Slashdot Mirror

Isn't it illegal to secretly infiltrate a computer system and remove legal software from it?

This looks real secret:
http://i39.tinypic.com/21kz7na.jpg

Amiga is always surfacing with new purchasers with great plans that
never work out. This one just might fly.

I've honestly been avoiding Chrome like the plague, if someones trying
to force something on you, I figure it can't be a good thing. I mean you click
the wrong area on just about any web page you find yourself downloading
Chrome.

But this Amiga things got me, I have two other boxes just like this one http://i42.tinypic.com/2hwpx82.jpg
all Amiga related "stuff", mostly games.

I started on the TRS-80 III, and I couldn't find software for it, if I did it was spendy
and just what Radio Shack stocked, I learned Assembly language only because an assembler showed up.

So when I got the Amiga I grabbed everything Amiga I could due to the famine I had with the TRS-80.
I was the one you visited if you wanted Amiga software :} and was happy to copy whatever you brought
with you.

I still have two Amiga 500's, a 2000 and a 3000; that 3000 is like a bad penny. I enjoyed it
very much, ran a BBS from it, then sold it... twice; it always returned as a "gift" :}

Actually, Samsung can argue that they didn't infringe on the patents. The jury cleared their tablet of infringement because of copious prior art. It found that they infringed on the iPhone, but that was most likely because of a technicality (they missed a filing deadline by a day), the judge disallowed Samsung from showing the jury prototype designs they were working on in 2006 prior to the iPhone being made public.

Anyone who wasn't sequestered like the jury and saw the evidence the judge disallowed knows Samsung didn't "copy" the iPhone's design. It's because of a technicality that the legal decision deviated from reality.

This is probably why Samsung rushed their watch device to market. If you think about it, a computer on a watch is the next logical step to the shrinking mobile computer. Samsung wanted to establish with absolute certainty in the public record that they didn't copy anyone when making a smartwatch. No way a technicality can prohibit them from telling a jury what is common knowledge.

"Go and make up a bill of material for a solid, working, code compliant solar PV solution for your home, or get a quote on one that does not discount financial incentives, so we have a true cost, and then come back with a real argument. "

Already have, it's what runs my research facility. Not my home. I don't pay electricity bills (nor water, gas, or sewage,) that's included in the set monthly.

And it didn't cost much at all to fit the research facility.

Oh, and I do this internationally (that's my UK facility. I have one in Australia one here in the USA, and one in Morocco.) I know exactly what I'm talking about. I'm globally licensed. Are you? No? Thought so.

This might be covered by using (more or less) something like a bench rifle, such that everyone is aiming at the same spot, and the rifles are secured such that little to no recoil is possible. Couple this with a modest caliber as well - after all, short range, no movement, no armor, and it's a human rather than a bear or moose.

But at this point I think we've ventured far beyond practicalities and into thought exercise territory :)

http://tinypic.com/r/2rqner7/5

Why would I be mad?

Congratulations, you missed the joke.

_

"Hydro farming takes DAILY attention."

Actually, a well-built hydro system runs itself.

But you wouldn't know jack shit about the systems involved in automating such a process, now would you?

On the other hand, I know way more than you or lumpy combined, as it's my fucking job.

I also design new methods of lighting plants in said systems.

And what would YOU know, child?

And so, Ballmer waves one final goodbye to all of his fans.

(Yeah, well; so I did it in MSPaint. It just would have been immoral to have done it in Photoshop.)

Convoluted? http://i41.tinypic.com/npnyx3.png

Please tell me if you think that this is providing a 2:1 return:

A receipt found by a coworker at her local Wal-Mart. (note the EBT Snap at the bottom)

Please tell me if you think that this is providing a 2:1 return:

A receipt found by a coworker at her local Wal-Mart. (note the EBT Snap at the bottom)

I had a click on the Velneo link... it might be awesome, but its in spanish(?) so that would put most people off it immediately.

You can change the language in the Velneo components easily (and Velneo v7 also enable you to build multi-language apps for your customers in a RAD way), check the image.

You can also contact them, AFAIK, most of the staff is fluent in English.

we both felt a bit odd as there wasn't a need to. It's a statue and a statue is free game

Federal claims court disagrees, it's in the freedom of panorama link you replied to. I'm not sure why you would think otherwise when it has just been pointed out to you.

