If you look at the last few years of common Windows exploits they have been deployed via bugs in 3'rd party applications, mainly Flash, Java and PDF. It's a user problem that they don't keep those applications up to date, but a system problem that keeping them up to date is too difficult for the average Joe.
Difficult is the wrong word here: cumbersome is what you're looking for.
They installed a lot of that stuff themselves, so it's not too difficult. But to have to remember what you have, to daily visit the various web sites to manually check whether there just might be an update available, that's cumbersome.
Without an automatic update mechanism (indeed preferably centralised, like most Linux distributions have) it's just not going to happen.
That's about the time OS-X was in development at Apple, not counting the time NeXT had spent on it already when Apple bought the company in 1997. The first release of OS-X was over four years later... and it took another few years and a few more releases before it was considered "good" by most
Your average Linux distro comes with plenty of software that is not GPL-licensed. This includes many licences that are compatible, others that may not be compatible with the GPL, including closed source software like Flash, W32-binaries to play movies in mplayer, and certain graphics card and other drivers.
Changes made to the Linux kernel and other GPL software must be shared back, indeed.
But that doesn't mean that all software in the system must be GPL licensed, and shared. Just like Android: open-source Linux kernel with partly open source and partly proprietary GUI.
You do realize that Jobs was the one who said "people don't know what they want"? Apple is the #1 perpetrator of dictating to users what they "should" want.
Not knowing the context of the quote, I interpret it differently.
People don't know what they want - because they don't know what's possible. And then Jobs went on to think about what's possible with tomorrow's technology, starting to design it today, so that when the technology comes available they can start building it.
There are many ways to design a laptop, a phone, and the software that runs it all. You may show some way to someone, and they go "oh, great, I want that!". But then you show another solution, one they didn't think of, maybe radically different, and they go again "oh, great, I want that!". You may very well conclude that people don't know what they want out of such a situation.
And so Jobs went on to figure out various ways to do stuff, and to design stuff, to find the best solution. And the best solution, that's what people want, of course.
Now whether Jobs' "best solution" is also your "best solution" is a matter of opinion, the excellent sales figures of Apple over the past decade or two do show that Jobs was doing something right there. And that what he thinks people should want, is what indeed many people want.
This kind of battery design (assuming it actually works) could be really useful.
The swapping-out part has to be solved (weight will be an issue when handling manually), but that's imho a matter of proper design, and is just a technical issue that can be solved.
The great thing of a battery like this is that the recharge problem is basically solved. No lengthy waits (swap out the batteries - can probably be done in a matter of minutes), no loss of capacity over the years (always a new battery), no massive spikes in electricity demand like supercapacitors would need for their quick recharge.
Of course building those batteries will need a lot of energy - after all, they're batteries, and should be storing a large amount of energy. That's the energy that was used for driving.
But the beauty of it is that it could easily be powered by renewables. A common problem of renewables is the unreliable short-term supply - cloud blocking the sun, wind suddenly increasing or decreasing, but over a longer time (weeks, months) the overall supply tends to be pretty predictable. Charging batteries - the traditional type at least - doesn't need constant current. They will charge when there is current, even if it's intermittent.
As this is aluminium, they will probably use some kind of electrolyses process to get the energy stored. These processes may need some redesign, but I'm quite sure it's possible to come up with some design that can handle varying power supply very well.
The existing gas stations can easily double as battery stations, too.
Charging stations are much harder because, as you say yourself, the electricity grid is not up to the extra loads (and probably the power plants neither - there is not that much extra generator capacity available).
The old battery will definitely have good recycling value - so you may discount part of the cost of materials there, as you're normally swapping them out. Just like with a gas cylinder for cooking gas (you only once pay a deposit for the cylinder, after that for the gas only).
What you did not add though, is the cost of the energy that is stored in those batteries. The energy those batteries provide comes from somewhere, and is certainly not free.
