jonathlee

Intellectual property and physical property are entirely different. Intellectual property can be shared/multiplied/given away indefinitely while still being retained by the originator while physical property cannot.

After copyright expiration, the original author of intellectual property can create derivative works even after their copyright expires (in the same universe, etc.) or even updated revisions, which restart their copyright for the revision. Even if other could do so, I suspect the market for their derivative works will still have a preference for their works vs. others who create derivative works of the original, depending on the quality of the derivatives.

It is really hard to own land (or any other physical thing) after you've sold it but the same is not true of a novel.

"Only 8 months" tells you nothing of the conditions or prison population within which he will be placed. 8 months in solitary or in a maximum-security prison (where hard-core, repeat-offender murderers and rapists are) is much harsher than years in a minimum-security prison.

Julian Assange, who hasn't even been convicted AFAIK, has been kept in solitary in a maximum-security prison while only being accused, falsely it turns out, of non-violent crimes. The reasonableness of the entire punishment must be taken into account, not just the duration.

Adding "tiananmen square" to "tank man" does return the photo as the 3rd result: tank man tiananmen square

Also, the misspelled version of Tianenmen that I first used worked as well.

Interesting modelling exercise but until we have physical evidence that this is occurring, and can calibrate the model to what degree, this is just an interesting hypothesis/story. Models are always subject to the GIGO and built-in-assumption confirmation problems and are always wrong, just sometimes useful.

Find the evidence to prove/disprove the model.

Because its the new hotness.

Yes. Look up space diving. There have been old Popular Science (Popular Mechanics?) articles on it and speculation in the space community about a new sport if/when a space tether is possible.

I have personal experience with this type of situation. Twice we had excellent phone interviews for an onsite contractor position. Then, when the supposed person we interviewed showed up, they turned out not to be able to do the work (not an onsite interview, the actual work). One was so bad that they had no idea what a variable was.

I have never heard of that happening in _any_ real-world version of communism. Maybe you are thinking of an employee-owned company?

No, the actual previous owners of the were running access to the beach as a business. It was a road (driveway) they built and charged fees to use, not public.

That was a reference to Robert Heinlein's book, "Stranger in a Strange Land".

Of course you put supports under it. The point is the low amount of mass required.

I work at Nucor and know of several people who have done exactly this in the 20 years I've worked here. They started working in a entry level production position and worked their way up to department manager, division manager/VP, senior VP and even CEO in one case.

This must be a new thing or only apply to certain states/cities. I've never saw this happen back when I was doing low wage work.

It's harder for 100 companies to collude undetected/unchallenged with no viable alternative than for 1-5 massive/politically-savvy companies to tweak results/ban users to fit their political biases. The larger a company is, the easier it is for it to blow-off any lawsuit losses over bad behavior (or simply have bad customer service) and continue those bad practices.

I believe the article has failed to realize that "self-reporting" evidence is weaker than actions, not stronger. If you listen to the Freakonomics podcast for any length of time, you would realize that the weakest, most likely to not really be true, form of evidence is self-reporting. When self-reporting/answering surveys, people commonly give the answer they are "expected" to give. The actions then reveal their real preferences, which can differ substantially.

With a topic as sensitive as urban density, where city planners have been bombarding us with the "right-answer" of high-density living for decades, I would expect people to over-report preferring high-density living, especially on a survey conducted by someone trying to prove their case that people prefer high-density housing.

According to the Outer Space Treaty (1967), which is still current international law and of which the USA is a signatory, the LAUNCHING STATE is the responsible party. The FCC is overstepping its bounds here.

This is just a company doing what any good company would do, shopping around for the best venue/set of rules for it's business. That's why companies physically located in Illinois or California incorporate in Maryland. Since India was willing to take responsibility for the launch, the USA (and FCC) is just out of the picture.

Seems like a good way to end up dead right.

If isdigit() is the standard library function, that takes/checks a single character. However, parse_integer() takes a full string and parses until it reaches a null or newline. The first character could definitely be a valid digit but the rest of the string could cause a problem. However, I am not a C programmer, so my internet search-guided intuition may be wrong.

Your interpretation, unknown due to lack of value, may be valid but is more likely incorrect. Historically, ideas take a long time (decades or more), before adoption. Some are simply not marketed on a wide scale, little exposure causing little adoption/implementation. Other ideas, even though as equally valid as ones that are adopted, are simply not implemented due to circumstance (one excludes the other due to existing infrastructure, etc.). Others are actively resisted (especially in the sciences, e.g. tectonics, ulcers due to bacteria/viruses instead of stress). Please do not judge an idea based on its age or lack thereof.

Maybe it doesn't work for lenses but it seems it would work for mirrors: http://www.academia.edu/5185260/SUNBEAMS_FROM_SPACE_MIRRORS_...