Was rushed the first reply and a "canned response". This time I did take the time to read the links provided:
"For artworks, even if permanently installed in public places, the U.S. copyright law has no similar exception,
and any publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork thus is subject to the approval of the copyright holder of the artwork."

I'll get the darn photo(s) approved. I'm certain the wish of the reconstructors as well as "The Friends of the Library" was for this to be in the
public domain and why the plaque was added to the photo.

I'm sure wikipedia wished to use the photo as it was removed, replace with a pile of bones, which were replaced again
by the photo until it's deletion date. Now the wikipedia entry is drab looking, it's been cut rather heavily -a good 3/4's of it gone from when I was monitoring it,

I was going to submit this photo as a snub for the photo's rejection http://i42.tinypic.com/34xf6lj.jpg (Photo: Nature trail informative sign of the Kennewick Man); as well as upload it to Google Earth http://www.panoramio.com/ as I do many photo's I take. even it's copyright is in question at this point.

See this picture http://i44.tinypic.com/j7ffoz.jpg (picutre: bust of the Kennewick Man located at the entrance of the Kennewick Library).
belongs here wouldn't you think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennewick_Man not so says wikipedia.
Jumped the barrels and did the hoops, still a copyright issue that shouldn't be.

For me the wikipedia is just to hard to use - I know there are programs to help but I don't wish to make it a profession, just add an entry or two. I'd hope
VisualEditor would make it easier to edit the wikipedia without becoming part of my browser in the process.

Reading the replies some mentioned flash, Flash for Windows defaults to Webcam on, so thought I'd
check my Flash for Mint as I wasn't sure if I had set the settings. Mint is my start in Linux and used infrequently.

Things led to preferences, Network Proxy pref's showing that 127.0.0.1 as being ignored, hit the help button
and get a standard Mint manual of which "network proxy" isn't found.
http://i39.tinypic.com/2z5uf80.jpg

No help, I see if it means what I think it means and put "127.0.0.1. slashdot.org" in my HOSTS file,
saved, rebooted then logged into slashdot.org
http://i41.tinypic.com/2s99gr8.jpg

Crap the only thing being blocked are sites placed into my router. I've been wide open the entire time while thinking
some 19400+ sites I have blocked in my HOSTS file, haven't been.

No, I don't trust Mint anymore after today, I've no clue what other surprises are "built in".

Reading the replies some mentioned flash, Flash for Windows defaults to Webcam on, so thought I'd
check my Flash for Mint as I wasn't sure if I had set the settings. Mint is my start in Linux and used infrequently.

Things led to preferences, Network Proxy pref's showing that 127.0.0.1 as being ignored, hit the help button
and get a standard Mint manual of which "network proxy" isn't found.
http://i39.tinypic.com/2z5uf80.jpg

No help, I see if it means what I think it means and put "127.0.0.1. slashdot.org" in my HOSTS file,
saved, rebooted then logged into slashdot.org
http://i41.tinypic.com/2s99gr8.jpg

Crap the only thing being blocked are sites placed into my router. I've been wide open the entire time while thinking
some 19400+ sites I have blocked in my HOSTS file, haven't been.

No, I don't trust Mint anymore after today, I've no clue what other surprises are "built in".

You, sir, are wrong. My 2D Benchmark Windows 7, Nvidia GT 440, 1920x1080x32 desktop. The "Jojo" benchmark (red bars) is with Aero enabled. The "This Computer" benchmark is with Aero disabled. My diagnosis: Your video card (or integrated GPU) is antiquated shit and probably the rest of your computer is as well. Not only that, but with Aero you get a butter-smooth, vsynced, tear-free display with no performance penalty. You? You're not.

Some may be wondering how this could be possible when almost all Apple devices have built-in cameras. The military employs a skilled third party to remove them completely instead of just disabling them. Here is some of his work (a Mac with the iSight taken out): http://i40.tinypic.com/2yvs9ki.jpg .

