Perfect application waiting for this
Once we have a simulated cat cortex it simply must go into the executive module of the first Infinite Improbability Drive. What shall we name the starship to contain it? I suggest Heart of Goldfish.
362 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Apr 2007
How about using a material based on the current deck coating but made sufficiently porous so that water could be pumped up through it creating a continuously replenished coat of water under the aircraft? You may well be able to apply vacuum to remove excess water when you're done to avoid a too-slick surface.
OK, where's my billion dollar contract?
I am perfectly willing to recognize a superior method of storing and accessing information, and will happily pay for for just that. However, the kindle (and many other "digital rights" encumbered systems) go much farther than that by trying to cripple my use of the information that I store and access. I won't have any part of it.
Even though I have serious misgivings about the copyright system for printed materials, books are much superior to protected/restricted digital versions of the same information primarily because the book itself becomes my property and I can dispose of it as I choose. You cannot legally resell a kindle version of any publication.
...of arrogant tyrant wanna-be assholes who are just so damned sure they know what I need better than I.
And, Mr. Kaspersky, suck on my real name. I use it when I want, and I don't use it when I don't want. I'll post anonymously when I write something inflammatory, unlike this mild message. Why should you have any say in the matter, you impotent jerk?
If you put a million fanbois in a room each with a keyboard with only two keys, a zero and a one, how long will it take them to reproduce the lost 250GB by repeatedly slamming their heads into the keys?
Oh, my, I just had the most bizarre mental image of the penitents of Monty Python and the Holy Grail. With wireless keyboards.
You say, "OK, first, the US constitution did not grant the right to bear arms to all men because it was our 'right' but because..."
Stop right there. The U. S. Constitution does not *grant* any rights at all. It acknowledges some of our natural rights and prohibits the government from violating them.
All together now: Government Is Not The Source Of Rights
What is this, a day trip for the members of the gigantic ego society?
People such as you, who are not willing to countenance free and responsible individuals declaring that they have a natural right to protect themselves, their families, and possessions, and who equip themselves to do just that, are misanthropic, arrogant, and egotistical wanna-be tyrants.
I am 60 years old and have never been in a fight in my life, having successfully defused all potentially violent conflicts without surrendering. I am quite proud of that. I also carry a firearm unless I have a good legal or practical reason not to. I have never pointed any gun at anything other than targets, much less fired one.
And you want to be trusted with the degree of power and responsibility to tell me what I may and may not do? How unspeakably power-mad you are.
Are you willing to say that you'd prefer to see a woman lying in a car park raped and then strangled with her own panty hose than to see her holding a pistol and standing over her dead would-be armed assailant?
You victim-disarmament psychos are truly nauseating.
Chris, you say "Where criminal masterminds fail to find opportunities to line their own pockets* you can always rely on government officials to do so."
Oh, you Pollyanna, you!
Gunvernment officials *are* the larcenous mastermind overlords. The criminals outside of gunvernment are too stupid to get elected, appointed, or hired by the State. Would you care to hazard a guess as to how many orders of magnitude State predation exceeds private predation?
What a load of <title>. I'm posting this using an HP notebook I picked up for a song because it had suffered a disk failure and the replacement was virgin - no Windows license included. So, I burned an Ubuntu disc, put it in the drive, and in very little time and with no real effort, here I am wirelessly connected (with encryption), networked to my HP LaserJet, running iTunes for my iPhone (via Wine), and using the same browser and email client I've been using for years (Firefox and Thunderbird).
I'm not bragging, just stating that this was an extremely straightforward setup - simpler by far than XP.
I've been using computers of one form or another since before many of you were born, since 1972 actually. I've had to learn quite a lot about most platforms I worked on, and I've worked on almost all of them at one time or another. I mention this because I had to check to see what version of Ubuntu I'm running (9.02 it says) because - sorry for the shouting - I HAVE NOT HAD TO LEARN SQUAT ABOUT LINUX BECAUSE IT JUST WORKS. And it works more reliably and with far fewer complications than any Windows I've used (and I actually still have the floppies somewhere for the text-based Windows Version 1).