I'm glad to see NASA astrophysicists are finally catching up with what plasma physicists have known since 1903 when Kristian Birkeland predicted exactly this. This phenomenon is known as "Birkeland Currents" (http://www.plasma-universe.com/Birkeland_current). Now if they would only stop using improper terminology such as "solar wind", "magnetic reconnection" and "frozen magnetic fields" and maybe even read actual plasma physics papers about the many years of real-life lab experiments that have shown the existence of this exact phenomenon.

It's not the speed that puts strain on the body, it's the _change_ in speed (i.e. acceleration). You are currently going ~67062 MPH around the sun and probably didn't notice. If you suddenly slowed down to 4000 MPH around the sun, you would definitely notice that. ;-). (http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=356)

If $4000/month won't pay his rent, he's (or maybe you) are living in the wrong country/region.

The Institute for Justice has been fighting this one for a while. I'm glad they were finally able to get the judge to see what was going on.

(Full disclosure: I am a supporter of IJ.)

To the best of my knowledge Common Lisp methods (CLOS) already allows the ability to do things such as your rendering co-ordinate transformation example already without requiring extraneous abstract method definitions.

Generic functions and their associated methods allow :before, :after and :around qualifiers to be added to specify the order in which they are run without the need of creating secondary method names for each layer of subclasses. For base class methods that need code to be run before or after the more-specific subclass method is called, a :before/:after method(s) is written that will be executed before the more-specific subclass "overridden" unqualified method is called. The developer of the subclass doesn't have to care/know that the base class is still doing some work there.

Conversely, if this base :before method needs to be modified, it too can be overridden with a corresponding :before qualified method (with/or without a call back to the base :before method via call-next-method) or even totally shadowed by an :around qualified method in the subclass.

This seems to be the best of both worlds. The original base class developer can specify code that needs to be executed for each overridden method without the sub-class developer needing to be aware of it without handcuffing the sub-class developer in handling edge-cases that the base-class developer didn't foresee.

Here is the example code that implements this:

  (defclass game-object ()
    ((x :accessor x :initarg :x :initform 0)
     (y :accessor y :initarg :y :initform 0)))
  
  (defmethod set-transform (renderer x y)
    ;; set the renderer coordinates here.
    )
  
  (defmethod draw-image (renderer image)
    ;; draw image here
    )
  
  (defgeneric render (game-object renderer)
    (:documentation "Render GAME-OBJECT to display using RENDERER."))
  
  
  (defmethod render :before (game-object renderer)
    (set-transform renderer (x game-object) (y game-object)))
  
  (defmethod render (game-object renderer)
    (draw-image renderer game-object))
  
  ;; Class where the :before base class method just runs
  (defclass scary-monster (game-object)
    ((image :accessor image :initarg :image)))
  
  (defmethod render ((game-object scary-monster) renderer)
    (draw-image renderer (image game-object)))
  
  ;; Class where the :before base class method is prevented from running
  ;; to prevent some undesirable action.
  (defclass happy-monster (game-object)
    ((image :accessor image :initarg :image)))
  
  (defmethod render :around ((game-object happy-monster) renderer)
    (draw-image renderer (image game-object)))
  
  ;; REPL session with the RENDER, SET-TRANSFORM and DRAW-IMAGE methods traced
  CL-USER> (render (make-instance 'scary-monster :x 1 :y 2 :image 'a) nil)
    0: (RENDER #<SCARY-MONSTER {2456D3F1}> NIL)
      1: (SET-TRANSFORM NIL 1 2)
      1: SET-TRANSFORM returned NIL
      1: (DRAW-IMAGE NIL A)
      1: DRAW-IMAGE returned NIL
    0: RENDER returned NIL
  NIL
  
  CL-USER> (render (make-instance 'happy-monster :x 3 :y 4 :image 'b) nil)
    0: (RENDER #<HAPPY-MONSTER {246A1689}> NIL)
      1: (DRAW-IMAGE NIL B)
      1: DRAW-IMAGE returned NIL
    0: RENDER returned NIL
  NIL

I think the templating library you are looking for is cl-mustache. I am using it currently for a SQL template engine in one of my internal work projects.

That sense is just as nonsensical. Would you also say that people in the 19th century were "addicted to coal" and "addicted to whale oil" and that people before that were "addicted to wood fires"? Oil is just the latest, most economical energy source in an entire series of sources. In a few years modern-day Luddites will change to "addicted to natural gas" or "addicted to nuclear fission", "addicted to fusion" or whatever the most popular portable energy source is then. Whenever there is more of something (food, energy, comfort, luxury, pr0n) than someone approves of (Puritans, Luddites, environmental extremists, religionists, etc.), they demonize it by saying people are addicted to it. It's called propaganda.

What an incredibly slanted article.

Based on the wording of the article, it seems that the satellite is in the wrong orbit not because of the fault with the first stage but because the second stage wasn't allowed to make a correction burn due to NASA rules.

The Governor's comment about red license plates being used, then green once the technology is ready for the general public reminds me of the old regulations that were put in place when automobiles were just beginning to spread. Anyone driving an automobile was required to hire a runner to run in front of them and warn everyone to get out of the way!