Honestly I wonder why people would want to turn this on to begin with. It's of no-ones business what I'm listening to, or whether I'm listening to anything at any time. And that has nothing to do with porn as such.
Pumps generally have a less varied workload - they usually have to do just one thing. Also they are based on old, well understood and highly mature technology that doesn't see double efficiency every few years.
By the way, my wifi router is about ten years old, and still working.
These storage buckets are presumably meant to be private, not public. So the private houses analogy is much better than the public restaurant analogy here.
The summary mentions a list of judges, so I assume they have volunteers for that. Which honestly doesn't surprise me too much, there are so many judges in the US, there must be some that find it interesting to host such a debate for whatever reason.
I think you nailed it there. After all God is the bright light in your life, isn't it? That alone should be proof enough.
Anyway it's all just a belief, and in the end the whole arguments will boil down to the question of whether there exists some omnipotent being (God, Allah, Yahweh, whatever you call it) or not.
As long as you belief in the existence of God, then the rest of the creation theory can be filled in quite easily. After all God is omnipotent, so nothing is too big for God to create. And if you don't believe in God, well then there are there all these cosmic observations and scientific theories that try to explain the history of the universe (with of course some huge hiatuses: what caused the Big Bang? And what is there out of our universe that allows it to expand? And what was there before the Big Bang?).
And who says God didn't just create all that together with the creation of our planet itself? If he can create a complete planet, a bit of microwave radiation should be just a side note.
Probably it will only prove that neither theory can be proven to judicial standards.
One version happened some 6000 years ago, the other some 14 bln years ago. It's quite impossible to find any evidence (by judicial standards) of either one.
And besides, I don't think they're mutually exclusive anyway. God in all his almighty powers and omnipresence and so probably just created the world some 6000 years ago, together with the whole universe and its history, making us believe it's much older than it really is. After all, we're talking about God here, and God can do anything.
That's a pretty normal way of saying it. Germany was their origin country; Europe is the rest of Europe. Post office will also work like that. One price to ship to someone in Germany; one price to ship to someone in EU.
In the mentioned situations I believe it's mostly the OS that's to blame, more so than the app.
If I were to develop an e-reader app, that reads a book from a file on disk, I would just open the file, and start reading the needed parts from it. Most modern OSes will then cache the file in RAM, or at least start reading ahead as much as possible, after all if the first bytes of a file are read, it's likely the following bytes will be read in the near future, and if not this memory can easily enough be overwritten by something else again. An app shouldn't even try to do this - it shouldn't try to fill up the memory - let the OS take care of that part. Resource management is an OS task, not a userland task.
An app should try to minimise direct resource use, that will generally speed up things overall. For example reading the whole e-book from disk and storing it in RAM will cause the process to grow big, and more likely to be killed to make space for other processes, so a next startup takes much longer. It growing so big also means more other processes have to get killed when the reader app is used, just to make space.
And yes I use "disk" here knowing full well that in a phone that's usually some kind of flash memory or SD card or whatever.
Maybe they start paying attention when it goes wrong. As in: someone 3D-prints their own gun, shoots it, and it explodes in their face. That is just bound to happen sooner or later, 3D printer material is just not meant for making guns out of - it's not just because that they're usually made out of metal. Maybe a design for light ammo, that someone scales up for bigger ammo, and kaboom, it takes of their hand.
I agree with you that for most uses a single-use gun will be good enough. I was mainly thinking of murder. During most hijacks and bank robberies the robber won't even fire their gun, but in that case a menacing looking, preferably real one, will do a lot better than something that looks like a toy.
Slashdot Mirror
If someone singles you out as target, you need more than just a patched up OS. A serious firewall would be a good start.
If you look at the last few years of common Windows exploits they have been deployed via bugs in 3'rd party applications, mainly Flash, Java and PDF. It's a user problem that they don't keep those applications up to date, but a system problem that keeping them up to date is too difficult for the average Joe.