How many of you commentards would like to have to provide an acceptable reason for resigning your job? Being forced to stay on rather than say merely, "I quit."?
Why shouldn't it work the other way? My employment is covered by a contract (a written one at present, but it has been oral or implied in the past) between two parties each with contractual rights and responsibilities. I have agreed that absent an easily recognized exigency I will provide two weeks notice of my intent to terminate my employment. Likewise, my employer also will give me notice in advance in most circumstances.
The key point is that neither one of us is required to provide a reason, either contractually - or ethically, IMNSHO (is it OK to use all caps in an abbreviation?) (Oh, my! Is it all right to capitalize OK?)
The employer of this person should have had only to say, "You're fired." Why in the world is any reason necessary?
I've long reckoned that multitasking performance is similar to committee effectiveness. In the latter, effectiveness is inversely related to the square of the number of participants; in the former, performance (or effective intelligence if you will) on any single task is inversely related to the multitasking level.
When I hire analysts and other technical people, I want them to concentrate on the task - note the singular - at hand. If I interrupt with another task, I very much like to be told that I'm interfering with productivity. Sometimes I need to do that, but we all need to see clearly the cost of doing so.
[PH because she calls for undivided attention]
The real question is will we see Sigourney in knickers as she appeared 30 years ago.
(I've just started working on my seventh decade so I might well enjoy that view whether or not she's chronologically adjusted!)
/Mine coat's the one dirty both outside and inside
Vulgar Varmint
Plume d'Or [1]
Atmospheric Overlord
Wing+Tail+Fuselage? [2]
Free Beer [3]
Not Bird Shit
de Havilland Comet II
Plane 9 from Outer Space [4] (my personal favorite)
Notes:
1. Pronounced "plummeter"
2. WTF?
3. Guaranteed attention-grabbing name, that one
4. Thank you, Edward D. Wood, Jr.
The list of vulnerable groups (children, disabled and elderly) is incomplete and as a result most of you have things backwards about cabinet ministers and other government panjandrums. These people are themselves vulnerable. They exhibit a clear inability either to perceive the world around themselves objectively or to react appropriately to that world. Moreover, they are universally megalomaniacal, frequently monomaniacal, not to mention narcissistic.
So, anyone working with cabinet ministers and the like should be vetted so as to prevent panjandrum abuse.
@Tim 30 (10:47 GMT) - The English Language does indeed have the word you are seeking. It is "governmental."
"Steyn notes that even in the wake of the 9/11 attacks and the paranoia of George Bush and Dick Cheney, and despite the Patriot Act and the Homelands Security Act, there was no attempt to introduce identity passes in the US."
There he's wrong, though the rest of his argument is quite persuasive. The REAL ID Act of 2005 is just that: the requirement for identity passes in order to travel, enter many government buildings, or any other "official purpose" so designated by the Heimatsicherheitdienst (Dept. of Homeland Security).
That these are national ID cards is disguised by pushing the responsibility for implementation onto individual states in the form of driver licenses or similarly issued ID cards for non-drivers. All of the states license systems must be tied together to a country-wide data base centrally controlled and administered, and accessible, of course, to all federal and state law enforcement and intelligence forces. And their dogs.
Fortunately, the system is not in place just yet and several states are fighting the law. Good for them!
Alun Taylor - did the company not give out recharging info or did you neglect to include it in your article? Or did the Evil Editor strike again? I'd really like to know how heavy an extension cord I'll need to recharge this vehicle from my neighbor's patio outlet. At night. But not a rainy night.
I'd be even more worried if its tasks included "destroy all moving objects within 100 miles not designated as 'frienldy'". Never underestimate the power of a typo in the wrong place.
@Dr. Mouse" Shirley you aren't saying they should go f*ck themselves?! But if so, I wanna watch.
My instant reaction upon seeing the photo was to think of the face of a hungry locust Hell-bent on eating my brain. Or wallet.
See what you think:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3134/3158283295_78df827049.jpg?v=0
<What do we do with wit^H^H^Hevil 'leccies? Burn them! Buurrrrnn them!>