I don't care about the desktop and I have all the other crap squished down into a single little task bar across the top of one of the screens.
My remaining issue is window placement and the solution has to support the mouse well out of the box. I've got better things to do than learn new keyboard shortcuts and tinker with config files.
Using terminator for my terminal interface got me a chunk of the way there.
Looking around the next Gen UI's the only thing I like is Win7's maximise to left and right half of the screen operations.
Nothing is ever really unlimited, they are just making assumptions about your potential usage based on device.
If just you paid for the data you used they wouldn't give a damn what you were using it for and would actively encourage things like tethering as a way of encouraging you to use more data.
To make efficient use of the storage space these services will hash the mp3's, store each unique file once and record which users have uploaded it.
Then the RIAA will subpoena the lists of which users have which mp3's. If a hundred users all have the exact same mp3 and it didn't come from one of the (very few) legal sources of mp3's then at least 99 of them copied it.
The problem is with the term "intellectual property", it's not property. It's government granted and enforced monopolies on the exploitation of ideas. Calling it intellectual property is an instance of framing aka the art of choosing the words to bias the discussion, much like calling tax cuts "tax relief".
Currently we have a Wifi security mode that is unencrypted and unauthenticated (open) and several that are encrypted and authenticated (wep, wpa1, wpa2 etc)
There is a need for a Wifi security mode that is encrypted but not authenticated. Which is essentially what this proposal is getting at. Of course the actual proposal fails miserably because WPA is not secure against attackers who know the shared secret. So we need a new security mode that fills this role in a secure manner.
1) What would you consider suitably big? Tsar Bomba was 50MT, that gives you a range increase of 7x.
2) From digging around it seems that it takes a couple of thousand rem to straight out kill someone, less than that and they are going to survive for at least a few days.
Cranking the numbers on yield (assuming no shielding) I figure you get a dose of about 3400 rem from a 50MT at 1000 miles. So it will probably be immediately fatal out to 1300 miles. And reliably fatal out to 2300 miles.
The 1MT nuke at 1000 miles would be essentially harmless and would only deliver immediately fatal doses out to a couple of hundred miles.
So it would appear that with a suitably large nuke and no radiation shielding you are correct.
to point high-power radar-reflection surveillance satellites at certain empty reaches of space
That isn't going to work for stealth spacecraft which are a trivial engineering problem next to propulsion. Space is huge, you're going to need very very powerful sensors to find anything the size of a ship.
It's not that big, about 40,000 square degrees for a full spherical sweep, a wide angle lens is 100 square degrees, so call it 500 exposures. Assuming the crew have turned off everything except life support then it'll be radiating at some 280 kelvin against a background of nearly 0. Which is good and bright in the thermal band. But to be conservative we'll assume that it needs a full minute per exposure, that's
Of course the real situation is much simpler than this needle in a hay stack approach. Presumably you know who your enemies are. So you know where they are coming from. There a basically 2 ways of getting from A to B in space. Transfer orbits and continuous thrust maneuvers. Transfer orbits greatly limit the amount of sky to be searched. And something thrusting continuously is going to be a lot lot more visible.
The dispersal of the radiation is going to follow the inverse square law.
A 1 megaton weapon delivers ~4e15 joules of energy. At a range of 1km thats 300megajoules per square meter. And it's going to come in a rather short pulse. Thats enough to solidly mess up your day, it will vaporize Aluminum and depending on the duration may even induce impulsive shock.
At 10km it's drops to 3Mj that's still enough to melt the surface of the Aluminum.
At 100km you are down to 300Kj, that's just going to make it moderately warm.
Obviously crew sensitivity to radiation is quite high, but I find your claim of thousands of miles quite dubious.
Additionally a thousand miles is a fairly close hit, the ISS for example covers that distance every 200seconds.
Tabs and spaces are treated as distinct, so a block indented with 'tab''sp''sp' is indented with precisely that and no other combination of tabs or spaces is acceptable.
