of not preserving emails. The implication is that this is part of some big cover-up or scandal, but nothing specific is mentioned. It's just more "Bush Dynasty = Big Oil = Big Conspiracy".
Cranky but reasonable. I try not to respond to people who sound unreasonable.
The patterns they suggested in the article were not as elegant as the Bayer filter (where each color formed an evenly spaced grid). They may be hiding the actual pattern for now or there may be some technical reason for those patterns that I don't understand, but I would suggest this pattern (C = Clear):
it keeps the same 4clear:2green:1red:1blue ratio but the different color pixels all form a regularly spaced grid.
The meaning in your post is infinitely small when viewed from outside your head. Could that explain why you are getting all metaphysical on us?
Sorry, please take that as a friendly jab. I'm sure your question had some valid meaning, but I could not deduce it from your post (and maybe it's just me that didn't get it).