How about fuel cells powering an electric motor to assist during takeoff. Extra power for the few minutes you need it, and smaller jet engines for the rest of the flight.
Or forget the fuel cells and just charge a bank of capacitors from the jet engines themselves...or better yet, on the ground before takeoff.
So according to the chart, if you hang around an area with 100 mS per hour for an hour, you'll receive a dose likely to cause cancer.
No. To use the inevitable car analogy:
A scientist says: "Car accidents can happen to anyone who is in an automobile. However, studies have shown that car crashes are an insignificant cause of death for those who drive less than 1000 miles per year.
An editor summarizes: "Minimum one-year driving linked to increased car crash risk: 1000 miles".
You read: "If you drive 1000 miles you'll probably die".
Or perhaps "capitalist societies" and "socialist societies" don't exist outside of textbooks, because real societies always contain some degree of each?
I think the concept is fairly straightforward, though: If you make it hard for a computer to determine the difference between the plaintext and garbage, it will be hard to brute-force decrypt. In theory, by making the plaintext into a captcha the computer will no longer be able to tell when it has successfully decrypted the image, so (again in theory) after every password attempt a human will have to read the "decrypted" image to see if it is correct or not, so a brute force attack would (in theory) take an incredibly long period of time.
I see a few problems, though, in that (a) even if a computer can't read a captcha, it could probably tell the difference between it and random noise, (b) the computer could take "likely candidates" and farm them out to Mechanical Turk et al., and (c) it's not practical for anything but short text messages, since the message is no longer readable by a computer.
I could see it used for encrypting other passwords, though: Encrypt your files using a long random password, then encrypt that password using this captcha system and a password you can actually remember.
It's because the researchers couldn't build factories in China to pump out their equipment by the million. Mass production, economies of scale and all that.
If you hired a team of engineers to invent and build you a one-off car, how much do you think it would cost?
According to TFV the "multicopter" uses onboard processing to find reference points between successive video frames, which it then uses to determine how fast and how far the drone moves.
However, the actual map generation and navigation is handled by a separate computer.
More specifically, the IE blog. While it's not exactly the mouthpiece of Microsoft PR, every development team is going to be biased toward their own product and show benchmarks that put their work in a positive light.
That said, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if IE9 is slightly more efficient than other browsers on Windows, since the IE devs have closer access to the OS than other teams, Safari brings a truckload of extra libraries to clone OS X, and Opera... is Opera.
Patents are supposed to cover implementations, not ideas. If I patented, say, a glue that worked in space, or at the bottom of the ocean, it wouldn't be "obvious" just because it's glue.
While the patent system is abused and some of the things "patented" are vague ideas that would apply to almost any implementation, there's no reason why a patent can't cover something which already exists in another environment.
Fortunately, patent terms haven't ballooned the way copyright terms have. Patents now cover up to 20 years from the first filing date (which can be many years before the patent is ultimately issued). In most industries that's pretty reasonable, but in software 10-20 years can be an eternity.
It seems like the best approach would be to change the patent term to whatever the length of a "generation" is for a particular industry, consulting experts in a given field to determine what that epoch may be. In automobiles, it might be twenty years. In software development, it might be two.
I agree the patent system is broken, and in the computer world it needs to have significantly shorter terms. But it's worth noting that many concepts (and the methods for implementing them), which seem "obvious" today due to their ubiquity, may not have been so 10 or 20 years ago.
Hell, many cultures never discovered the wheel, or would have developed much later if they hadn't been introduced to it by their neighbors.
Slashdot Mirror
and it was cobbled together from commercially available parts, including a microprocessor, that moved on wheels
I...uh...er...what?
How about fuel cells powering an electric motor to assist during takeoff. Extra power for the few minutes you need it, and smaller jet engines for the rest of the flight.
Or forget the fuel cells and just charge a bank of capacitors from the jet engines themselves...or better yet, on the ground before takeoff.
So according to the chart, if you hang around an area with 100 mS per hour for an hour, you'll receive a dose likely to cause cancer.
No. To use the inevitable car analogy:
A scientist says: "Car accidents can happen to anyone who is in an automobile. However, studies have shown that car crashes are an insignificant cause of death for those who drive less than 1000 miles per year.