Additionally the language doesn't care how much white space you indent with, only that there is some indentation and that it is consistent, so you could have a class and indent all the stuff in that class with 'tab''sp''sp' and then indent the bodies of the functions in the class with a further 'sp''sp''tab''tab' for a total of 'tab''sp''sp''sp''sp''tab''tab'. And of course this restriction only applies to white space at the start of statements, when you break statements across lines you can do whatever the hell you want. Although why you would want to do anything aside from a normal straight forward indenting scheme totally escapes me.
That said every serious programming project I have ever encountered (regardless of language) has had an indentation policy and anything that would have make it past any of those policies would be just fine with python.
As others have mentioned, it sounds wrong and for the first week or two you'll be constantly thinking about it worried you'll mess up somehow, but after that you indent you code just like you always do anyway and you don't notice.
If it were a dictatorship then maybe you'd be right, but the American voters put Bush in charge. Or at least the ~25% of them that voted for him and ~50% that didn't bother to vote at all put him in charge. And subsequently that 75% is definitely culpable for everything that America has done in the past 8 years.
Good point, so since speed = wavelength x frequency, my example of a 90% speed drop will also produce a 90% drop in wavelength so the 360m packet will now occupy 3.6m.
However my implied point that you are going to need a lot of this stuff in your router still holds.
This isn't a congestion issue, it's a buffering issue.
When a packet gets to a network device the body is stored in attached ram and the header is pushed into the routing engine which determines the egress port and queues the packet for TX. When the packets turn for TX comes up the body is retrieved from the ram and pushed down the line.
That memory interface is one of the biggest pain in the rear parts of building a high capacity router.
Now if instead of storing the body in ram you could spin it out around a fiber loopback that'd be mighty handy. You'd save yourself the time and effort of converting, storing, retrieving and reconverting 90% of the data.
Unfortunately life is not that simple, at 10gigabit you get 33bits per meter. That means that a 1500byte frame occupies about 360m, even if you could knock the speed down 90% you would still need 36m of whatever. And that's just so that you can get it all out before it starts coming back in again.
24" dell lcd's cost $350, that's in the neighborhood of 1 days pay and they are good for a couple of years, I make a point of not working anywhere that can't figure out that a decent screen will cumulatively save me at least 1 day over it's lifespan
It scares me to think that you need to have the whitespace indicate this fact to you.
The syntax highlighting, presence of braces and presence of an extra level of indentation on the next line don't cover it?
By the way, sizeof, not a function either, it's actually an operator, but I'm willing to bet that you'd object strongly to writing "sizeof(bob)" as "sizeof bob".
I really don't get this obsession people have with putting braces on separate lines.
Block scoping is perfectly well indicated by indentation and blank lines are valuable for dividing functional blocks of code.
When you go and put all the braces on separate lines it totally kills the visual effect of the actually empty lines. Then you'll have to go and start using multiple blank lines for separating things and before long half the screen will be empty and mostly empty lines.
Hmmm perhaps that's it, maybe this is a scheme for people who don't like looking at the code.
I never bother with references from the places I've worked, if the companies care they can find and call them themselves.
I do however provide references from people I've worked with, generally a mix of coworkers and immediate bosses.
I'm also a tad honest so I tend to choose them based on my opinion of their integrity and professional ability not based on what I think they may say about me.
on the spam note, gmail has this feature where it automatically deletes stuff in the spam folder after 30 days, this means the spam folder total is effectively a 1 month rolling average of spam rates, my gmail spam folder currently has 3000 items in it
Slashdot Mirror
I don't care about the desktop and I have all the other crap squished down into a single little task bar across the top of one of the screens. My remaining issue is window placement and the solution has to support the mouse well out of the box. I've got better things to do than learn new keyboard shortcuts and tinker with config files. Using terminator for my terminal interface got me a chunk of the way there. Looking around the next Gen UI's the only thing I like is Win7's maximise to left and right half of the screen operations.
Nothing is ever really unlimited, they are just making assumptions about your potential usage based on device. If just you paid for the data you used they wouldn't give a damn what you were using it for and would actively encourage things like tethering as a way of encouraging you to use more data.