I'm not sure what kind of proof I can offer, but here's a screenshot of my apk folder with timestamps going back to August around the time the fun started.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state , the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It's a short amendment, but if you quote the whole thing then you can't cherrypick and change it's meaning. The second amendment is not about keeping the state at an arbitrarily defined level of "free", it is about keeping the state safe from foreign conquerors.

While it does not speak of hunting, it does speak of "a well regulated militia", a point that is always overlooked and twisted by pro-gunners that are so quick to cling to the hunting defense.

The "R" in NRA is for rifle. The NRA is a sportsmen's organization that advocates for the rights of hunters. Historically the NRA has been for gun control, having helped draft the ban on fully automatic weapons in the 1980's. All this posturing to present themselves as patriots has exposed the gun lobby for what it is, an efficient scheme to separate fools from their money and make super wealthy people even richer.

Ammunition has tripled in price, most guns have doubled in value, and the gun-rights groups eat it up as signs to keep buying. They buy so much they create shortages which in turn fuel their paranoia causing them to feel compelled to buy even more as soon as it comes available. They did this when Obama was elected and they did it again when he won reelection. Guess what, the buying trend will happen again in 2016 when another Democrat wins the Whitehouse after Texas goes blue thanks to the Latino vote.

The worst part about it is that most of those guns will end up stolen and on the streets at some point in the very near future.

I preferred Thumbscript myself. True it only works for a certain number of languages since it is based on 3-digit combinations for glyphs. (well, 2 since everything goes through the middle, for the most part)
Image of the basic idea here
It could be expanded on BY adding 3 digit combinations as well, but it would also increase complexity.
You could probably dynamically show characters you could create from the current button press to the next button press, but that'd get really complex.
In the similar idea behind Dasher, you could use smaller and smaller letters the deeper they are. (I loved dasher as well. Dasher is fantastic.)

I made an implementation on numpad to see how well it worked and it wasn't half bad. Took a little while to get used to, but quite a few keys were shaped like the movements on the 3x3 grid, which helped.
And for those who might want an implementation, I cannot right now, but here is a similar one on AHK forums that doesn't look that bad.
AHK forums - thumbscript beta
It is an old post though. And I think AHK went through a huge change in syntax a while back, but not sure if it was before or after this post was made. I think, by looking through the syntax of the code in question, it should work.

"it would open up businesses to an avalanche of requests from individuals as well as costly lawsuits."

Good!

Obligatory cat macro

A screencap of the suspect's VK profile. Isn't it a bit ironic that in their little "send a gift" section, it has...a bomb?

http://tinypic.com/r/1j5c2c/6

The porn shop job was to add R&D money to my already meager R&D budget set forth by my investors. Now that they're putting more money into R&D since they see that I know what I'm doing and can do it with a very modest increase in funding, I quit the porno shop job.

Yes, we can do 60w per square meter. See we have light-moving technology. And the iteration in that video is actually 90w using older-gen LED tech. If we were to use something on the class of the MK-R LED but tuned for growth, we'd hit likely 45w consumption to light up that whole area. Many plants don't need the light shining steadily upon them at full intensity.

See, some crops don't respond very well to large levels of light. Those types of crops such as leafy crops (basil, lettuce, the wheatgrass you saw growing under practically zero light in the prior video) tend to bolt at higher light levels and go to shit as far as a commercially usable product goes. Also, under targeted LED, plants tend to pack more nutrition in them per unit of fertilizer, simply because of the enhanced action.

"Last I looked there where something like 2 reds, 2 greens and 2 blues. Nothing like complete spectrum coverage"

You haven't put a white LED under a spectrometer, then, in at LEAST 4 years. We've had output similar to blackbody radiation for years, now.

Got any more outdated information you'd like to share and have dispelled?

LED lighting is more efficient photosynthetically than sunlight, due to targeted-wavelength action.

That's why we're moving to LED. What takes the sun 1,000w per square meter for growing a crop we can do with like 60w per square meter, which means we can stack these systems atop each other and what takes sunlight one acre of land to produce we can do with LED and 1/10th of an acre.

Smart people use solar to power their LEDs and use the excess power to run atmospherics and pumps, like my UK testing facility.

Oh, and some crops, no light needed at all - like this

Smart people know what wavelengths and how much photon flux crops need and only give them that.

