dieseltaylor

Well I am afraid I did not make it simpler - a lot simpler : ) So rehash: The USPTO has been granting patents incorrectly and the Justice Department has now weighed in to sort out what is patentable and what is not. The decision that seems to be aimed for is that what already exists naturally is unpatentable. With regard to the rewards due to medical companies for discovering novel inventions/twists I actually think the system sucks. There are cures in existence that need exploting but because they cannot be patented drug companies are not interested in extending them. National universities and research organisations should be funded for this type of research. Eg

Still an interesting read , and something to mull over as we consider the timing of the copier bomb finds and the proximity to the US elections.

http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/727/636

The US Justice Department is looking at the granting of patents on genomes. Another words the US Patent Office has given US companies patents on the normal DNA of humans. Roughly 20% of the human genome. Now you might think that as these existed before Patents were invented one could hardly claim to have made them or expect rights to them. After all discovering a particle in physics does provide any rights. But here read the brief first, or skip to the March decision: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/genepatents-USamicusbrief.pdf The story kicked off with this decision: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-29/myriad-loses-ruling-over-breast-cancer-gene-patents-update1-.html Myriad Genetics is/ was with its patent on human breast cancer genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 -- it's charging $3,000 a pop to run a simple test that determines whether women carry those genes.

KR -WTF! Load Firefox. Load Opera.

: ) No problem. If you believe the meta-research on whether media depictions affects peoples tendency to violence then you might also feel differently about graphic realism. Most people instinctively feel that given a problem most people reach for the tool they are most comfortable with, so carpenters see a problem as how is it resolved by my tool-kit, ditto plumbers, lawyers, etc. Humans for all their potential powers are also creatures of reaction and habit, and generally quite primitive. Playing Borderlands recently had me flinching with bird shadows the trigger [Rakk attacks]. My brother travelling in Syria recently was automatically looking at it as a tanker from playing the CM series. Ok so who am I to put my opinion, and the meta-research on media influences against the power of capitalism and peoples preference for quick gratification/ black-white solutions in a complicated world. Next thing you know I will be moaning on that advertising affects people also - which can be no more true than media violence does. : ) added Victoria II, great for improving geography and improving knowledge of the complex world ............... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_II http://www.tsjonline.com/story.php?F=4774964

Its well-known now that children and at least dogs have an innate sense of fairness. I think there is a huge frustration where fairness has disappeared from society. Obviously fairness is a matter of point of view and tends to the majority view. Somewhere or other I have read what the acceptable multiple appears to be from bottom wage to top wage. ANd whatever it is does not exist in the US and not in the UK. The underlying sore is that the "managers" and the share-holding institutions are involved in a game where their salaries are arranged between them. Perhaps it is easier to look at the symbiotic relationship between estate agents/realtors where in the UK they are paid on a percentage of sale price, the mortgage industry which is pushing mortgages and rewarded for the more they sell. and the Govt. who raise more tax as property prices rise. And in the UK again, a Prime Minister riding on popularity from the illusion of rising wealth. Who was interested in calling the bubble and stopping it. Same for the US mortgage market. The super-rich could only win and all of those who fed richly, if only for a decade, on a sickening fatally flawed boom powered by cheap money. My feeling is that whilst any country has a first past the post electoral system it is doomed to polarisation rather than better Government. Anywa an American writing:

Good stuff. I imagine every AAFV has the chance of a shell going into the turret ring/under the mantlet and I imagine every tank gunner was taught were to aim on targets that were "tricky".

Firstly, I did not say it sucked. I said it may or may not. I hope they make a bundle of money. In my experience though good detailed graphics does not always translate to good gameplay. Borderlands is escapist comic science fantasy with lots of humour and is "unreal". The idea of killing men in as realistically possible world actually makes me quite squeamish. 1] Poor buggers fighting it out and dying to satisfy meglomaniac leaders is not fun. 2] In some ways I really think it cheapens the real deaths that occurred - however if it is the kind of game where you get shot your game destructs then perhaps the seriousness of what happened might be in some way brought to the FPS "soldier". Playing at higher levels where it is a chess-proxy game does not require me to deal with the issue of killing people and why - it becomes a form of puzzle with unknowns. It could aswell be a business game - but then they are not common. Borderlands is weak in that dying and respawning only takes a chunk of your money, however you keep all the weapons and shields you have laboriously acquired. And that is a weakness in an otherwise very good game. But then I suppose they have to satisfy - or feel they should satisfy - the twitch market.

Very very pretty. BUT that does not mean it will be fun to play it may be, it may not. Games can be simple and very addictive and others are beautiful but fail to engage. In fact for me it is entirely the wrong level - but then that is me.

http://www.flixxy.com/bear-animal-nature-film.htm How the hell!!! http://www.flixxy.com/little-north-korean-girl-playing-guitar.htm The advantages of having limited state owned radio and TV!

There is a difference I think between drones run from the ground and air-superiority fighters where the human touch is more applicable to the former. Making that distinction helps to frame the differences. BTW I was reading an article today which says the US Army has spent $20B on the UAV concept, research and purchasing. http://www.alternet.org/world/148701/american_empire_produces_11_global_winners_--_hint%3A_they_aren%27t_the_good_guys_?page=entire

my genearla feeling is the better the graphics the worse the game play! I am sure there are exceptions and these are mighty fine graphics. Not my sot of game though. I have to admit to overdosing on Borderlands as my only FPS but it is so darn funny and scary ..... and cheap.

Thanks for the link - an interesting thread. It is so similar to the story on tanks etc. But perhaps foremost the RN is seen through rose-tinted glasses. The USN had its own share of problem designs but basic engineering they seem to get very right.

