1277 posts • joined Monday 5th March 2007 21:42 GMT
The EU is often said to run on a franco-german motor. They are both equally up to their necks in it: Germany provides the money, political will and organisational skills and France provides the histrionics.
"and the UI copies Apple's iPhone."
I, er... what? The UI copies what? The iphone? How? The iphone UI is a touch-screen filled with little icons that you can, er, move around a bit. The Android UI is a touch-screen filled with a very flexible and configurable space for widgets, icons and all sorts of things. That counts as "copying"?
@Bonuse - nope
The tablet identifies itself as a tablet, the sites response is at fault.
Postulate a hypothesis
Generate possible experiments to test the validity of the hypothesis
Run the experiments
Measure the results
Reject or adapt the hypothesis based on the results.
The interesting part is that the results are not actually 100% predictable; a working scientific theory is simply a hypothesis that has not yet met a negative result. This DARPA experiment is entirely scientific, as it is attempting to experimentally verify the hypothetical behaviour of a particular design of craft at extremely high speeds. They've made a prediction of its behaviour based on their hypothesis of how this particular design might behave, and the prediction has... well, failed. But that's good science, as it has provided a large amount of empirical data to refine their hypothesis (in this case, the design of the craft) and update their predictions.
You mentioned prior information. Where did that prior information come from? The only place it can have come from is experimentation, and given that this project is dealing with a field that is still largely hypothetical, they have to make these grand experiments to provide the necessary data to make their predictions with.
They could wear a paramilitary-style uniform and be drawn from the civilian population. They could maintain the peace, enforce the common law and apprehend trouble-makers. I suggest they be called Urban Officials.
@martin owens Assumption? When patents were first created the system worked just fine - it was properly applied, requiring models, actual inventions and not just vague, broad ideas and legalese. Calling historical facts "assumption" either proves you know nothing, or that you're willing to ignore reality when it goes against your argument.
@ac, you obviously didn't read my post. this is an example of why the patent system is broken now, it has no bearing on the *concept* of patents, as ypu are attempting to argue.
What Mrs Jones (Miss? Ms? I don't know.) fails to understand is that, even if we had a completely private healthcare system, she wouldn't have been able to just waltz in to her doctor's office the day before leaving and demand jabs without providing medical records.
She's actually a very good example of the entitlement mentality that causes so much trouble.
Shades of grey, dear
A properly applied patent system works. This is not an example of a properly applied patent system, but of a fundamentally broken one. It cannot be used as an example of why patents are wrong, merely as an example of why the current system - which allows patenting of things that are neither obvious, nor novel, nor strictly even "inventions" - is wrong.
Regular fission turns an appreciable amount of matter into energy in the form of gamma rays, other high-energy electromagnetic radiation and a great deal of heat. The energy that matter is turned in to would be, similarly, gamma rays and other high energy electromagnetic radiation, the difference being that the conversion would be complete.
The current assumption is either that matter and anti-matter were produced in equal proportions during the big bang, but that they quickly segregated from each other, OR that anti-matter isn't quite as stable as matter, so it was less likely to form.
Is gthere a simple solution?
Tempting as it no doubt is to declare this a sign that android is a failure, it is nevertheless the very open nature of the android 'ecosystem' that makes it a success.
This presents a problem. An open system can be exploited, which some seize on as 'proof' that the open system is destined to fail and that the apple walled garden approach is the only viable solution. I don't think it's a binary case.
I lile the open model. I also think there's room for a closed, guaranteed market operating alongside it. A two-tiered approach, where both a walled-off area and an open caveat emptor market exist alongside each other would provide both trusted apps and access to the apps that don't meet specific requirements, but which still provide value, without restricting the owner of the device in ways they don't like.
Sometimes snobbery has justification.
It does raise the issue...
... how much of the news we get is actually true, and how much is regurgitated bullshit? Given how must news is just re-titled and slightly edited copypasta from press releases - especially government and NGO press releases - it's hard not to believe that there's very little actually done by journalists these days, *except* swallowing and regurgitating bullshit.
They don't have to rely on the US government for work, they're free to explore alternative possibilities for putting men in space. Retrieving or maintaining satellites, undercutting the current state operators for launching satellites and so forth, but Musk is reportedly keen on sending ships and possibly people to Mars, and presumably many other things that require a man-rated rockiet, but don't require a contract from the US government. If they aren't already working on a bigger goals than the ISS ferry I'll eat my shoes.