Also, smart people know that outdoor gardening is typically ungodly wasteful, especially when it comes to water and fertilizer.

Easily an older farmer could do it. This is one of the huge benefits of things like vertically-stacked hydroponics systems utilizing LED (and in some cases, no light at all.) Less physical stress, conservation of resources, lowered operating costs, higher yields, and faster ROI.

We've had systems available for a couple of years, now. A company I contracted with in the UK builds such systems.

This is our testing facility, but you can get a production facility very similar to this one for just shy of a quarter-million dollars, and you can have that paid back within a year and a half for typical crops (and the first harvest for legal/medical marijuana crops.)

Looks like 17bits. Sorry, but won't work in chrome's V8. Seriously, V8 uses UCS-2 instead of UTF-8? WTF Man?

hey, look, I get modded down for stating a fact.

http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=2il1ydc&s=7

Got a problem, people?

because it IS a presentation mockup like any of these:

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/2667/pavillion22so.jpg [imageshack.us]
http://i847.photobucket.com/albums/ab35/bobro15/NAA-FX-2_zps79959a9a.jpg [photobucket.com]
http://i50.tinypic.com/2yl7cs8.jpg [tinypic.com] (the one in front)

Building smaller RC models and mockups is not rare.

The head of the design team himself said they have only performed test flight with two smaller models (one with a propeller, the other with a micro jet). These are from the slides he presented.

Propeller-powered sub-scale model:
http://sphotos-d.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/250662_10151268717323603_1355114109_n.png

Jet-powered sub-scale model:
http://sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/542333_10151268717468603_1294585182_n.png

The one in photos was a mock up. Like any of these:

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/2667/pavillion22so.jpg
http://i847.photobucket.com/albums/ab35/bobro15/NAA-FX-2_zps79959a9a.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2yl7cs8.jpg (the one in front)

I say line them all up next to a trench and put a bullet in their heads...

We can all dream: http://i48.tinypic.com/2dc8kg1.jpg

The Mac Pro has a power supply. The power supply has a fan. This fan is close to the outer housing of the Mac Pro and accessible through some gills of some sort ... Do you now see where the potential risk lies?

http://i46.tinypic.com/2gvvq61.jpg

I don't really see the potential risk there.
However I should admit I've been doing this sort of work for the past 20 odd years, so perhaps that experience is why I don't see it.

It seems one would need to take a long and narrow wire, heat the end up so it glows, then put it in the grill and push it to melt through the plastic in order to touch the fan.

Are people known for doing this?
I admit it wouldn't surprise me, but for those types of people I generally wouldn't trust them holding a screwdriver, and would expect great personal injury from wielding nothing more than a sheet of paper ;P

Compared to many other generic power supplies out there [ https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=psu+fan ] Apple looks to be up with the safer designs out there.

To really get at the fans one needs to open the case. Not many current generation systems are designed to run with the case open. Airflow is too important to prevent component damage.
I always leave the system plugged in so I can discharge static by touching the PSU, but rarely ever powered on.

http://i49.tinypic.com/scw9pk.png

Actually, I got KDE 4.8 working (to prove my patches against gcc-4.6 and qt4-x11 were correct). As long as you don't start KDEPIM (Kontact), it's actually decent fast (in tightvncserver):

http://oi47.tinypic.com/2058vue.jpg

Funnily enough, a sole GTK+ application (xchat) in a light-weight window manager (IceWM, otherwise much faster than KDE) was slower.

Of course, once I started Kontact, all bets were off, but then, whenever I do that on the company desktop at work (where we're forced to use it for Groupware - the calendar you see is my actual account at work, sans a few sensitive information) even a modern x86 machine gets slow ;)

Plot the temperature by month from this paper (not just averages of months). The distribution of temps suddenly jumps upwards about two degrees starting in 1989 corresponding to when a sensor was switch out. They also corrected for some calibration errors and sensor drift, starting that year. But fail to tell us how exactly they corrected for the drift.

Here it is from all their data (including interpolated):
http://oi50.tinypic.com/2qn8x29.jpg

It is more obvious if you plot only the data they actually had.