WeBoB has a chat facility but only 150 ish members of which only a small number use chat. You could look at other gaming clubs. I believe this site [bF] has a list of them somewhere.

Thanks Kineas I have justed tested at 488 metres with six StUG IIIF with the 30+50mm armour. The results are the same in that the T34's got wiped. Given they only managed three hits, of which one was a partial and the others riccochets then it was probably not very good as a test. What was interesting was that despite me giving them loads of T ammo two of them immediately skulked which probably lead to loss of any accuracy. SO it is conceivable that the IIIF variant is the most unfair of the Stug.

Out of curiosity I looked at the ammunition situation in March 1945. I bought six T34/43 and five of them had T ammo with penetration of 95mm at 500metres. I also bought six StugIIIG I set the groups up against each other [as I would try never to play tank vs tank I like to see overall battlefield stuff] at 488 metres. In eight seconds the T34's have killed two Stugs and got partial penetrations on two more with no effect using their T ammo. After further firing all the T34's are dead at 50 seconds. They have scored a further SEVEN partial penetrations on the four remaining without knocking any StUGs out. Incidentally at 1000metres the Russian tanks used their normal AP as it is 1mm better! And of course died very speedily. Looking at June 44 for the same tank I bought 30 and exactly half had no T ammo, most of the remainder had one or two rounds with a high of five. Incidentally buying them individually rather than in platoons gave me twelve tanks without T ammo- not really a significant result and possibly just random anyway.

I wish people when quoting test results would give the month and year of the tests. Anyone trying to replicate without the information is wasting effort. Without dates the introduction of different shot/shells makes a mockery of results. I agree with JC.: )

If we change "in" to "of" WW2 I am afraid the JSIII would be superior. And possibly the Centurion - though that was only going into production in 1945.

BBC article quotes that figure without saying if that is the 469 Senate and representative seats up for grabs. I assume it is as the article concentrates on the types of adverts and the personalities involved. There are other cases such as an elected DA having a local billionnaire [business under investigation] financing a campaign against him. So simple maths says each voter could just be given 33$ to vote right! Actually thats simple maths and you might want to pay those who could vote but dont' so it would be $15 bucks each. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11656690

Mans brain is a wonderful thing and yes I have a huge regard for what it is capable of. However one thing it is not good at is dealing with mutiple inputs and taking instant decisions. I am not denying humans can make "instant" decisions but its a matter of quality and speed. One can integrate smart systems to make the sensor inputs understandable to the pilot but this in essence is avoiding the obvious that the software could probably do that particular job in a fraction of the time What the software might have a problem with is if you ask it to do all the things a human brain might be able to do. However if you restrict it to simple things, take-off loiter at 80,000 ft until activated or required to return to base that is a relatively simple program. The activation might be an intrusion by an aircraft in a defined area, a nuclear explosion, an EMP attack. Now you may also have crewed "fighters" where you want to eyeball a plane but for out and out air superiority it would be hard to see what could beat a dedicated programmed fighter. You may even progress to modules of software to exchange in and out for long range naval surveillance, or ground survellance. [ in the right kind of aircraft] EMP is a big problem but hen how many nations will have the capability? Is it easier to have spare unpiloted planes in silos ready for launch because you do not need the huge pilot infrastructure costs.

Gizmag today

Thanks for the ibfo Noltyboy. I was not aware that Montgomery had a great grasp of helicoptor warfare so I am slightly non-plussed. Incidentally the site here: http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/WhatWeDo/AirSafetyandAviation/JHC/ show what wordy shambles it is. I say shambles as apparently amongst its 15000 odd staff none speaks English sufficiently well to understand the difference between principal and principle. It is also the first time the ugly manufactured word "jointery" has come to my attention. Admittedly it pre-dates JHC so they cannot be held liable for military jargon. In July 2009. So JHC aso seems to good at deploying units? Actually I don't think helicoptors are the panacea they seem to get painted and the terrian is hostile let alone the environment. If you read the full article you will see how the US loses track of 147 helicoptors whilst we are engaged in dumbing down the latest Chinooks. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/revealed-scandal-of-uks-grounded-helicopter-fleet-1750094.html Goatopedia is fun ... http://www.e-goat.co.uk/wiki//index.php?title=Jointery and then Helicopter From Goatopedia - The Royal Air Force Wiki (Redirected from Support Helicopter Force) Jump to: navigation, search Scary things that don't really fly but beat the air in to submission. The RAF operates several types of helicopter. The majority coming under the Joint Helicopter Command. [edit]

If you can anticipate an impact position, and you realise your jamming is not working, I suspect in your pilotless plane you utilise a move that confounds the enemy missiles trajectory - possibly a momentary effect whilst you deploy a short range anti-missile missile. The point being that without any pilot to intefere the software coding will enable appreciation of situation and targetting to happen extremely quickly. I did mention a period of ground based air superiority pilots ... but that is not my wish ... just me accepting that an Air Force has inertia. As flaming knives points out there are problems that with a first moving asset that precludes fancy moves and that will be realised quite quickly. The first stop will be a pretty smart air superiority fighter but with eyes for the remote "driver". This will be a sop as the software will be able to land and take-off and do pretty much everything in between. There will also be an appreciation that grond/fighter message sending would be the first thing the enemy attacked in a "proper" war so the fighters would need autonomy.

Wikileaks- Afghanistan - how to fight the war- drug financing - drugs and societies. Very straightforward : ) which leads to: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11660210 oops and http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/10/31/las-sheriff-baca-stirs-fear-against-marijuana-days-before-the-election/