I'm not sure why it would be sad that nerds don't know a lot about amateur radio. The most interesting thing about shortwave radio and ham radios was opening up the opportunity to tune into foreign broadcasts and communicate with people who were far away. There is a system in place that does those things far more efficiently now. Its called the internet.
People wax eloquent about dying technologies, but technologies die for a reason. We no longer have large groups of people who know how to repair steam engines, service vacuum tube radios, take care of horses and the list can go on. The reason is there are far more relevant things to learn and know. I don't mourn the loss of knowledge about properly attending to a horse who has a sliver lodged in its foot on the road, and I don't really mourn the loss of amateur radio enthusiasts either.
Not necessarily. Each camera has specific ways to turn Raw images into processed jpegs. You will notice converters that turn RAW images into jpegs always have a list of cameras their converters work on. This is because RAW images are unique to each type of camera. So (although I'm not 100% sure about this) it may still be true even if you take RAW pictures.
That being said, most people don't take RAW pictures in the first place, so this technique is probably still very useful. Even if it doesn't work with pictures processed from RAW images after being taken out of the camera.
When IPv4 doesn't work any more, then you will see more IPv6. Some people plan ahead, and are implementing IPv4, some people deal with network failures as they go along instead, and they will adopt IPv6 when it becomes necessary. This is largely how we got the internet as well. Things work until they don't. We change things when making them work using old ways is harder than changing to new ways.
As many people have said, unless this guy has a really nice way of improving the internet that is easy for people to do, he isn't really saying anything useful.
You could refer to Romans 8, where it talks about the law of sin and death (Old Testament) and the new freedom you have in accepting Jesus as Savior.
Here is a handy link of the passage:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208;&version=31;
Or you could read Acts, and find where Peter discovers gentiles can be saved (acts 4) and then read Acts 15, where it is said that gentiles do not need to follow the law of the old Testament to be saved. (Just put in acts 4 or acts 15 in the same link)
Or you could read Galations 2 where it talks about a specific application of not being under the law anymore.
This concept is discussed all over the New Testament.
Judging from what I read in the article, this new OS model seems at least 10 years away. I anticipate Microsoft offering this in addition to its normal OS's, probably focusing on businesses first who would have less of a problem with a subscription model of software purchasing.
What do other slashdotters think about when we will see something like this?
There have been 294 consecutive safe solid fuel rocket launches since the O-Ring problem with the Challenger. The proposed Jupiter launcher uses both solid and liquid fuel rockets, the Solid rockets boosting the initial stage and then separating. They address the solid fuel rockets don't stop issue by providing systems that detach the solid rockets from the launch vehicle in an emergency, and detaching the launch capsule from the rest of the launch vehicle and parachuting it down.
I'm not sure you read my post beyond just trying to spew vitriol. How is the fact a solid rocket can't stop inherently more dangerous if you engineer the launch vehicle to take that into account?
Solid fuel launches with the shuttle seem fine from a safety standpoint. The one danger that did in a shuttle (falling Ice) came from the liquid oxygen tank, no the solid fuel. The other failure was of an O-ring connecting the booster to the liquid fuel tank. That failure was addressed.
The falling ice problem is addressed by putting the cargo above the boosters. The O-ring has already been addressed. So the new proposal seems even safer than the shuttle. I fail to see how solid fuel rockets are inherently more dangerous than liquid fuel ones.
Solid fuel rockets can't stop, and they have to be carefully made so there isn't any open pockets of no fuel or they explode. But if you carefully make them (Nasa has) and engineer the launch system to take into account the thing won't turn off (Nasa has), it is a great system.
Liquid Fuel can be throttled or turned off, but requires a very complex (read point of failure possibility) pump system to work properly. That has its drawbacks as well. In summary Liquid Fuel and Solid Fuel have different strengths and weaknesses, and when the vehicle is engineered to handle them, it shouldn't exclude either from being used the human passengers.
The beauty of this proposal is that even if it is never used, it will pressure the ares developers to do even better. Competing designs tend to improve end products.
Why is it a disease? I like bananas. Why should I not eat bananas? I understand that you want everyone to live according to your standards and morality, but really, why should I not eat bananas?