On 18 January 2011, a new CR1000 datalogger (used to record and disseminate the readings
from the various AWS sensors) was installed on the Byrd AWS in replacement of the AWS-2B
electronic system used since 1989. Upon inspection of the old system at the AMRC, a
calibration error of 1.5 â--¦C (in excess) was identified for the temperature observations recorded
since 2002. In addition, subsequent testing in a newly available cold chamber at the AMRC
provided more accurate measurements of the temperature sensitivity of the AWS-2B system,
which results in a negative temperature drift as the temperature decreases. As a result,
corrections were made to the temperature observations recorded by the Byrd AWS between
1989 and 17 January 2011. The release of the corrected dataset on the AMRCâ(TM)s ftp server in
December 2011 was followed by an update of the monthly mean temperatures from Byrd AWS
available on the READER online archive10 (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/met/READER/).
The effect of the corrections on the reconstructed temperatures is illustrated in Supplementary
Fig. S10. In the lower temperature range (typically -50 to -30 â--¦C), the temperature drift largely
compensated for the 1.5 â--¦C error in the 2002â"01/2011 observations, whereas no compensation
occurred at higher temperatures (-20 to 0 â--¦C). This explains the differences in the correctionsâ(TM)
impact between summer and winter, and between the 1989-2001 and 2002-2010 periods
(Supplementary Fig. S10). It is noteworthy that the temperature drift problem did not affect
significantly the AWS observations from 1980â"1988, and this for two reasons: (1) Excess
power from the RTG was used to keep the internal temperature of the electronics above -20 â--¦C.
This extra power was no longer available when the AWS started relying on batteries charged
by solar panels. (2) The central processing unit of the AWS was (paradoxically) a newer
version than the one subsequently used from 1989 onward.

The results? Oh yes, quite dire: http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=14nh4jq&s=6

Here... let me help you....

http://i44.tinypic.com/20rl4is.jpg

You have now been enlightened.

--
BMO

Actually Elop sold his shares and Ballmer doesn't even seem to be in the top 5 individual owners. Only 10% of the stock is owned by insiders, the rest being owned by institutional investors. So it seems that either Microsoft is defrauding everyone including the largest institutional investors in the US, or the Licenses Sold metric is a valid way to measure the pace of sales.

Of course, Microsoft has their own spin on the numbers, but if you take the Vista "Licenses Sold" statistics and put them into context with similar statistics reported by Microsoft for other OSes, you can tell the Vista numbers reported at the time were too low to indicate the OS was growing at an acceptable rate. For instance, consider the following chart, which shows reported sales data from Microsoft for W95 - W7, and projections for W8, based on historical trends. You can easily tell that even with all the double counting, Vista sales are far below what you would expect for an OS that is selling well, such as XP or W7. To me, this says the effect of the double counting from upgrades is negligible compared to the sheer volume of regular license sales that make it to end users.

To check the reasonableness of this, take a look at this data in the chart for W7 sales, compared to actual growth reported by market share trackers like statcounter. The linked chart shows relatively linear (R^2 = .99) monotonic growth of Windows 7 after launch, implying a constant per month rate of sales. The Windows 7 "Licenses Sold" data from Microsoft in my chart shows Windows 7 sold on average 20.10 +- 2.2 Million units per month over the course of 36 months.

So to check to see how the "licenses sold" number reflects real adoption of the OS, we could probably look at the ratio of the rates of sales for Vista and W7 in both units sold and marketshare gain. We would expect, that if licenses sold translates to marketshare gain, then these ratios should be the same.

From the statcounter figures, in the period where Vista was on sale but before W7 was released, it gains marketshare at about .61 percentage points per month. Windows 7, after its release, gained market share at about 1.4 percentage points per month, for a ratio of 2.3. The same ratio for average "Licenses Sold" data is 20.01M/9.54M over the same period (12/2008 - 09/2009 for Vista, 12/2009 - 10/2012 for W7), for a ratio of 2.1. That means that either Microsoft understated Windws 7 Licenses Sold by 6.05%, or the overstated Windows Vista licenses by 5.71%, or some combination thereof.... and factor in Piracy which would not count as license sold.

Anyway, the point is that from past data released by Microsoft for "Licenses Sold" and actual data representing actual OS market share growth, the Licenses Sold metric is very nearly identical to and indicative of growth of the OS.

