Also if a lot of people start using openoffice and other open source software on windows MS loses a lot of money. Most of their profit comes from selling office and other addon software rather than OS itself. They would have to make their own stuff free or come up with very good software which people are willing to pay for. The only reason people pay so much for office and all is because they do not have or know about opensource which works on windows.
No private company is going to spend billions of dollars to send spacecraft into the solar system and beyond so that we can answer some basic questions in science. Ofcourse if you think that research into basic sciences is a waste of money than there is no argument. No private company or individual will invest in anything until they are convinced that they can make a few bucks for every buck they invest. And you must provide some evidence for which private company has superior capability than nasa for space right now. Infact a number of screwups that nasa had have been due to mistakes in manufacturing by these very private companies that you talk of.
at near light speeds time will slow down to a crawl not pass faster on the ship.
Re:How did they decide?
on
Press freedom
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Also the study did not address anything about the inherent bias in the media. The fact that the government does not control the media does not mean that we get unbaised coverage of the news. And a lot of times the ownership of the media is not even clear to judge which side they are more baised against. This is as dangerous as govt. controlling the media because people think that the media is free and fair which is not true.
The problem with methane is that it will still produse CO2 which is a green house gas, and in any new form of fuel we will want to get rid of any green house gas emissions. This is the biggest reason to switch to H2 as it only produces water on burning. The storage density of H2 is bad if u store it as a gas or liquid. Its only when you start storing h2 adsorbed on some materials that the density will be practical enough for applications. Lots of work is going on in this area of adsorbing h2.
we do have plenty of evidence for evolution. In science when you propose a model you not only back it up with evidence but also make experimentally verifyable predictions. If you cannot propose any experiment to prove or disprove the predictions then it is not a scientific theory, its mostly considered philosophy. The the contention that all bological sysyems are irreducably complex is simply not correct. for a critique of behe's book see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html. Also finetuning in the universe is no evidence for anything. We do not know if there are other universes out there with different pyhsical constants. Also sicence does not base itself on how much stuff a model can explain, otherwise the model that god created everything as it is, and can do anything explains all things and we do not need any other model. whenever a model is proposed you also propose a series of experiments which will either prove or disprove the model. ID's contention of existance of intelligent creator has no direct experimental way of verification which makes this not scientific but philophical. and ofcourse there is always the question of who is the creator of the creator, and the creator of the creator of the creator.......inf.
hey you yourself seem to be baised against kerry. I dont see why you should complain about somebody else being baised. well ofcourse you can complain that they are editors and unlike you have power to post stories here. But then the universe is a very unfair place to live in.
intelligent design is just another form of creationism. While no theory demands that an intelligent creator should be dismissed from science , the presence of a creator who can in principle do anything means that science no longer is exact. in otherwords science can no longer predict anything as it can be changed in arbitrary ways. And so far we have absolutely no evidence of an intelligent creator. Throwing statements like things as complex as humans cannot evolve on their own nor the fact that evolution at this point cannot explain everything constitute evidnce for creationism or intelligent design.
a theory is judged by its own evidence not by public opinion or by chinks in another theory.
all the political ads have evolved in the same way as normal ads on telivision. Its just a way to sell dumb candidates to the unsuspecting people by making them look intelligent. How many political ads really give anything objective to think about or anything to think about at all. If people are making their choices based on ads in tv thats just really sad. you can keep bombarding the people with really useless stuff u call issues and completely sideline any real issues that people should be paying attention to which is what is happening in this election.
well weather prediction is very tricky because it is a non linear syatem which is highly dependent on initial conditions. So unless one knows all the initial conditions and their variations over time the accuracy of the prediction will be bad. this is especially true for long term weather prediction. but with faster and faster computers coming up people have been able to put in more and more parameters with better resolutions and thats why hurricane prediction is so much better now compared to 10 yrs ago. and it will keep getting better. its definetly not impossible to predict the path of the strom. infact right now they are fairly accurate for atleast 24-48 hrs which is a big thing. 24-48 hrs is a lot of time to evacuate people. without all the progress in predicting weather the casualities would have been much much higher.
wow all the cool new games that will come out...first person doctor, real time surgery(RTS) etc where you can do your own operation and see how many times and in how many ways you can die before the actual surgery. will give evryone a realistic expectation from the actual surgery.
microsoft going the SCO way..
wait for people to adopt the new software.
after sufficient number start using it say we own the patents and u all have to pay up.
more money for MS.
the bandwidth will anyway be increased spam or no spam. I am not really sure spam can be made to go away. its like hacking where people keep coming up with new protection measures which are eventually broken.
well the idea does seem interesting but the article does lack any details like did they actually try depositing other materials and what was the success rate. Also they are able to deposit Ni uniformly, but have they actually tried depositing it in different size layers to see if their method works. there are a bunch of ideas in the nanoworld which work specifically for a set of materials, so i wonder if this would be as general as claimed, and laser ablation has been around for quite a while now. well if anyone elas has any details it will be cool to know.
Slashdot Mirror
That i would get through the day without seeing a story about the iPhone on slashdot. I hope god forgives me for my blasphemous thoughts.