At the end of the 19th century, with the help of the US government, food companies like Dole and Chiquita helped create and prop up "banana republics" in latin america, which were in fact figurehead dictatorships geared towards producing raw materials and crops for US consumption, like bananas. In fact, before that time, the #1 most popular fruit in the US was the apple, but thanks to these companies, they turned that part of our culture on it's head and created a massive campaign to make the banana #1, using the pricing power of cheap bananas and government influence to steamroll a fruit that was, and still is, produced locally by US farmers.
The reason why they did this is not because bananas are better tasting or better for you, but because they were cheaper than local produce when you factor in highly cheap labor of the impoverished populace and favorable political conditions gained by less than ethical means.
And to be honest, Apples taste better than bananas. An apple is more durable, and can be made into more things, and supports your local economy .
This is absolutely bonkers. My wife's family lives in Wisconsin. You want them to survive on local produce over the winter? You want them to hoard dry goods so they can eat 6 months out of the year? Not to mention the exciting selection of nutritional deficits that most of the world suffered from before cheap year round fresh food selections. Really, this type of judgmental viewpoint bothers me so much. I really see your "EAT THIS WAY OR YOU HAVE A DISEASE!" moralism as no different from right wingers who think homosexuality is a disease.
You'd be surprised the number of vegatables that can be grown late into the fall season. In wisconsin, you don't exactly have to grow the vegetables near Madison, but there are tons of places within the continental US where you can get produce shipped north. You can cross the US from top to bottom by train or 18 wheeler in two days without trying very hard, And we ship things more fragile than fruit by truck these days.
You are taking the metaphor the GP is making way too far. Those who say "homosexuality is a disease" come from an illogical and bigoted stance about the inequality of "races" when in fact there's nothing biological to suggest one "race" is inferior to the other. On the other hand, to play devils advocate, not all fruits are created equal. Also, see my entry above about how the banana became popular by government and big business influence. There's some good reasons why you can be negative about this fruit.
Are you just making this up as you go along? Watching people "line up" for bananas in a supermarket? Food scarcity hasn't exactly been a problem in America in a number of years, I would be very interested in where you've seen people "line up" to get bananas, while bypassing all other fruits.
Food scarcity isn't a problem, but living in the middle and not on the more populated coasts, perhaps you simply don't see that sometimes the bananas on the shelves get sold out and they haven't restocked the shelves yet. I've seen that plenty of times. Then some people have to wait. It particularly happens in less affluent areas with high population density. Doesn't happen every day, but it's simply a matter of shelf space not food scarcity.
Good for you! We should all be more like you, thanks for holding yourself out there as an example of the Right Way to live!
You're welcome. Perhaps I can show you how to live better by trying to reduce your carbon footprint. After all, buying product locally as well as reducing my carbon footprint has positive impacts on my fellow human beings that I should be concerned with. Or would you rather just let your fellow man slip on a banana peel, break his neck, lose his job and his life savings and say "tough shit I don't care
So True. Apple can't sell computers to save its life. No one wants to buy them. They can't play crysis so they are garbage. Serious artists always refuse to use Apples because they know this in their hearts.
Can I throw a reality check into these assertions? There is NO laptop you can buy for under $2000 that will play crysis. A few months ago there were no laptops that could play Crysis realistically at all. As to why a "Serious Artist" would need more than a Mac can provide I am confused.
The professional photographers and editors I work with tend to prefer the MacBook Pros. And when they really need the horsepower they tend to prefer the Mac Pro. Sure, other computers are used and preferred by some, but the Mac Pro has plenty of horsepower for anything a single workstation would be used for.
Except that this announcement reveals NOTHING about how Apple competes with Dell. People who buy high-end Dells do not do so in the retail environment. The Dell retail stores for the most part sell low end computers. Savvy buyers know if you go online, you can get exactly what you want instead of whats in stock.
I remember when RDRAM was going to take over
on
DDR3 RAM Explained
·
· Score: 1
As so many people have said, the price premium over ddr ram and the lack of a performance enhancement makes DDR3 not be appealing to most people. I can enhance my computer much more cheaply by stuffing more ram in it, getting a faster processor, or getting a faster hard drive. I might even spring for a better monitor before I spend the extra money on a 5% performance increase. And in a lot of cases, because of the slower latency, DDR3 can be slower than DDR2 ram.
Propaganda has always been part of war efforts. And they will always be part of a war effort. The government needs to get out their viewpoint of what is going on. I'm not sure why this is surprising to anyone here.