The obvious next step would be to feed it a fan created strategy guide and see if it gets even better.
To make efficient use of the storage space these services will hash the mp3's, store each unique file once and record which users have uploaded it.
Then the RIAA will subpoena the lists of which users have which mp3's. If a hundred users all have the exact same mp3 and it didn't come from one of the (very few) legal sources of mp3's then at least 99 of them copied it.
Game over.
The problem is with the term "intellectual property", it's not property. It's government granted and enforced monopolies on the exploitation of ideas. Calling it intellectual property is an instance of framing aka the art of choosing the words to bias the discussion, much like calling tax cuts "tax relief".
Currently we have a Wifi security mode that is unencrypted and unauthenticated (open) and several that are encrypted and authenticated (wep, wpa1, wpa2 etc) There is a need for a Wifi security mode that is encrypted but not authenticated. Which is essentially what this proposal is getting at. Of course the actual proposal fails miserably because WPA is not secure against attackers who know the shared secret. So we need a new security mode that fills this role in a secure manner.
1) What would you consider suitably big? Tsar Bomba was 50MT, that gives you a range increase of 7x.
2) From digging around it seems that it takes a couple of thousand rem to straight out kill someone, less than that and they are going to survive for at least a few days.
Cranking the numbers on yield (assuming no shielding) I figure you get a dose of about 3400 rem from a 50MT at 1000 miles. So it will probably be immediately fatal out to 1300 miles. And reliably fatal out to 2300 miles.
The 1MT nuke at 1000 miles would be essentially harmless and would only deliver immediately fatal doses out to a couple of hundred miles.
So it would appear that with a suitably large nuke and no radiation shielding you are correct.
3) True
That isn't going to work for stealth spacecraft which are a trivial engineering problem next to propulsion. Space is huge, you're going to need very very powerful sensors to find anything the size of a ship.
It's not that big, about 40,000 square degrees for a full spherical sweep, a wide angle lens is 100 square degrees, so call it 500 exposures. Assuming the crew have turned off everything except life support then it'll be radiating at some 280 kelvin against a background of nearly 0. Which is good and bright in the thermal band. But to be conservative we'll assume that it needs a full minute per exposure, that's
Of course the real situation is much simpler than this needle in a hay stack approach. Presumably you know who your enemies are. So you know where they are coming from. There a basically 2 ways of getting from A to B in space. Transfer orbits and continuous thrust maneuvers. Transfer orbits greatly limit the amount of sky to be searched. And something thrusting continuously is going to be a lot lot more visible.
The dispersal of the radiation is going to follow the inverse square law.
A 1 megaton weapon delivers ~4e15 joules of energy. At a range of 1km thats 300megajoules per square meter. And it's going to come in a rather short pulse. Thats enough to solidly mess up your day, it will vaporize Aluminum and depending on the duration may even induce impulsive shock.
At 10km it's drops to 3Mj that's still enough to melt the surface of the Aluminum.
At 100km you are down to 300Kj, that's just going to make it moderately warm.
Obviously crew sensitivity to radiation is quite high, but I find your claim of thousands of miles quite dubious.
Additionally a thousand miles is a fairly close hit, the ISS for example covers that distance every 200seconds.
WEP - old very broken WPA with TKIP encryption (aka WPAv1) - aging and showing it WPA with AES encryption (aka WPAv2) - best currently available
Tabs and spaces are treated as distinct, so a block indented with 'tab''sp''sp' is indented with precisely that and no other combination of tabs or spaces is acceptable.
Additionally the language doesn't care how much white space you indent with, only that there is some indentation and that it is consistent, so you could have a class and indent all the stuff in that class with 'tab''sp''sp' and then indent the bodies of the functions in the class with a further 'sp''sp''tab''tab' for a total of 'tab''sp''sp''sp''sp''tab''tab'. And of course this restriction only applies to white space at the start of statements, when you break statements across lines you can do whatever the hell you want. Although why you would want to do anything aside from a normal straight forward indenting scheme totally escapes me.
