One thing I've always noted about TMBG is that they don't appear to ever sell out or take direction from anyone. Even when they have commercial tie-ins (malcom, mickey mouse clubhouse) it's still obviously TMBG-originated material.
When somebody at FermiLab tells you that gravity accelerates objects at 9.8 m/s^2 and uses this to calculate the trajectory of a ball very accurately, you believe them, because you can see this, and they can do it over and over and over.
but why? why does it do this? whatever your answer is, i ask "why?" again. we don't have a fundamental answer for "why?"
i have seen statistics for similar events in the past. when 911 offices are at capacity, and people can't get through, it's a send-end-send-end scenario...people don't give up, and one call turns into ten calls turns into 50 calls.
the call volume doesn't make sense to you because not all the facts are presented.
you will need 1 GSM phone, another phone to call it, a USB 2 external hard drive, your computer, and a large file.
After attaching the USB-2 cable between your HD and computer, place the GSM phone on or near the cable. I have had success within one or two feet, but for the purposes of your first run, placing the phone on the cable itself is the most likely way to see results.
begin the transfer of the large file.
call the GSM phone.
if the GSM phone receives the call while the file is transferring, the drive should crash. i've encountered blue screens from this experiment in the past.
my point is that when some opinions are tarnished by faulty research *all* opinions are suspect. maybe he can link you to a journal calling for 30-a-day vaccinations, or maybe it's 5.
i recall that when my children were very young, they wanted to run 2 or 3 vaccinations in parallel. we spaced them out, and nothing appeared to go wrong. was our behavior altered by this? yes, it was. was it bad or wrong? you can't tell me, scientists don't fully know, there's no proof anywhere that spacing out vaccinations is a bad idea. no proof. lots of writing and opinion, no real true proof.
do i need peer-reviewing to validate my opinions? no.
GPs point is valid - popular opinion of science is hurt by this kind of a)behavior in the scientific community and b)revelation of it.
please link to any peer-reviewed science journal which you can prove isn't an 'Elaborate Fraud'.
no matter how you slice it, fraudulent studies don't prove or disprove anything, but they hurt the entire process by calling everything other study on the matter into question as well.
rf engineers don't like these boosters because they extend signals in unpredictable/uncontrollable ways.
if a cell site is propagating signal incorrectly, it can be fixed via down-tilt, power-stepping, or a host of internal-to-the-system parameters.
however, if a cell site is propagating signal just fine, but some joe is extending its signal five miles beyond its expected range, and another joe is pulling from him another two miles away, it becomes nearly impossible to predict how adjustments will affect the rest of the network.
certainly, the corporations want to make money, and can, selling pre-configured in-house repeaters, but letting anybody extend a LICENSED signal on their own, without a license is just asking for trouble.
i would be even less surprised if some of the jailbreakers had insider information to help them unlock the apple devices. as well thought out as apple's info-release schedules are (sanctioned leaks on upcoming products?) it totally makes sense for them to have two versions of the ipad on the market:
1, typical user experience, customer buys it and it does what it says it will
2, enhanced user experience, customer buys it and hacks it to do something else
in either case, a customer buys it, and in the relatively small second subset, the group who would normally curse the company out and hold off from buying the device because it's 'crippled' actually gives apple money.
of course it was quickly broken, it's part of the dance.
what if your external verifier was hardware based? build a little device with hardened rom and bios, give it a usb interface, or maybe even something proprietary - let the detection take place off-board.
Slashdot Mirror
i'm building an ER in a zeppelin.
this both gives me the chills, and doesn't.
no, *that's* what they want you to think.
Say what they mean, mean what they say.
One thing I've always noted about TMBG is that they don't appear to ever sell out or take direction from anyone. Even when they have commercial tie-ins (malcom, mickey mouse clubhouse) it's still obviously TMBG-originated material.
This interview was no different.
that video validated every single nightmare i've ever had
if the dolphins are smart enough to understand us, they'll play dumb.