What I am curious about is where people think there is some overwhelmingly positive coverage of the military? I sure haven't seen it anywhere.
I think you fail to understand economics or business at any level. Why does drilling for oil prevent us from developing alternative sources? Isn't it possible to do both? Let's say we have one company drill for oil, and another develop alternative energy. Isn't that OK, or do we really need to put all our eggs in one "drill for oil" or "develop alternative energy" basket?
For the foreseeable future, it is vital we have access to oil, as our national defense depends on it. Every jet, tank and boat runs on it (except the nuclear ones). That alone is a good reason to develop national oil reserves.
Wow, Its cool how you know exactly what streets will be like in 50 years (They will be made out of dirt) AND that electricity will be readily available, yet no fuels to alternatively power vehicles. Particularly shocking to me is that they will not be able to use concrete to pave roads. They will HAVE to resort to dirt roads in the future.
I will predict you are 100% wrong. That in 50 years we will have roads paved with something and cars will be run on something other than pure electricity. Heck, even the ROMANS didn't use dirt roads when they could avoid it. And that was 19 centuries before asphalt.
Powerful - to you, apparently the holy grail of powerful is opening a 4 GB text file. To others, the ability to use Photoshop, Microsoft Office, and other programs is powerful. There is nothing in Linux I can't do on my Apple computer, and precious little I can't do on my windows XP box.
Stable - I've had Windows XP boxes that were as stable as my Linux boxes. Curiously my least stable computers are the one that run OS X. It seems to depend more on hardware and what types of software you use.
Simple - I fail to see how installing Linux is any easier than OS x or Windows XP. THey all are really easy.
Inexpensive - Linux itself is free, but if you need support, or if you need to accomplish certain tasks, then Linux can get as expensive as any other OS.
It all boils down to what you are trying to do. I use Windows XP, Windows Vista, OS X, and Linux (I prefer Debian and try to avoid the GUI since I use my linux boxes for extremely specialized tasks like web filtering or caching or web serving). Each OS has its place.
I'm not that worried about this for 2 reasons: Hackers usually want something that is easily available to hack. These pacemakers are not so common as to be everywhere and easy to access. It would take some work to find and set up a situation where you can hack a pacemaker. The second reason is there are a lot easier ways to kill people than this. If someone goes through this much effort to kill you, they could have done it any number of different ways already. So if you die this way, think of it as living longer than you would have otherwise.
All of your questions are answered here: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/merrit01.html If you have something specific to ask, I'd be very happy to answer you specifically with text. But if all you have is links and second-hand objections, I'll answer with links.
Really, 2 Contradictory Genesis stories? Funny because when I read Genesis 1, I see a brief summary verse in Genesis 1:1 and then Genesis goes into a more detailed description of the actual events. Whether you believe the story as true or not is up to your beliefs and world view, but stop this silly accusation of biblical contradictions. There really are no contradictions in the Bible that I have found substantiated. Feel free to try to prove me wrong on that.
Oh and you excellent and brief treatment of the subject really offers up no proof of what you claim in your post. When you claim something, please try to be accurate.
So a school district is paying less than.5 percent of its budget on the operating system on all of its computers and you don't think this is sustainable? I would disagree with you there. That seems perfectly sustainable. Perhaps its not the best use of its budget in your opinion, but it doesn't stretch the imagination in any way that I can see. If you combine that with the idea that they are most likely also paying for Microsoft Office in addition to the OS, that seems very reasonable. How much would you have to pay to have a team of people support the district and keep Linux working properly in an office environment? I would be willing to bet the costs are very close to a wash, if not then they balance towards Microsoft at this point in time.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure why it would be sad that nerds don't know a lot about amateur radio. The most interesting thing about shortwave radio and ham radios was opening up the opportunity to tune into foreign broadcasts and communicate with people who were far away. There is a system in place that does those things far more efficiently now. Its called the internet.
People wax eloquent about dying technologies, but technologies die for a reason. We no longer have large groups of people who know how to repair steam engines, service vacuum tube radios, take care of horses and the list can go on. The reason is there are far more relevant things to learn and know. I don't mourn the loss of knowledge about properly attending to a horse who has a sliver lodged in its foot on the road, and I don't really mourn the loss of amateur radio enthusiasts either.