Like u perhaps.......
what if the parallel universe you pop out through the wormhole into is made completely of antimatter.
Also if a lot of people start using openoffice and other open source software on windows MS loses a lot of money. Most of their profit comes from selling office and other addon software rather than OS itself. They would have to make their own stuff free or come up with very good software which people are willing to pay for. The only reason people pay so much for office and all is because they do not have or know about opensource which works on windows.
No private company is going to spend billions of dollars to send spacecraft into the solar system and beyond so that we can answer some basic questions in science. Ofcourse if you think that research into basic sciences is a waste of money than there is no argument. No private company or individual will invest in anything until they are convinced that they can make a few bucks for every buck they invest. And you must provide some evidence for which private company has superior capability than nasa for space right now. Infact a number of screwups that nasa had have been due to mistakes in manufacturing by these very private companies that you talk of.
at near light speeds time will slow down to a crawl not pass faster on the ship.
Also the study did not address anything about the inherent bias in the media. The fact that the government does not control the media does not mean that we get unbaised coverage of the news. And a lot of times the ownership of the media is not even clear to judge which side they are more baised against. This is as dangerous as govt. controlling the media because people think that the media is free and fair which is not true.
The problem with methane is that it will still produse CO2 which is a green house gas, and in any new form of fuel we will want to get rid of any green house gas emissions. This is the biggest reason to switch to H2 as it only produces water on burning. The storage density of H2 is bad if u store it as a gas or liquid. Its only when you start storing h2 adsorbed on some materials that the density will be practical enough for applications. Lots of work is going on in this area of adsorbing h2.
we do have plenty of evidence for evolution. In science when you propose a model you not only back it up with evidence but also make experimentally verifyable predictions. If you cannot propose any experiment to prove or disprove the predictions then it is not a scientific theory, its mostly considered philosophy. The the contention that all bological sysyems are irreducably complex is simply not correct. for a critique of behe's book see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/behe/review.html. Also finetuning in the universe is no evidence for anything. We do not know if there are other universes out there with different pyhsical constants. Also sicence does not base itself on how much stuff a model can explain, otherwise the model that god created everything as it is, and can do anything explains all things and we do not need any other model. whenever a model is proposed you also propose a series of experiments which will either prove or disprove the model. ID's contention of existance of intelligent creator has no direct experimental way of verification which makes this not scientific but philophical. and ofcourse there is always the question of who is the creator of the creator, and the creator of the creator of the creator.......inf.
hey you yourself seem to be baised against kerry. I dont see why you should complain about somebody else being baised. well ofcourse you can complain that they are editors and unlike you have power to post stories here. But then the universe is a very unfair place to live in.
intelligent design is just another form of creationism. While no theory demands that an intelligent creator should be dismissed from science , the presence of a creator who can in principle do anything means that science no longer is exact. in otherwords science can no longer predict anything as it can be changed in arbitrary ways. And so far we have absolutely no evidence of an intelligent creator. Throwing statements like things as complex as humans cannot evolve on their own nor the fact that evolution at this point cannot explain everything constitute evidnce for creationism or intelligent design. a theory is judged by its own evidence not by public opinion or by chinks in another theory.
all the political ads have evolved in the same way as normal ads on telivision. Its just a way to sell dumb candidates to the unsuspecting people by making them look intelligent. How many political ads really give anything objective to think about or anything to think about at all. If people are making their choices based on ads in tv thats just really sad. you can keep bombarding the people with really useless stuff u call issues and completely sideline any real issues that people should be paying attention to which is what is happening in this election.
well weather prediction is very tricky because it is a non linear syatem which is highly dependent on initial conditions. So unless one knows all the initial conditions and their variations over time the accuracy of the prediction will be bad. this is especially true for long term weather prediction. but with faster and faster computers coming up people have been able to put in more and more parameters with better resolutions and thats why hurricane prediction is so much better now compared to 10 yrs ago. and it will keep getting better. its definetly not impossible to predict the path of the strom. infact right now they are fairly accurate for atleast 24-48 hrs which is a big thing. 24-48 hrs is a lot of time to evacuate people. without all the progress in predicting weather the casualities would have been much much higher.
wow all the cool new games that will come out...first person doctor, real time surgery(RTS) etc where you can do your own operation and see how many times and in how many ways you can die before the actual surgery. will give evryone a realistic expectation from the actual surgery.
i for one would be more than happy to spend a few extra days recovering just to play more.
microsoft going the SCO way.. wait for people to adopt the new software. after sufficient number start using it say we own the patents and u all have to pay up. more money for MS.
the bandwidth will anyway be increased spam or no spam. I am not really sure spam can be made to go away. its like hacking where people keep coming up with new protection measures which are eventually broken.
well then someone else would have started it. u will have to keep killing anyone who gets this idea before he can implement it.
well the idea does seem interesting but the article does lack any details like did they actually try depositing other materials and what was the success rate. Also they are able to deposit Ni uniformly, but have they actually tried depositing it in different size layers to see if their method works. there are a bunch of ideas in the nanoworld which work specifically for a set of materials, so i wonder if this would be as general as claimed, and laser ablation has been around for quite a while now. well if anyone elas has any details it will be cool to know.