Sorry, you lose.
The definition of free speech, per the US Bll of Rights, runs: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
There's no specific clause that says "as long as it's about things deemed important". Free speech is free speech, there's no iff nor but, it is the freedom to express yourself however you see fit. In the public sphere you have no right to not see anatagonist immature shit. The minute you exercise that particular "right", you impinge on the free expression of another.
This being trivial has no direct bearing on the issues you raised. They are important. However, the fact that this is a silly, trivial little thing is precisely why it is also important. If we let the State begin to take away trivial aspects of a fundamental right, they can salami-slice their way through it until that right is gone.
In termsof energy, getting fom low orbit to geo is nothing compared to getting to low orbit. Go look at a the old Saturn rockets they used for the moon launch. Over two thirds of that enormous rocket was used for getting into orbit low orbit, the rest was used for getting all the way to the moon. Getting to GEO equivalent from where the ISS is now would need almost nothing compared to that.
Support the Single European Tank!
To attack Murdoch for his alleged involvement in a media backing scandal, they're going to encourage the media to... get involved in another media hacking scandal.
Even with the rebate we pay far more into the EU than we get out of it. We could pay those subsidies directly, why do we need to have it administered by a remote bureaucracy that hasn't had its accounts signed off for the last decade or more?
The EU adds administrative costs and sucks up a load of money that we could use to benefit our own people instead of paying for other countries' failed economic policies.
Computer turn based is not an oxymoron. An oxymoron would be things like a non-computing computer, or a deadly game.
The phrase you're looking for is "I'm a twit who can't stand anything that doesn't fit my very narrowly defined idea of entertainment."
Tinpot? Oh no no no, we can't have that...
The process necessary to produce tin in reasonable quantities for making tin pots is would also produce far too much pollution, particularly carbon pollution of the worst sort, and the end result is such a terrible, tatty, *regressive* sort of thing with none of the charm of a north african raffia bond clay cooking urn. Tinpots have consequently been banned, but this is a good thing as it will create more job opportunities for the north african raffia makers, and all the associated urn producers, clay miners and so forth, and it provides a much needed boost to our own economy by creating a healthy tin recycling industry. As a result, it would be fair to say that we are a culturally inclusive non-discriminatory environmentally aware non-metallic (or indeed anti-metallic) single unitary source of law, morality, behaviour and sustenance.
"Dictatorship" is so 20th century darling...
The tiny dead hand of government.
Not as such.
The first amendment describes acts that the state absolutely cannot contravene. The constitution is a guarantee of fundamental rights that the state shall not abridge, it has no bearing on the acts of private individuals with each other, as long as both parties understand the agreement they are making.
If anything it would fall under breach of contract and passing off. Apple claims to provide a service. If they are deliberately hamstringing that service for political or social ends then they could be open to legal action.
A N Other Title
Linking your phone to a google account is probably what they mean. That would activate your access to various bits and bobs such as the marketplace and their handy information slurping servers.
That sort of activation.
You know why so many cracker types are diagnosed with aspergers? Because it tends to produce cracker types. The combination of high intelligence, obsessive knowledge-seeking and reduced social awareness are classic symptoms of both aspergers and the stereotypical computer nerd. An aspergers brain is thought to have certain structures doubled up, making them highly sensitive to external stimuli, which essentially forces them to retreat into the most controlled environment they can find - one that doesn't have "real" people in it.
However, like adhd and bipolar disorder in the 90s, it's become something of a self-diagnosed "solution" for people who want cover for acting like arsholes on the internet. About half of anon probably self-diagnoses as aspergic when most of them are just pricks. Tough problem to crack, but you can usually tell the fake from the real deal. Aspies are obsessive by nature, as obsessive focus on a single task or subject is the only way they can filter out unwanted stimuli. The way to tell an aspie from a prick on the internet is to observe their behaviour: if they bore easily and constantly move from subject to subject, they probably aren't an aspie.
Bearing in mine much of this is, of course, subjective and based on observations of my wife and associates who have been officially diagnosed with aspergers.
Not like trains?
You're right, aviation is not like the trains: it's run cheaply and efficiently, without any need for huge government subsidies to keep it going. And no, a low tax rate is not the same as a subsidy, before you try and make that argument: subsidy requires taking money from one entity and handing it to another. Low or zero tax means the government never gets its hands on it in the first place.