Not necessarily. Each camera has specific ways to turn Raw images into processed jpegs. You will notice converters that turn RAW images into jpegs always have a list of cameras their converters work on. This is because RAW images are unique to each type of camera. So (although I'm not 100% sure about this) it may still be true even if you take RAW pictures. That being said, most people don't take RAW pictures in the first place, so this technique is probably still very useful. Even if it doesn't work with pictures processed from RAW images after being taken out of the camera.
I meant to say some plan ahead, and are implementing IPv6, ah well...
When IPv4 doesn't work any more, then you will see more IPv6. Some people plan ahead, and are implementing IPv4, some people deal with network failures as they go along instead, and they will adopt IPv6 when it becomes necessary. This is largely how we got the internet as well. Things work until they don't. We change things when making them work using old ways is harder than changing to new ways.
As many people have said, unless this guy has a really nice way of improving the internet that is easy for people to do, he isn't really saying anything useful.
You could refer to Romans 8, where it talks about the law of sin and death (Old Testament) and the new freedom you have in accepting Jesus as Savior. Here is a handy link of the passage: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%208;&version=31; Or you could read Acts, and find where Peter discovers gentiles can be saved (acts 4) and then read Acts 15, where it is said that gentiles do not need to follow the law of the old Testament to be saved. (Just put in acts 4 or acts 15 in the same link) Or you could read Galations 2 where it talks about a specific application of not being under the law anymore. This concept is discussed all over the New Testament.
I think you just helped Valve come up with some concepts for Portal2. That would add a bunch of fun to the game.
Judging from what I read in the article, this new OS model seems at least 10 years away. I anticipate Microsoft offering this in addition to its normal OS's, probably focusing on businesses first who would have less of a problem with a subscription model of software purchasing.
What do other slashdotters think about when we will see something like this?
Out of curiosity, what do you think about the project Jupiter proposal some rocket scientists have proposed instead of Ares?
There have been 294 consecutive safe solid fuel rocket launches since the O-Ring problem with the Challenger. The proposed Jupiter launcher uses both solid and liquid fuel rockets, the Solid rockets boosting the initial stage and then separating. They address the solid fuel rockets don't stop issue by providing systems that detach the solid rockets from the launch vehicle in an emergency, and detaching the launch capsule from the rest of the launch vehicle and parachuting it down.
I'm not sure you read my post beyond just trying to spew vitriol. How is the fact a solid rocket can't stop inherently more dangerous if you engineer the launch vehicle to take that into account?
Solid fuel launches with the shuttle seem fine from a safety standpoint. The one danger that did in a shuttle (falling Ice) came from the liquid oxygen tank, no the solid fuel. The other failure was of an O-ring connecting the booster to the liquid fuel tank. That failure was addressed.
The falling ice problem is addressed by putting the cargo above the boosters. The O-ring has already been addressed. So the new proposal seems even safer than the shuttle. I fail to see how solid fuel rockets are inherently more dangerous than liquid fuel ones.
Solid fuel rockets can't stop, and they have to be carefully made so there isn't any open pockets of no fuel or they explode. But if you carefully make them (Nasa has) and engineer the launch system to take into account the thing won't turn off (Nasa has), it is a great system. Liquid Fuel can be throttled or turned off, but requires a very complex (read point of failure possibility) pump system to work properly. That has its drawbacks as well. In summary Liquid Fuel and Solid Fuel have different strengths and weaknesses, and when the vehicle is engineered to handle them, it shouldn't exclude either from being used the human passengers.
The beauty of this proposal is that even if it is never used, it will pressure the ares developers to do even better. Competing designs tend to improve end products.
So it seems China is trying to become Britain.
