Slashdot Mirror

and both trace their origins to the same place. NextStep was the inspiration for windowmaker and OS X is a direct evolution of the nextsteps codebase.

this is nextstep: http://www.fanboy.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/nextstep-os.jpg
this is windowmaker: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Windowmaker.jpg
and mac OS X: http://www.knowledgerush.com/wiki_image/4/48/Aqua_(Mac_OS_X)_screenshot.jpg

the similar looks of finder and next's file browser is not a coincidence.

It's a joke (scroll down to "Sad news ... Stephen King, author, dead at 54").

I dont really know if it would really work or not, but I've had this idea for an interferometer based "holo-tank" for over a year now.

(I really don't care if somebody steals this idea.)

The phenomenon of self-interference is the life-blood of traditional holography-- basically, one beam is split in a beam splitter, one of the resulting beams scans an object, while the other then interferes with the refracted light from the scanning beam as it exposes a photographic plate.

traditional holography

This stores the interference pattern on the plate, so that when it gets illuminated by laser light of the same frequency, a virtual 3D image of the scanned object gets produced.

That's basic holography; The idea I have in mind is quite a bit different:

Since this is slashdot at least some of you guys will be familiar with the micro-mirror arrays found in some modern DLP projection television sets, (For those that are not, here is an obligatory wikipedia link.) and probably some of you already know about multi-mode lasers for use in frequency combs. (Another obligatory wikipedia link.)

Essentially, you take the beam from a multimode frequency comb laser that is calibrated to produce a series of discrete frequency spikes within the visible light spectrum, and run it through a beam splitter, just like traditional holography.

However, instead of sending one beam to interact with a real object as the scanning beam, you direct BOTH beams onto DLP chips. These DLP chips reflect and refract the laser light so that the beams will have a very subtle phase incongruity when they intersect within a transparent medium. This causes the beams to interfere with each other and scatter at the point of intersection. By carefully controlling the beam lengths to be highly specific to the individual frequency spikes of the laser comb's beam, you can modulate the apparent "color" of the glowing 'dot'. (Or, at least I think you should be able to anyway.)

Now, if you "Scan" the two lasers over the DLPs, you should be able to use them to produce a purely computer generated holographic image, in something that would approach real color. (Would not be true real color, because of the discrete nature of the laser comb you are using.)

Due to issues of blinding people with the laser light, you would need to project the image inside of a transparent block of material, like high clarity glass or crystal, with some kind of beam trap at the far end-- however, this "tank" doesnt need to be very thick to theoretically produce a nice 3D object. I would think a mere quarter inch thick would be more than sufficient.

If they can predict a volcano eruption let us say 40 minutes in advance, why not?! Like weather it is probably a matter of time scale and prior information density.

____ ____ ____ ____
"dyslectic people seem to be stupid and now it is a proven fact that they realy are. haha. learn to read losers."
From http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Dyslectic/

Sure it is, it's corporate socialism, commonly called corporate welfare but also called fascism. El Duce, Benito Amilcare Andrea Mussolini, said "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power".

Falcon

Sorry, but if you Merikans want to go ahead and play Terrorist Top Trumps, we've got about 150 years of history with the Provisional IRA to play with.

http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/List_of_terrorist_attacks/

http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Noolbenger/

Au contraire, mon frère

Microsoft is quite adept at Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. They're also quite good at marketing despite some obvious missteps over the years.

You could do a lot worse : "A few of the notable authors who have had works published in Playboy include John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, Jack Kerouac, Alex Haley, Stephen King and many more". A lot of SF greats have also published in Playboy : "In 1966, the magazine showed off a bit with The Playboy Book of Science Fiction and Fantasy, a selection of tales first published in its pages, including George Langelaan's "The Fly" (source of the movie), Charles Beaumont's "The Crooked Man," Arthur C. Clarke's "I Remember Babylon," and well-written stories by the likes of Sturgeon, Frederik Pohl, Robert Sheckley, and William Tenn."

You could do a lot worse : "A few of the notable authors who have had works published in Playboy include John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, Jack Kerouac, Alex Haley, Stephen King and many more". A lot of SF greats have also published in Playboy : "In 1966, the magazine showed off a bit with The Playboy Book of Science Fiction and Fantasy, a selection of tales first published in its pages, including George Langelaan's "The Fly" (source of the movie), Charles Beaumont's "The Crooked Man," Arthur C. Clarke's "I Remember Babylon," and well-written stories by the likes of Sturgeon, Frederik Pohl, Robert Sheckley, and William Tenn."

I actually thought you were kidding with POOTs. Thanks for the new non-standard units!
While verifying, I also found these: http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Orders_of_magnitude_(power)/

Fortunately for us, most terrorists are nearly as stupid as New Labour (they'd have to be, to be infected with religion!)