And, as explained, aviation is taxed on the demand - that is, on passengers flown. It's a sales tax rather than a resources tax, which is a much more equitable solution for all involved. If it were taxed on fuel it would simply source fuel where the tax wasn't applied. It can't source passengers were there is no tax, because there aren't any.
My experience of the apple app store was no different
As they say in cliché land, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
You know how language works, right? Nouns derive rom verbs, verbs derive from nouns, both derive from everything else. It's what language does as it evolves. People coplainin about this are trying to prevent the very thing that made their language what it is in the first place.
Single example from millions: hand. It is a verb (you hand a thing to a person) derived from the noun "hand", that wiggly thing you use to type. I have to hand a handy object, which I shall hand to you using my hand. The type of type I type is typical.
In other words, shut up, you're making yourself look dumb.
Give it time.
Either eclipse will turn up on it, or some enterprising user will manage to hack debian onto it, at which point you'll be able to run it anyway.
Incidentally mine is working out quite nicely too. Already replaced my aged laptop, as you may have guessed. The only downside is the limited codec support, which means that I can't stream my enormous 1080p movies on it (having said that, it might also be the fact that I'm trying to stream . But that's ok, I can just use it as a gigantic upnp remote for xbmc.
ps. we meet at last!
Import duty would breach several constitutional restrictions
Current appearances aside, the united states is still a federation of nation-states, not a unitary state with administrative divisions. The US constitution was designed with this in mind, requiring that the states give up control of their internal borders in exchange for a federal government that would handle the external borders, common defence and a few other issues that affected the entire union.
The constitution guarantees freedom of movement without restriction by the states and also prevents one state from imposing duties, fines and tariffs on another. An "import duty" imposed by california would be a very unconstitutional thing. In effect the "use tax" is already very close to such a breach, but it avoids that by expressing as a tax on individuals within the state rather than on the economic activity of another state.
A federal sales tax would likewise breach constitutional guarantees regarding the states ability to legislate and raise their own finances. Strictly speaking even the federal income tax breaches such guarantees. Most activities by the federal government over the last 150 or so years have been unconstitutional to some degree and the issue has become less one of preventing such activity, and more of finding how far people are willing to let unconstitutional activity go.
Sadly not true, by the time Bismarck was making her break for the open ocean the dazzle camo and false bow-wave had been painted over. The confusion came because Prinz Eugen and Bismark were visually very similar silhouettes, and sailing in such a way that they looked the same size from certain angles.
Language is rather more than just a way to exchange ideas. Different languages convey ideas in different ways, which in turn forms and perpetuates radically different world views. Language is a great part of culture, both forming it and being formed by it. When a culture loses its language it will change a lot, losing itself and possibly even disappearing entirely, as cultural artefacts and ideas become less possible to express in the adopted foreign language.
A similar but less pronounced effect appears in language evolution over time. Words that meant one thing now mean a different thing but, also, ideas once held dear can no longer be expressed in any meaningful way, or take a great deal of effort to express and, consequently, become lost or changed until they're unrecognisable.
A good example is the biblical concept of "fear". A contemporary reader, steeped in modern culture, will read phrases that refer to the "fear" of god and assume it means people are meant to be in mortal terror. The word originally translated as fear would these days be translated as respect, but that doesn't quite cover the full meaning of the original hebrew.
Or take any greek text translated to English and look for the word love. You don't know whether that was agape, eros or what have you. Ancient greek has many words that are routinely translated as "love" but which mean very different things, meanings that require one or two sentences or a paragraph to explain in modern English. Cultural context is lost in translation. When a culture loses its language it has to attempt to translate its culture into the language it has adopted, a process that will strip a culture of most of its foundation or turn it into a parody of itself.
The idea of a world where everyone speaks the same language might seem appealing at first, but which language do you choose? Any language you chose will end up destroying much of the culture alien to it. Constructed languages, moreso, for the only way they can survive is by crafting a cultural context within which they can function.
A common language for commerce is useful, but we need to encourage the survival of languages in order to maintain the unique viewpoints they provide.
And I say this as someone who thinks this BBC Alba thing is a pile of patronising, politically biased trash.
The last part *can be* the MAC, but it doesn't *have* to be the MAC. It can be anything you want, even randomly altered over time as described in rfc4941.
And I don't even "get" ipv6. Never understood why they couldn't make the existing IP address a subnet of a new, much larger address space.
No, but they do have...........IRAQ! *scare chord*
He forgot to pick up his 3D glasses.