Nice shots, I'm down the south of the country near Hobart and it was heavily clouded and under 50% coverage but got one half-decent pic

Eclipse

False. http://i46.tinypic.com/9fuo85.png

For a quick comparison, I can write as small as the date that appears on a penny with a Fisher Space Pen. http://i46.tinypic.com/34zzpyh.jpg However, you will have issues with its ink smearing like any other pen.

Meego was fantasy bullshit. Maemo would have been their winning ticket

They were perfectly capable of doing either or both. There's been a huge amount of propaganda trying to say that Nokia was in a state of panic. In fact they could afford to keep paying for development more or less indefinitely; even whilst developing four platforms at once (Symbian, S40, Meego & Maemo) they had huge revenues and large profits (their "failed" smartphones were actually delivering increasing profits; not just sales) just before they Eloped the company with the famous "let's burn the platforms" speech. Symbian had increasing sales and their low end phone were stable so they had the market access which could allow them to sell the phones. The only things they had to do was select one within half a year, keep with it as a main priority for a year or two and maintain backwards compatibility with Symbian and series 40 accessories and they would have a good chance of developing an "eco-system".

One way to overcome this is to use firmware like tomato (if possible on your model). It have some nice Channel scanning option in the wireless menu that would keep the noise level as low as possible. Regarding the wearing of cheap electronics one way is to keep the wireless stopped when not used (like in the night). One can always configure time schedule for auto or button stop/start.

You Yanks fear the word "socialist" so much you spend far more to get rid of it!

You're parroting a commonly held misconception about how politics in the United States works. Firstly, your elected representatives come from more than two parties; Your voters have a wider diversity of candidates to choose from, and are less apt to vote along party lines. This also spreads out the concentration of money paid to your elected representatives by private interests. Put more simply, it's harder to buy legislation in your country. As well, the disparity between the rich and poor is far less pronounced. This results in your legislators being more likely to represent the actual will of the people, rather than the apparent or manufactured will.

WOW! I didn't know Pakistan was *this* awesome! YAY! I fucking love my country! Let's burn some embassies in pride :p

Ah, Sorry for the snark, it just that your first paragraph made me chock on my tea (oh, and you owe me a keyboard )

BTW, if you assumed me to be a Britisher due to my qualification, (a fair mistake) allow to inform you that that shit is everywhere. Heck I made a map of all the countries with an ACCA exam centre (I am a bored, bored soul) : http://i45.tinypic.com/1zd8c5k.jpg

I agree with your points, and I think a clarification is in order on my part.

Look, as an objective outsider, I was merely looking at merits of this problem, I do not have any affiliation with either side of the debate.

I understand the merits of this case: the US values *time* factor in the health equation far more than the *cost* factor; American would rather pay A LOT(even take out a loan) to get *prompt* healthcare, rather than pay nothing , or a little...and die in the queue.

But that doesn't mean that a certain mid point *can't* be reached. A lot of the so called socialist countries aren't all that socialised when it comes to medicine (not every country is a Nordic, after all).

Look at the *socialised* medicine in, say, Netherlands and Germany, for example. To sum it up *broadly*, you still pay, just that the state helps out a bit, either subsidising the amount, or spreading it over time, mandatory insurance, or some other trick. All it does it is help you when you are down, so you can worry about payment at a more opportune time, when you are healthy.

However, basically, the problem is that that mid-point comes under the definition of "socialism" and since socialism is evil... you do everything in your power to stay away from that balance point.

Basically, Americans are paying for the *privilege* of *not* having socialised medicine, and paying for it through the nose. Take *Obamacare* for example; the name itself is a reminder of the fact, that, never mind the merits of this act, Americans were actually *insulted* by the idea!

I feel this comic might sum it up: http://satwcomic.com/the-end-of-america

Hence my recommendation; if you *are* going to provide a social service, don't do a half-arsed job of it. Just do the damn thing already, and and do it good. Once you get over the phobia of socialism, then you can get to providing a service that's both competitive *and* cost-effective.

(And you are socialist anyway, from my POV, after all, you provide unemployment benefits of some sort, that's already a *evil* socialist aspect!)