When somebody at FermiLab tells you that gravity accelerates objects at 9.8 m/s^2 and uses this to calculate the trajectory of a ball very accurately, you believe them, because you can see this, and they can do it over and over and over.
but why? why does it do this? whatever your answer is, i ask "why?" again. we don't have a fundamental answer for "why?"
i have seen statistics for similar events in the past. when 911 offices are at capacity, and people can't get through, it's a send-end-send-end scenario...people don't give up, and one call turns into ten calls turns into 50 calls.
the call volume doesn't make sense to you because not all the facts are presented.
tfa is worded poorly, this is a smaller radio and base-station, not a smaller tower.
the only point i'm making is that this *can* happen, given the right circumstances.
great home experiment:
you will need 1 GSM phone, another phone to call it, a USB 2 external hard drive, your computer, and a large file.
After attaching the USB-2 cable between your HD and computer, place the GSM phone on or near the cable. I have had success within one or two feet, but for the purposes of your first run, placing the phone on the cable itself is the most likely way to see results.
begin the transfer of the large file.
call the GSM phone.
if the GSM phone receives the call while the file is transferring, the drive should crash. i've encountered blue screens from this experiment in the past.
GP was hyperbolic, not troll.
my point is that when some opinions are tarnished by faulty research *all* opinions are suspect. maybe he can link you to a journal calling for 30-a-day vaccinations, or maybe it's 5.
i recall that when my children were very young, they wanted to run 2 or 3 vaccinations in parallel. we spaced them out, and nothing appeared to go wrong. was our behavior altered by this? yes, it was. was it bad or wrong? you can't tell me, scientists don't fully know, there's no proof anywhere that spacing out vaccinations is a bad idea. no proof. lots of writing and opinion, no real true proof.
do i need peer-reviewing to validate my opinions? no.
GPs point is valid - popular opinion of science is hurt by this kind of a)behavior in the scientific community and b)revelation of it.
please link to any peer-reviewed science journal which you can prove isn't an 'Elaborate Fraud'.
no matter how you slice it, fraudulent studies don't prove or disprove anything, but they hurt the entire process by calling everything other study on the matter into question as well.
a clarifying point - a passive antenna on a car or house is not a booster - the devices in question take the signal in, amplify it, and retransmit it.
rf engineers don't like these boosters because they extend signals in unpredictable/uncontrollable ways.
if a cell site is propagating signal incorrectly, it can be fixed via down-tilt, power-stepping, or a host of internal-to-the-system parameters.
however, if a cell site is propagating signal just fine, but some joe is extending its signal five miles beyond its expected range, and another joe is pulling from him another two miles away, it becomes nearly impossible to predict how adjustments will affect the rest of the network.
certainly, the corporations want to make money, and can, selling pre-configured in-house repeaters, but letting anybody extend a LICENSED signal on their own, without a license is just asking for trouble.
rewriting your own articles isn't classified as stealing.
if you resubmit your own work, it's not plagiarism.
if i wanted a pseudo-3d bubble effect, i'd buy a tv with a huge bulging CRT.
I'll believe it when I don't see it.
i would be even less surprised if some of the jailbreakers had insider information to help them unlock the apple devices. as well thought out as apple's info-release schedules are (sanctioned leaks on upcoming products?) it totally makes sense for them to have two versions of the ipad on the market:
1, typical user experience, customer buys it and it does what it says it will
2, enhanced user experience, customer buys it and hacks it to do something else
in either case, a customer buys it, and in the relatively small second subset, the group who would normally curse the company out and hold off from buying the device because it's 'crippled' actually gives apple money.
of course it was quickly broken, it's part of the dance.
this would lead to great practical jokery when two webcam feeds get swapped. hey, that's not what i'm looking at! whoa, whoa, whoa!
what if your external verifier was hardware based? build a little device with hardened rom and bios, give it a usb interface, or maybe even something proprietary - let the detection take place off-board.
is there some written law that holds people to following robots.txt? if not, how is it even possible to call it a weakness?
tell Tchaikovsky the news.
put a hydrogen-atom-splitter on the bow of the ship, they'll just get cut in half and fall out of the way.