That said every serious programming project I have ever encountered (regardless of language) has had an indentation policy and anything that would have make it past any of those policies would be just fine with python.
As others have mentioned, it sounds wrong and for the first week or two you'll be constantly thinking about it worried you'll mess up somehow, but after that you indent you code just like you always do anyway and you don't notice.
In Australia it's called GST and it's 10%, which still doesn't account for the ridiculous prices.
Cell stage was kinda hectic and reminded me of flow, didn't get boring before it was time to move along.
Creature stage got boring and fast, maybe next time through I'll try something aside from killing everything in sight.
Tribe stage was fun and gave me a surprising amount of challenge for easy difficulty setting.
And then I was designing a town hall for the start of Civ stage when it crashed, rebuilding that is going to be tedious as hell.
If it were a dictatorship then maybe you'd be right, but the American voters put Bush in charge. Or at least the ~25% of them that voted for him and ~50% that didn't bother to vote at all put him in charge. And subsequently that 75% is definitely culpable for everything that America has done in the past 8 years.
Nope, I was right to start with, the speed change is a result of the wavelength change. And of course the total length changes with the wave length
Good point, so since speed = wavelength x frequency, my example of a 90% speed drop will also produce a 90% drop in wavelength so the 360m packet will now occupy 3.6m.
However my implied point that you are going to need a lot of this stuff in your router still holds.
When a packet gets to a network device the body is stored in attached ram and the header is pushed into the routing engine which determines the egress port and queues the packet for TX. When the packets turn for TX comes up the body is retrieved from the ram and pushed down the line.
That memory interface is one of the biggest pain in the rear parts of building a high capacity router.
Now if instead of storing the body in ram you could spin it out around a fiber loopback that'd be mighty handy. You'd save yourself the time and effort of converting, storing, retrieving and reconverting 90% of the data.
Unfortunately life is not that simple, at 10gigabit you get 33bits per meter. That means that a 1500byte frame occupies about 360m, even if you could knock the speed down 90% you would still need 36m of whatever. And that's just so that you can get it all out before it starts coming back in again.
24" dell lcd's cost $350, that's in the neighborhood of 1 days pay and they are good for a couple of years, I make a point of not working anywhere that can't figure out that a decent screen will cumulatively save me at least 1 day over it's lifespan
It scares me to think that you need to have the whitespace indicate this fact to you.
The syntax highlighting, presence of braces and presence of an extra level of indentation on the next line don't cover it?
By the way, sizeof, not a function either, it's actually an operator, but I'm willing to bet that you'd object strongly to writing "sizeof(bob)" as "sizeof bob".
"braces show where code blocks are"
Like I said, "Block scoping is perfectly well indicated by indentation"
You are indenting stuff correctly and consistently right? cause if your not then talking about any other aspect of code formatting is a waste of time.
I really don't get this obsession people have with putting braces on separate lines.
Block scoping is perfectly well indicated by indentation and blank lines are valuable for dividing functional blocks of code.
When you go and put all the braces on separate lines it totally kills the visual effect of the actually empty lines. Then you'll have to go and start using multiple blank lines for separating things and before long half the screen will be empty and mostly empty lines.
Hmmm perhaps that's it, maybe this is a scheme for people who don't like looking at the code.
Oh that's cause they are too much like you, makes us uncomfortable.
I never bother with references from the places I've worked, if the companies care they can find and call them themselves.
I do however provide references from people I've worked with, generally a mix of coworkers and immediate bosses.
I'm also a tad honest so I tend to choose them based on my opinion of their integrity and professional ability not based on what I think they may say about me.
It's not targeted at me, it's the spammers using random addresses on my domain as as source addresses.
on the spam note, gmail has this feature where it automatically deletes stuff in the spam folder after 30 days, this means the spam folder total is effectively a 1 month rolling average of spam rates, my gmail spam folder currently has 3000 items in it