Slashdot Mirror

Honestly the article is stupid. I regularly charge an iphone and an IPAD in 2 hours with a solar panel, in fact I also run a laptop off of it while they charge.

Yes, it's a larger 3 panel fold out array I have for camping, but I'm still charging on solar.

They need to clarify, you CANT charge a cellphone in a reasonable amount of time with a $1.99 garbage cell glued to the back of a cellphone. Their design was no better than taking a couple of solar panels from yard lights and thinking they were innovative.

Doubly stupid because solar chargers for smartphones already exist. I can read the customer reviews and tell you it doesn't work.

Good thing this study wasn't government funded.

It's open source, can port forward, can use pubkey auth (shared key auth) and doesn't require you to "modify" kernels or root the device.

http://code.google.com/p/connectbot/

I am having lots of fun with Spring Roo and GWT (Google Web Toolkit). The latter is supported by the former.
Roo allows to generate automatically a CRUD application with different technologies (AFAIK it currently supports GWT, Spring MVC and Web Flow). GWT allows to create single-page applications, using the server as a service and data provider only. In other words, let the browser do the hard work :-D
Single-page applications are much faster than server-centric web applications. Security can be managed effectively at service level, for example using Spring Security annotations.

Is that what Canada uses for their currency?

No, their currency looks like this.

GOOGLE: jar jar racist

Which means that Jar Jar could only possibly be, uhh, well, um, ah, gosh... oh, wait, I know - Herman Cain!!!

Yeah, that's the ticket!

A trojan app can send SMSes only if you give it the permission to.

Yes, a permission that comes in s giant laundry-list of permissions that non-technical users have no capacity to understand what they are allowing.

It's not even like Android asks you for permission when it tries to send an SMS, it's a giant list on installation that gives no context to WHEN it's going to use the abilities you grant.

It doesn't even need to ask every time, like the annoying security pop-ups you mention. To ask simply once, the first time permission is needed, is enough to eliminate a whole class of trojans in applications that obviously should not be using SMS.

That is my whole gripe with Android really, while they COULD make the security system better they have not - and I think they have allowed it to be too open by default, so they cannot truly shut it down as much as it should be locked down for non-technical users due to backwards compatibility.

The information I have tells me it is not the case

What did I say about not using google?

Yes some of the paid apps actually work.

But Apple do shut down known jailbreaking methods at almost every OS update.

Some of the METHODS, yes, because they are generally security holes. But not the jailbroken systems.

And again, if Apple really wanted they could shut down tethered jailbreaking but they have left that alone for YEARS.

Have Apple changed their mind since they officially stated that jailbreak does void your warranty?

Between the act you can system restore and various warranty acts, it's irrelevant what apple says. What matters is what they do.

See: http://www.princeton.edu/admission/whatsdistinctive/experience/the_preceptorial_system/

Or just google it: http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=princeton+preceptorial+system&pbx=1&oq=princeton+precep&aq=2&aqi=g3&aql=&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=1334l4298l0l7175l16l12l0l2l2l0l186l1404l5.7l14l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=da70dd10971034b4&biw=1376&bih=790

Well, I liked it.

Every time I see this, I remember the obvious counterargument.

- If OSX had better than 8% market share, wouldn't there be hordes of virus programmers (russian mafia, bored script kiddies and pranksters, whatever) looking for holes in it to take over?
- If Linux had better than 1% market share, wouldn't there be hordes of programmers trying to break it? Actually, if you look at the server market where Linux has a larger market share, they DO try to crack it - and lo and behold, they tend to succeed relatively on the same pace as breaking into Windows server boxes.

The question isn't, is Windows insecure? Of course it is - due in no small part to being not-securely-configured by hordes of user-level operators at their houses. But if everyone magically switched to your OS of choice, are we really likely to find that the situation improved at all? Probably not. Even at their smaller market share, it turns out OSX has had its fair share, and Linux as well.

