The ends justify the means. Brilliant. That never goes wrong.
Fair enough, creators (and I'm using the term loosely, to account for musicians and car designers, and that's only two examples) have to get paid so their salaries must be included in the price of the copies of their creations. So, riddle me this: why do musicians not have a salary, and why do cars cost the same after enough cars have been sold to account for the salary of the designers?
He illegaly gained access to servers in the US, so he commited the crime in the US and should be prosecuted there.
Who decided he illegaly gaines access? The US?
Now imagine you're just browsing and North Korea decides you were illegally accessing their servers. Should you be sent there? Or maybe it'd be more reasonable that the north korean government informs yours of what they see as a crime and let your own law decide whether you're a criminal or not.
High capacity drives should come in one enclosure that can be seen over its PC interface connection as multiple smaller drives the OS can handle. A "drive RAID".
And OSes should stop representing each drive as a separate object, except to lower level administration.
All longterm storage should be pooled as a RAID, even if there's only a single device. Presenting individual volumes to the user (and programmer) is more trouble than it's worth. It's the OS' job to present a simple, effective interface to complex underlying hardware.
IPv6, Hard drives, multiple cpu cores... just too many Hz and bits. [...]
Drive makers: Take a pause, catch your breath and work on access times, reliability, and pushing reforming drive technologies like GPT.
Parent is insightful, and hasn't been modded up. Our industry thrives in forced obsolecense of older capable tech... while skipping real features that should be priorities.
If these companies weren't American, craving "bigger is better (at the same $$$ margin)" we would see reliable drives and improved access times. Companies put the foot down and we lose anyway: the last time I heard of a race to reduce RGB dot pitch size (increasing monitor resolutions without an end in sight) was when the USA introduced HDTV and widescreen LCD's... This resolution listshows favor to HD and widescreen, though it didn't exist at all around 1998. It's just that profit margins on 4:3 became smaller.
HD fixed resolutions to an immovable size and forced resolutions to relatively poor movie-ready sizes, ignoring graphic work, increasingly cheap large monitors at the home and gaming or 3D editing at huge resolutions. Imagine the profit margins when you no more R&D to invest in. 1080p just doesn't compete with, er.. "1200p" monitors of yesteryear, but the industry took the latter away from my local stores.
Are you kidding? Design would be highly sought after. People with means would pay exorbitant amounts of money for something cool and unique, and go through great lengths inventing a force field to prevent the design from being stolen.
But it wouldn't really matter, because we can duplicate food and apartments and clothing and whatever else. No one would need money, and people would be free to invent or design all kinds of stuff for the good of all people, not for money. Because money can be duplicated too.
Most of the Founders identified themselves first as Englishmen, and then when their English rights were trampled, by the location of their newly independent States - Virginian, Pennsylvanian, Massachusettsian, and so on. In fact Vermont remained an independent Republic for quite a few years before finally joining the new Union of States.
They viewed themselves the way Member States of the EU view themselves today - first citizens of the State, second of the union.
I suppose that would depend what the ball game is that you are using your bat for
If you teach "history" with the aim of inculcating some political view (left or right or whatever), then, yes, by all means always go for the widely accepted view (of the particular political establishment that you are trying to favor).
Because teaching something that is widely accepted has a strange way of being self-reinforcing (population with inculcated political view are also more accepting of a certain coloring to history, etc.)
In my opinion, teaching unbiased historical facts teaches the students much about human nature, with which they are able to make informed choices, amongst others when it comes to politics. The problem with social engineering attempts like these are the bias: negative aspects of the favored political direction as well as positive aspects of the opposing political direction are "sanitized out", leaving a less complete model of the complex and sometimes ambiguous human nature. This often comes back to bite the original intent in the shiny metal pants in some way or another, perhaps long after the individuals who came up with it have long passed on. I'm sure one can find a couple of spectacular examples of such failures in history.
I have to call FUD on that -- Word 2007 will read file formats from before those students were born. If they are claiming that Word ate their homework, they are lying.
Unless Word 2003 at school won't easily recognize
Of course many species go extinct independent of human action (though with human action so pervasive, what species is entirely untouched by it?), but there's little we can do about them.
Finding quantum entanglement in photosynthetic systems demonstrates that we can learn quite a lot of what we're seeking when we look at existing features of living species. Making them extinct is a significant opportunity cost we must consider when accounting for the benefits of what we do that makes them extinct.
"Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." -- Howard Aiken