Are you saying that all religious persons are as stupid as you've indicated New Labor is? I don't see how that holds up.

First, there are these people, who I think pretty clearly weren't stupid:

• C.S. Lewis
• Gottfried Leibniz
• Blaise Pascal
• Abraham Lincoln

Or perhaps you consider religion to have been tenable in pre-Darwinian days, but not now? Then you'd have to account for these people:

• John Polkinghorne
• Francis Collins
• Barak Obama

Do you really hold that all of those people are incredibly stupid, as evidenced by their holding religious beliefs?

That'll teach me to use out of date references :-(

http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Software_piracy/

Well, first your assuming that the pig waste is being dumped and the chicken waste wouldn't be

Sorry, should have specified, these are with costs internalised. If the chicken raising costs, including the costs of pollution, etc. are lower than that of pigs, then we should go with chickens unless pigs just taste or nourish (or however you decide the value of your food) that much better.

I'm not arguing for chickens in the real world. I'm pulling random animals out of my hat for examples. Maybe we should eat more chicken and less pork.

BTW, I don't have a problem with regulation as long as it effect everyone.

And surely it should. I'm not saying only pig farmers should be prohibited from polluting. That was concrete example with made-up numbers to run some math demonstrating my position.

Taxation and regulation have the same effect in the end, assuming the tax revenue is put to proper use. The only change is where the surplus is transferred to: the government or the supplier, and I happen to prefer to send it to the government. But I don't want to start up a sub-debate.

It was over using taxes as a way to punish corporations and people who harm the environment and do so more then you do.

Not to punish. To make them shoulder all the costs, so they're bore entirely by the supplier and--through higher prices--the consumer of said product. If I were punishing them I'd make them bear more than the cost.

but I still don't believe taxes do anything other then increase the hardship to the consumers and it is a waste of resources that we will never see a benefit from.

Ugh. I really don't want a debate on the taxes != regulation thing, but if you draw the two supply-and-demand graphs, one using taxation and one using regulation, you'll see the same resulting quantity supplied, the same price, the same waste (assuming the government can tax as efficiently and honestly as it can regulate), and the same consumer surplus. The only difference is the producer surplus. Regulation = taxation with subsidation to the supplier, pretty much.

Wikipedia agrees that a pollution rights market--which is essentially regulation plus a market--are 'are not generally more efficient than Pigovian taxes' (which it turns out is the proper term for the taxes I'm advocating). Sadly, they don't discuss strict regulation.

Figure 2 (and 3) show taxation. I'm pretty sure if we regulated to Q2, the only difference is that the 'Tax revenue' portion of the surplus instead is added to the producer surplus (or possibly split between supplier and producer?), whereas I believe it should be used to offset the cost of the pollution that still results (since Q2, and therefore the pollution caused in producing Q2, is still non-zero).

The difference between regulation and taxation that I tend to gloss over, and related to one that I believe you pointed out early on, is that we can't really know the tax rate to set in order to achieve a given quantity supplied and the resulting pollution, whereas it's usually the resulting pollution level that we're trying to set.

On the other hand, maybe it's the cost of the resulting pollution we're trying to set, in which case I think taxation would be better, knowledge-wise.

If you support regulation, though, you're supporting limits on externalities, which is my main point. I think we're disagreeing more because I explain it poorly than because we actually disagree.

Anyone with a little perl knowledge can go a long way towards making a slashcode site into a customer support, file download, or of course a news and events website.

Anyways, here's the slashsites in case anyone is interested.

• Media-Mixer
• RadioTiki
• ipv6news.org
• PRIME Wrestling
• Knowledgerush
• High Performance Hunting
• marketseat.com
• ExtraCrispy.Net
• YourOfficeGeek
• ITCouncil
• Morrissey Solo
• The Cedar Valley Linux Users Group
• EastVan
• earthDot
• meepdot
• Love9
• MedMeta
• jazz-flute.com
• jazz-sax.com
• SigKill
• University of Utah College of Engineering Computing Facility
• Mr. Lego
• FuelCellTalk
• Portland Geekly News
• The Golden Horde Network
• use Perl;
• MacSlash
• bottomquark
• We Have No Product
• TQY3
• gildot
• Tar Heel State Online
• SlashHosting (Hosting for Slash sites)
• slashhost (Hosting for Slash sites)
• IDM Newsbase
• gosports.org
• Anime Station
• NetGAMES
• OnTopofIT
• Web Crush
• HairyPALM.com: The PDA InfoQuarters
• Myworkflow.com
• Techdirt.com
• Be Route (French)
• Yourtown CLN
• DNS Policy
• BarraPunto (Spanish)
• isrec.org
• AbsolutChaos
• Extreme XL Linux News
• Spam Roaster's Club