An editor summarizes: "Minimum one-year driving linked to increased car crash risk: 1000 miles".
You read: "If you drive 1000 miles you'll probably die".
I thought telecommuting had been around for some time.
Look on the bright side; if there was a place that hired programmers to work in the nude, you'd be at the top of their list.
You bet it is! It's so hard to refuel a Swarovski Drive on this planet.
Parse Error.
Or perhaps "capitalist societies" and "socialist societies" don't exist outside of textbooks, because real societies always contain some degree of each?
"Berserker."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_safety_issues
I understand the pitfalls of anecdotal evidence as much as anyone, but it turned me into a newt.
I think the concept is fairly straightforward, though: If you make it hard for a computer to determine the difference between the plaintext and garbage, it will be hard to brute-force decrypt. In theory, by making the plaintext into a captcha the computer will no longer be able to tell when it has successfully decrypted the image, so (again in theory) after every password attempt a human will have to read the "decrypted" image to see if it is correct or not, so a brute force attack would (in theory) take an incredibly long period of time.
I see a few problems, though, in that (a) even if a computer can't read a captcha, it could probably tell the difference between it and random noise, (b) the computer could take "likely candidates" and farm them out to Mechanical Turk et al., and (c) it's not practical for anything but short text messages, since the message is no longer readable by a computer.
I could see it used for encrypting other passwords, though: Encrypt your files using a long random password, then encrypt that password using this captcha system and a password you can actually remember.
That's the one with the $5 wrench, right?
That's why I read Fox News. They only use a handful of words over 6 letters, and those few are used so often it's easy to figure them out.
From what I read, It looks like it happened very suddenly and there are signs Q was involved.
Admittedly I haven't read past the summary.
It's because the researchers couldn't build factories in China to pump out their equipment by the million. Mass production, economies of scale and all that.
If you hired a team of engineers to invent and build you a one-off car, how much do you think it would cost?
According to TFV the "multicopter" uses onboard processing to find reference points between successive video frames, which it then uses to determine how fast and how far the drone moves.
However, the actual map generation and navigation is handled by a separate computer.
Most people are nice simply because they don't want to hurt others.
When their personal interests aren't at stake.
Stir in a little fear and greed and you've got a time-bomb.
Must...resist...obvious...overused...joke...
More specifically, the IE blog. While it's not exactly the mouthpiece of Microsoft PR, every development team is going to be biased toward their own product and show benchmarks that put their work in a positive light.
That said, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if IE9 is slightly more efficient than other browsers on Windows, since the IE devs have closer access to the OS than other teams, Safari brings a truckload of extra libraries to clone OS X, and Opera... is Opera.
Oh, and what idiot modded the parent "redundant"?
Use the HTML entity > to get >, < for <, and so on. Slashdot accepts most common HTML entities, but alas—not unicode.
Patents are supposed to cover implementations, not ideas. If I patented, say, a glue that worked in space, or at the bottom of the ocean, it wouldn't be "obvious" just because it's glue.
While the patent system is abused and some of the things "patented" are vague ideas that would apply to almost any implementation, there's no reason why a patent can't cover something which already exists in another environment.
Fortunately, patent terms haven't ballooned the way copyright terms have. Patents now cover up to 20 years from the first filing date (which can be many years before the patent is ultimately issued). In most industries that's pretty reasonable, but in software 10-20 years can be an eternity.
It seems like the best approach would be to change the patent term to whatever the length of a "generation" is for a particular industry, consulting experts in a given field to determine what that epoch may be. In automobiles, it might be twenty years. In software development, it might be two.
I agree the patent system is broken, and in the computer world it needs to have significantly shorter terms. But it's worth noting that many concepts (and the methods for implementing them), which seem "obvious" today due to their ubiquity, may not have been so 10 or 20 years ago.
Hell, many cultures never discovered the wheel, or would have developed much later if they hadn't been introduced to it by their neighbors.
Yes.
You are conveniently leaving out his other autobiography - I Am Spock.
That is... Contradictory... It is not... Logical... Mister Spock... Explain...