And then, of course, there's the old "Problem between keyboard and chair" issue. Users willing to click on ANYTHING are going to be your worst source of problems, especially in the home market. Again, would that change if all of them switched to OSX or Linux? Of course not, they're still going to click on anything and enter their password to install the Free Puppy Screensaver or whatever else it is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Reputation_Management

It's real. People get paid to do it.

More:
https://www.google.com/#q=reputation+management

RTFA: Chile != China

ROTFLMAO

I think you were looking for: ROFLMAO

oblig: http://www.google.com/search?q=ROFL+MAO

This law is supposed to be used to take down link-farm sites which have advertising alongside their pages of links. Those pages make money for the owners so they violate the 'non profit' part of the copyright exception.

Oh, you mean like this site does: http://www.google.com? Yeah, it's time someone took care of those infringing bastards!

This is Google's explanation. From two years ago.

If it's blank now because Google is still not "satisfied with the map data we had available" then Bing Maps is kicking their ass in that area.

I don't understand why it follows that you have to be a 'left wing socialist' if you are against Patriot Act?

Google would do well to offer something like-

http://classic.google.com/ [google.com]

Everytime they screw up the Google search page (which I have made my home page since 1999) I try to find a way to disable it and revert to the classic mode, and if I can't find it, type a bunch of searches on the latest Google screwing with the search to see how others are coping with it (or not).

And each time I find quotes from that Marisa whatever saying she will do whatever she wants to it, they want to be on the cutting edge (or at least not left behind by Bing's changes or whatever).

This is only happening to my laptop so far, not my desktops, but doesn't appear to be a way to revert it.

The experience with Google is slipping day by day, attributed to Marisa's (or whatever her name is - I don't feel like Googling it in a rant against Google) perpetual meddling with it as that constitutes her justification for existence at Google.

But everything else is worse. If it gets bad enough I'll use scripts to display the Google pages the way I want but it hasn't come to that yet. She's basically a major annoyance to me so far.

You can try http://www.google.com/m - not exactly what you want, but might be useful in some cases, like old computers or slow connection perhaps.

as far as I know google scholar is still alive and well... http://scholar.google.com/

Google has a lot of brilliant people working for it. Unfortunately there is a lot of incompetent managers like Vic Gundotra, who has almost ruined Google+'s potential with his stupid policies, or Andy Rubin, one of the biggest hypocrites ever. The latter are the ones you hear about in the news. The engineers, they try to do their job the best way they can.

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town!

Likely to become a pay service: Google Business Solutions (Google Docs, etc.)

You mean Google Apps? That's already a pay service. And for the free versions of those services, they certainly profit in the long run from keeping people using them.

Google would do well to offer something like-

http://classic.google.com/

That turns the clock back even more. No animations, no music, no pop-up junk on the side for search results (instant previews or whatever they call it), etc.

I think that Google might need to offer new stuff to attract the type of person that finds the likes of Bing amusing. Having choice is a good thing. However, forcing [yet more] eye candy on people is going to alienate those (like me, who are already irritated) who just want minimal, fast, simple. Something that isn't distracting, irritating, CPU loading, complex, and doesn't use mouseovers or javascript. Personally, I would even prefer a new domain for it, like cgoogle.com so it can be easily whitelisted.

Of course they don't, it doesn't make money. The best thing you can do is e-mail Google and tell them that thanks to assholes like Andy Rubin and Vic Gundotra you will not use their products anymore, as they keep alienating the users over and over again.

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town!

Really? Where does it say that? You have to become a YouTube partner, which is quite restrictive and involves revenue sharing (i.e., you have to be popular enough to share revenue).

http://support.google.com/youtube/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1061460

http://www.youtube.com/partners

I wanted to put some open source howto videos online and basically got a reply that I shouldn't bother them again until I was at least as popular as a talking dog or vomiting kitten video.

The 95W bulbs have been around for decades. GE Miser series. Google has a newspaper ad from 1982 about them.

GE has a list of their now-banned bulbs. It includes the 95W/LL50 you referenced.