Actually It's blocked:
http://i46.tinypic.com/byhx.jpg

A. You're rating LED efficiency by lumens - WRONG. Photon flux density. Remember, lumens are for humans.

B. "Now LED's are at about 100 lumens per watt" - WRONG AGAIN. We have 5500K white LEDs with 150+ lumens per watt, and Cree has already broken 220+ lux/w - LAST YEAR.

C. "So you need about 1,300 watts to light up one square meter to the same intensity as sunlight. Very roughly." Sure, but you're implying most of our food crops even need that sort of intensity - they don't.

D. "Solar cells and inverters and wiring have an end-to-end efficiency of around 10%" Yea, if you use cheapo garbage. The stuff powering my research facility, end-to-end, pushes roughly 22%.

E. "So we need about 13 meter-square panels at right-angles all the time to the Sun to get 13,000 watts during sunny days on the Moon." I see you totally ignore the fact that our moon has no atmosphere worth mentioning, so that photon flux density is actually much higher versus on earth, you also forget that the moon is closer to the sun then we are roughly half of the time, so again, the photon flux is even greater.

F. "So we're back up to about 20 meter-square panels to light up one meter. To light up 50 square meters, one person's worth, that's ONE THOUSAND SQUARE METER STEERABLE PANELS." Except again, you're implying that plants need such intense light to grow. That's wrong. Totally wrong.

G. "And oh, where are you going to get the water for 50 square meters of whatnot growing?" Plenty of hydrogen and oxygen on the moon, plus we've found water there. We can make fake snow by just expelling compressed hydrogen and oxygen in a shared jet nozzle (it's how we make snow during the summer on mountain ski resorts) so I bet making water from scratch components would not be that difficult. On top of that, we've got hydroponics systems that can drop water requirements as much as 99% for many crops.

Your numbers fail to take into account how plants grow and just how much space is needed.

And as an aside - I do this professionally. I'm going to have to say your words are sorely lacking in knowledge on the relevant subjects.

A. You're rating LED efficiency by lumens - WRONG. Photon flux density. Remember, lumens are for humans.

B. "Now LED's are at about 100 lumens per watt" - WRONG AGAIN. We have 5500K white LEDs with 150+ lumens per watt, and Cree has already broken 220+ lux/w - LAST YEAR.

C. "So you need about 1,300 watts to light up one square meter to the same intensity as sunlight. Very roughly." Sure, but you're implying most of our food crops even need that sort of intensity - they don't.

D. "Solar cells and inverters and wiring have an end-to-end efficiency of around 10%" Yea, if you use cheapo garbage. The stuff powering my research facility, end-to-end, pushes roughly 22%.

E. "So we need about 13 meter-square panels at right-angles all the time to the Sun to get 13,000 watts during sunny days on the Moon." I see you totally ignore the fact that our moon has no atmosphere worth mentioning, so that photon flux density is actually much higher versus on earth, you also forget that the moon is closer to the sun then we are roughly half of the time, so again, the photon flux is even greater.

F. "So we're back up to about 20 meter-square panels to light up one meter. To light up 50 square meters, one person's worth, that's ONE THOUSAND SQUARE METER STEERABLE PANELS." Except again, you're implying that plants need such intense light to grow. That's wrong. Totally wrong.

G. "And oh, where are you going to get the water for 50 square meters of whatnot growing?" Plenty of hydrogen and oxygen on the moon, plus we've found water there. We can make fake snow by just expelling compressed hydrogen and oxygen in a shared jet nozzle (it's how we make snow during the summer on mountain ski resorts) so I bet making water from scratch components would not be that difficult. On top of that, we've got hydroponics systems that can drop water requirements as much as 99% for many crops.

Your numbers fail to take into account how plants grow and just how much space is needed.

And as an aside - I do this professionally. I'm going to have to say your words are sorely lacking in knowledge on the relevant subjects.

In that time period, it was *normal* for conquering people to demonstrate their dominance over the conquered by raping them.

Of course, you would never see such base acts in modern day society-- people now a days have a little more respect than that! You would never catch someone from today's age, for example, using their genitals to celebrate dominance. Oh wait.. http://i45.tinypic.com/333zrie.jpg

Oh evolution, thou art a heartless bitch.

Next target, from leaked official Apple court documents.