Difficult is the wrong word here: cumbersome is what you're looking for.
They installed a lot of that stuff themselves, so it's not too difficult. But to have to remember what you have, to daily visit the various web sites to manually check whether there just might be an update available, that's cumbersome.
Without an automatic update mechanism (indeed preferably centralised, like most Linux distributions have) it's just not going to happen.
This makes me wonder why so many web sites will try to infect your computer. And I am assuming the webmaster of those sites doesn't intend to do this.
Are all those web servers infected? If so, how come they're not patched properly?
Or is there another route - like advertisements - that get the malware infection done? In which case ABP should do the job.
That's about the time OS-X was in development at Apple, not counting the time NeXT had spent on it already when Apple bought the company in 1997. The first release of OS-X was over four years later... and it took another few years and a few more releases before it was considered "good" by most
Your average Linux distro comes with plenty of software that is not GPL-licensed. This includes many licences that are compatible, others that may not be compatible with the GPL, including closed source software like Flash, W32-binaries to play movies in mplayer, and certain graphics card and other drivers.
Changes made to the Linux kernel and other GPL software must be shared back, indeed.
But that doesn't mean that all software in the system must be GPL licensed, and shared. Just like Android: open-source Linux kernel with partly open source and partly proprietary GUI.
You do realize that Jobs was the one who said "people don't know what they want"? Apple is the #1 perpetrator of dictating to users what they "should" want.
Not knowing the context of the quote, I interpret it differently.
People don't know what they want - because they don't know what's possible. And then Jobs went on to think about what's possible with tomorrow's technology, starting to design it today, so that when the technology comes available they can start building it.
There are many ways to design a laptop, a phone, and the software that runs it all. You may show some way to someone, and they go "oh, great, I want that!". But then you show another solution, one they didn't think of, maybe radically different, and they go again "oh, great, I want that!". You may very well conclude that people don't know what they want out of such a situation.
And so Jobs went on to figure out various ways to do stuff, and to design stuff, to find the best solution. And the best solution, that's what people want, of course.
Now whether Jobs' "best solution" is also your "best solution" is a matter of opinion, the excellent sales figures of Apple over the past decade or two do show that Jobs was doing something right there. And that what he thinks people should want, is what indeed many people want.
This kind of battery design (assuming it actually works) could be really useful.
The swapping-out part has to be solved (weight will be an issue when handling manually), but that's imho a matter of proper design, and is just a technical issue that can be solved.
The great thing of a battery like this is that the recharge problem is basically solved. No lengthy waits (swap out the batteries - can probably be done in a matter of minutes), no loss of capacity over the years (always a new battery), no massive spikes in electricity demand like supercapacitors would need for their quick recharge.
Get a bigger water tank, and automatic refill system. Or maybe I'm thinking too simple now?
Of course building those batteries will need a lot of energy - after all, they're batteries, and should be storing a large amount of energy. That's the energy that was used for driving.
But the beauty of it is that it could easily be powered by renewables. A common problem of renewables is the unreliable short-term supply - cloud blocking the sun, wind suddenly increasing or decreasing, but over a longer time (weeks, months) the overall supply tends to be pretty predictable. Charging batteries - the traditional type at least - doesn't need constant current. They will charge when there is current, even if it's intermittent.
As this is aluminium, they will probably use some kind of electrolyses process to get the energy stored. These processes may need some redesign, but I'm quite sure it's possible to come up with some design that can handle varying power supply very well.
The existing gas stations can easily double as battery stations, too.
Charging stations are much harder because, as you say yourself, the electricity grid is not up to the extra loads (and probably the power plants neither - there is not that much extra generator capacity available).
The old battery will definitely have good recycling value - so you may discount part of the cost of materials there, as you're normally swapping them out. Just like with a gas cylinder for cooking gas (you only once pay a deposit for the cylinder, after that for the gas only).