IIRC, one of the major things with iOS was that graphic routines would be given priority over everything else

Why does this bullshit have to be repeated over and over again?...
It's simply not true: Android also have higher priority for that as that's a very-very-very basic technique. If you would take a look at the original article, it's spelled out very clearly.

Why? Developing a new theorem in mathematics is just as hard. And other people stand to benefit just as much. And that was your main point, was it not? What makes engineering special? (And note that I used FEM as my example, which is as far from "pure" mathematics as you can come. A concept that is fraught with peril anyway.)

And of course today with the advent of computers, the distinction between "mathematics" and "solving difficult engineering problems" is a very fleeting one. The XOR-cursor, should that have been patentable? Or the RSA algorithm? Or to make it more interesting, why not take a few of my own, such as SECURE LOAD BALANCING IN A NETWORK or Secure file transfer or Charging Of GPRS Traffic For Roaming Mobiles By Performing Traffic Counting What about these are not, more or less, "mathematics"?

No, your arguments are ill thought through. You need to get back to the drawing board. "Because it was difficult to come up with" isn't even internally consistent. Especially as you seem to agree with maths not being worthy of "protection". (Hint: Economics works better for your purposes than effort).

Why? Developing a new theorem in mathematics is just as hard. And other people stand to benefit just as much. And that was your main point, was it not? What makes engineering special? (And note that I used FEM as my example, which is as far from "pure" mathematics as you can come. A concept that is fraught with peril anyway.)

And of course today with the advent of computers, the distinction between "mathematics" and "solving difficult engineering problems" is a very fleeting one. The XOR-cursor, should that have been patentable? Or the RSA algorithm? Or to make it more interesting, why not take a few of my own, such as SECURE LOAD BALANCING IN A NETWORK or Secure file transfer or Charging Of GPRS Traffic For Roaming Mobiles By Performing Traffic Counting What about these are not, more or less, "mathematics"?

No, your arguments are ill thought through. You need to get back to the drawing board. "Because it was difficult to come up with" isn't even internally consistent. Especially as you seem to agree with maths not being worthy of "protection". (Hint: Economics works better for your purposes than effort).

Why? Developing a new theorem in mathematics is just as hard. And other people stand to benefit just as much. And that was your main point, was it not? What makes engineering special? (And note that I used FEM as my example, which is as far from "pure" mathematics as you can come. A concept that is fraught with peril anyway.)

And of course today with the advent of computers, the distinction between "mathematics" and "solving difficult engineering problems" is a very fleeting one. The XOR-cursor, should that have been patentable? Or the RSA algorithm? Or to make it more interesting, why not take a few of my own, such as SECURE LOAD BALANCING IN A NETWORK or Secure file transfer or Charging Of GPRS Traffic For Roaming Mobiles By Performing Traffic Counting What about these are not, more or less, "mathematics"?

No, your arguments are ill thought through. You need to get back to the drawing board. "Because it was difficult to come up with" isn't even internally consistent. Especially as you seem to agree with maths not being worthy of "protection". (Hint: Economics works better for your purposes than effort).

I said nothing that all six stalls were big, just that the bathroom was needlessly large. But we digress; size of the bathroom isn't the point. The point is that engineering everything to accommodate everyone is unrealistic. In a world of infinite variety, I can always come up with another edge case that will define another requirement. At some point it makes more sense to move the mobility solution closer to the person requiring the mobility, rather than bending infrastructure to fit around the edge case. If there's a worthwhile market, technology will grow to provide a solution.

Sorry, but you are wrong.

Innovation is not about taking a single idea and pushing it until it works.
Innovation is about taking a lot of ideas, and see what is viable.
I see that you don't know the story behind post-it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postit
Fry explained that you have one very successful idea out of 5000 concepts.