What you did not add though, is the cost of the energy that is stored in those batteries. The energy those batteries provide comes from somewhere, and is certainly not free.
And that is entirely true as well.
Honestly I wonder why people would want to turn this on to begin with. It's of no-ones business what I'm listening to, or whether I'm listening to anything at any time. And that has nothing to do with porn as such.
RTFA is easier, it's mentioned there as well. But at least you do keep up a good /. tradition by not RTFA.
Pumps generally have a less varied workload - they usually have to do just one thing. Also they are based on old, well understood and highly mature technology that doesn't see double efficiency every few years.
By the way, my wifi router is about ten years old, and still working.
These storage buckets are presumably meant to be private, not public. So the private houses analogy is much better than the public restaurant analogy here.
The summary mentions a list of judges, so I assume they have volunteers for that. Which honestly doesn't surprise me too much, there are so many judges in the US, there must be some that find it interesting to host such a debate for whatever reason.
I think you nailed it there. After all God is the bright light in your life, isn't it? That alone should be proof enough.
Anyway it's all just a belief, and in the end the whole arguments will boil down to the question of whether there exists some omnipotent being (God, Allah, Yahweh, whatever you call it) or not.
As long as you belief in the existence of God, then the rest of the creation theory can be filled in quite easily. After all God is omnipotent, so nothing is too big for God to create. And if you don't believe in God, well then there are there all these cosmic observations and scientific theories that try to explain the history of the universe (with of course some huge hiatuses: what caused the Big Bang? And what is there out of our universe that allows it to expand? And what was there before the Big Bang?).
You really underestimate the power of God. All those things are child's play for any self-respecting God.
And who says God didn't just create all that together with the creation of our planet itself? If he can create a complete planet, a bit of microwave radiation should be just a side note.
Probably it will only prove that neither theory can be proven to judicial standards.
One version happened some 6000 years ago, the other some 14 bln years ago. It's quite impossible to find any evidence (by judicial standards) of either one.
And besides, I don't think they're mutually exclusive anyway. God in all his almighty powers and omnipresence and so probably just created the world some 6000 years ago, together with the whole universe and its history, making us believe it's much older than it really is. After all, we're talking about God here, and God can do anything.
That's a pretty normal way of saying it. Germany was their origin country; Europe is the rest of Europe. Post office will also work like that. One price to ship to someone in Germany; one price to ship to someone in EU.
In the mentioned situations I believe it's mostly the OS that's to blame, more so than the app.
If I were to develop an e-reader app, that reads a book from a file on disk, I would just open the file, and start reading the needed parts from it. Most modern OSes will then cache the file in RAM, or at least start reading ahead as much as possible, after all if the first bytes of a file are read, it's likely the following bytes will be read in the near future, and if not this memory can easily enough be overwritten by something else again. An app shouldn't even try to do this - it shouldn't try to fill up the memory - let the OS take care of that part. Resource management is an OS task, not a userland task.
An app should try to minimise direct resource use, that will generally speed up things overall. For example reading the whole e-book from disk and storing it in RAM will cause the process to grow big, and more likely to be killed to make space for other processes, so a next startup takes much longer. It growing so big also means more other processes have to get killed when the reader app is used, just to make space.
And yes I use "disk" here knowing full well that in a phone that's usually some kind of flash memory or SD card or whatever.
It even doesn't make it any easier, does it?
Maybe they start paying attention when it goes wrong. As in: someone 3D-prints their own gun, shoots it, and it explodes in their face. That is just bound to happen sooner or later, 3D printer material is just not meant for making guns out of - it's not just because that they're usually made out of metal. Maybe a design for light ammo, that someone scales up for bigger ammo, and kaboom, it takes of their hand.
I agree with you that for most uses a single-use gun will be good enough. I was mainly thinking of murder. During most hijacks and bank robberies the robber won't even fire their gun, but in that case a menacing looking, preferably real one, will do a lot better than something that looks like a toy.