Google's goal is to aggregate all the knowledge in the world, so why do they close useful search services, like codesearch ?
http://google.com/codesearch
If a project needs a large team to maintain it, like Wave or Buzz, I agree that Google needs to stop putting money into these projects, but when the project requires only a few people, why stop it completely ?
Also, I think it's a very bad idea to stop these projects (Wave, Buzz) entirely:
1) they should reduce the teams to only a few guys, in order to keep the services. Maybe it will become successful one day.
2) killing projects like this shows to the whole Google employees that it's useless to suggest new ideas, because Google will never take the risk to start them. The message is: "Google is only interested into successful projects, and will not take any risk". If I was a Google employee, I would start my own company, instead of giving my own idea to them.

Even Google Health might become important in a near future, I'm not sure, I cannot test it, being outside of US.

And I'd like to see what Google will do with their automated cars.
It's a technological showcase, but the risk is too high to have an automated car: if you have an accident, who is responsible ?

Focus has nothing to do with success. MySpace was focused, and it fails. Facebook is focused, and it succeeds.

Apple is not focusing on technology, since it's trying to be a software AND an hardware company (iMac, iPod, iPad).
A lot of companies tried to sell tablets, and only Apple succeeded in branding it.
And don't talk to me about iOS or anything, nobody cares about that.

Apple's success is only because they are focusing on the users, and Google doesn't care at all about them, it cares only about its clients (advertisers), or in other words money.

Let's see if Apple without Jobs will continue its focus on users.
Let's see how long Google will continue to dominate the search market, once people realize that Google doesn't care about them.

Natural monopolies are a myth. This article (PDF) explains how the alleged natural monopolies commonly attributed to public utilities came about: governments owned the roads, and they failed to set an efficient price on access to the roads to lay utility conduits.

LED replacement "tubes" for fluorescent fixtures.
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=led+fluorescent+tube+replacement&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest#client=opera&rls=en&q=led+fluorescent+tube+replacement&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=shop&source=og&sa=N&tab=wf&ei=7vcAT4-zKIH10gGQhLyQAg&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=e6a8ab2beaf464d&biw=1024&bih=556

It's pretty simple, you just open the fixture, remove the ballast and hook the 115vac lines directly to the fixture. Snap in your bulb and you're done.

A 20W LED tube replaces a 32W 48" fluorescent. Or you can get 40W LED tubes and just use one in a two bulb fluor fixture.
http://www.amazon.com/LED-fluorescent-replacement-ballast-Ledwholesalers/dp/B002P3FQI6
Sam

I second this notion. I frequently use the define: $searchTerm query with Google.

For example: telivision,
or: Wordnik

Compare the latter to the same search on Wordnik: Wordnik

Bonus: Those Google links are wrapped in TLS, so no one sees the query terms or results in transit. https://www.wordnik.com/ takes you to their developer site...

I second this notion. I frequently use the define: $searchTerm query with Google.

For example: telivision,
or: Wordnik

Compare the latter to the same search on Wordnik: Wordnik

Bonus: Those Google links are wrapped in TLS, so no one sees the query terms or results in transit. https://www.wordnik.com/ takes you to their developer site...

This is an active R&D test facility. The photo of the document which can be found on the blog says it's a "ÐÐÐs-751" (R&D test facility) and according to Energomash's website they had 21 tests there in 2011 and more tests were planned in 2012.

That's why they are abandoning all these non-profitable things and focusing on the stuff that brings in the money: social (Google+), managed by Vic Gundotra and Android, lead by Andy "Hypocrite" Rubin.

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town!

An excellent way to find the information you're looking for would be to visit the links in the story. Since you seem to have misplaced them, here's another copy for your convenience:

• growing collections of online words
• Wordnik
• Corpus of Contemporary American English

Furthermore, the summary actually contains the text "These sources differ from both conventional dictionary publishers and crowd-sourced efforts like the excellent Wiktionary for their emphasis on avoiding human intervention rather than fostering it."

How did you manage to make your post and miss all of the above?

Indeed.

You are right, the obvious solution is to not release any more PC games. PS4 and Xbox720 will be powerful enough to push decent framerates at 1080p. No need for a Wintel PC anymore.

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town!

https://www.google.com/search?ix=hea&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=radio+shack+150-1270

it's long gone, nobody does NTSC video anymore.

This looks pretty vacant to me. Here the location on google maps:
Khimki, Russia
A little wikipedia research tells you that this is the old OKB-456 development and test facility for the RD-100 engine, a predecessor of the modern RD-107 engines. the plant was build right after WWII to build a copy of the german V2 rocket and probably has not been used for years. Todays Sojus rockets fly with the RD-107 or with its upgrades RD-117 and RD-118. These are produced by NPO energomash in samara at this location:
Progress Plant, Samara

This was a 5 min research, so I could be wrong.

This looks pretty vacant to me. Here the location on google maps:
Khimki, Russia
A little wikipedia research tells you that this is the old OKB-456 development and test facility for the RD-100 engine, a predecessor of the modern RD-107 engines. the plant was build right after WWII to build a copy of the german V2 rocket and probably has not been used for years. Todays Sojus rockets fly with the RD-107 or with its upgrades RD-117 and RD-118. These are produced by NPO energomash in samara at this location:
Progress Plant, Samara

This was a 5 min research, so I could be wrong.

What happens is that Google engineers are unable to think outside of the web browser box, for a good reason: Google makes 96% of its profit with ads, they want users to spend as much time as possible looking at their browser. So things like this make a lot of sense to them.

--
There is a new arrogant asshole in town!

This page makes me think NaCl is part of chromium-browser as opposed to being one of the few non-free things bundled with chromium-browser to make Chrome.

http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Flana-sator.livejournal.com%2F160176.html%23cutid1&act=url

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/kcfbijoldkenmemnbbkjnpdhnijgahck

And I love ... uh ... whatever you are. You see, the US is crazy. In 2012 the US will spend between 1 and 1.4 trillion on Defense. That's 3-4 times the GDP of Iran. It's not a fair fight, at all. The US Navy would crush Iran literally overnight. Just think "Shock and Awe". Iraq had one of the most powerful air forces on the planet and it was destroyed in a matter of hours. Then we would inevitably spend the next 10 years wasting trillions of dollars trying to rebuild it and failing miserably. I'm certainly not advocating for that situation, but if you think for a second that Iran has any chance to defense against the US military you are delusional .

Sounds similar to my old Bronco II that looked like it was going to start dropping parts most of the time people stayed plenty clear of that. Yet there were still people who thought it was a good idea to cut it off, or like one urban troubadour walk right out in front of it on an icy road. Guy wasn't even looking and decided to jay walk across a major street (4 lanes each direction including the turn lanes) and I had an idea that he was going to do this so I was already trying to stop but came within a foot of hitting him. Retard boy decided to curse at me calling me a mother fucker, ass hole, and so on while banging on the hood and I just went off, think Marine drill instructor. I doubt anyone had ever told this individual they were at fault and that they weren't a victim it doesn't hurt that I am bigger than most people so it adds to the intimidation factor. Problem is most people are just self absorbed ass holes more so when in their car so they assume that you will get out of their way and that when you change lanes you are encroaching on their road.

Ever been to Brazil? Ever see the favelas (shanty towns)? Here's a link http://www.google.com/search?q=favela&hl=en&client=safari&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=d8L_ToHsI830sQLZ1qjUAQ&ved=0CD4QsAQ&biw=320&bih=416#p=0

And they sold their original stock which they had from before the efficiency rules, then customs stopped the importation of any more because they are not idiots and know a smartass when they see one.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&twu=1&u=http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/unternehmen/kleinheizgeraet-heatball-zoll-haelt-40-000-gluehbirnen-auf-11065089.html

People are missing the major point here: There is no incandescent ban in the US, only an efficiency requirement. If someone can invent a filament bulb which meets the requirements they are free to sell them... oh wait they already did and it is called a halogen bulb; you can pick them up at any hardware store.

If you're using a reasonable browser, or a reasonable operating system package, PDFs should load very quickly.

I don't know who originally reported it (it was over a decade ago), but if you check Google books or scholar you'll find references. books link scholar link