Why is it a disease? I like bananas. Why should I not eat bananas? I understand that you want everyone to live according to your standards and morality, but really, why should I not eat bananas? At the end of the 19th century, with the help of the US government, food companies like Dole and Chiquita helped create and prop up "banana republics" in latin america, which were in fact figurehead dictatorships geared towards producing raw materials and crops for US consumption, like bananas. In fact, before that time, the #1 most popular fruit in the US was the apple, but thanks to these companies, they turned that part of our culture on it's head and created a massive campaign to make the banana #1, using the pricing power of cheap bananas and government influence to steamroll a fruit that was, and still is, produced locally by US farmers. The reason why they did this is not because bananas are better tasting or better for you, but because they were cheaper than local produce when you factor in highly cheap labor of the impoverished populace and favorable political conditions gained by less than ethical means. And to be honest, Apples taste better than bananas. An apple is more durable, and can be made into more things, and supports your local economy . This is absolutely bonkers. My wife's family lives in Wisconsin. You want them to survive on local produce over the winter? You want them to hoard dry goods so they can eat 6 months out of the year? Not to mention the exciting selection of nutritional deficits that most of the world suffered from before cheap year round fresh food selections. Really, this type of judgmental viewpoint bothers me so much. I really see your "EAT THIS WAY OR YOU HAVE A DISEASE!" moralism as no different from right wingers who think homosexuality is a disease. You'd be surprised the number of vegatables that can be grown late into the fall season. In wisconsin, you don't exactly have to grow the vegetables near Madison, but there are tons of places within the continental US where you can get produce shipped north. You can cross the US from top to bottom by train or 18 wheeler in two days without trying very hard, And we ship things more fragile than fruit by truck these days. You are taking the metaphor the GP is making way too far. Those who say "homosexuality is a disease" come from an illogical and bigoted stance about the inequality of "races" when in fact there's nothing biological to suggest one "race" is inferior to the other. On the other hand, to play devils advocate, not all fruits are created equal. Also, see my entry above about how the banana became popular by government and big business influence. There's some good reasons why you can be negative about this fruit. Are you just making this up as you go along? Watching people "line up" for bananas in a supermarket? Food scarcity hasn't exactly been a problem in America in a number of years, I would be very interested in where you've seen people "line up" to get bananas, while bypassing all other fruits. Food scarcity isn't a problem, but living in the middle and not on the more populated coasts, perhaps you simply don't see that sometimes the bananas on the shelves get sold out and they haven't restocked the shelves yet. I've seen that plenty of times. Then some people have to wait. It particularly happens in less affluent areas with high population density. Doesn't happen every day, but it's simply a matter of shelf space not food scarcity. Good for you! We should all be more like you, thanks for holding yourself out there as an example of the Right Way to live! You're welcome. Perhaps I can show you how to live better by trying to reduce your carbon footprint. After all, buying product locally as well as reducing my carbon footprint has positive impacts on my fellow human beings that I should be concerned with. Or would you rather just let your fellow man slip on a banana peel, break his neck, lose his job and his life savings and say "tough shit I don't care
So True. Apple can't sell computers to save its life. No one wants to buy them. They can't play crysis so they are garbage. Serious artists always refuse to use Apples because they know this in their hearts.
Can I throw a reality check into these assertions? There is NO laptop you can buy for under $2000 that will play crysis. A few months ago there were no laptops that could play Crysis realistically at all. As to why a "Serious Artist" would need more than a Mac can provide I am confused.
The professional photographers and editors I work with tend to prefer the MacBook Pros. And when they really need the horsepower they tend to prefer the Mac Pro. Sure, other computers are used and preferred by some, but the Mac Pro has plenty of horsepower for anything a single workstation would be used for.
Except that this announcement reveals NOTHING about how Apple competes with Dell. People who buy high-end Dells do not do so in the retail environment. The Dell retail stores for the most part sell low end computers. Savvy buyers know if you go online, you can get exactly what you want instead of whats in stock.
As so many people have said, the price premium over ddr ram and the lack of a performance enhancement makes DDR3 not be appealing to most people. I can enhance my computer much more cheaply by stuffing more ram in it, getting a faster processor, or getting a faster hard drive. I might even spring for a better monitor before I spend the extra money on a 5% performance increase. And in a lot of cases, because of the slower latency, DDR3 can be slower than DDR2 ram.
Propaganda has always been part of war efforts. And they will always be part of a war effort. The government needs to get out their viewpoint of what is going on. I'm not sure why this is surprising to anyone here.
What I am curious about is where people think there is some overwhelmingly positive coverage of the military? I sure haven't seen it anywhere.
I think you fail to understand economics or business at any level. Why does drilling for oil prevent us from developing alternative sources? Isn't it possible to do both? Let's say we have one company drill for oil, and another develop alternative energy. Isn't that OK, or do we really need to put all our eggs in one "drill for oil" or "develop alternative energy" basket?
For the foreseeable future, it is vital we have access to oil, as our national defense depends on it. Every jet, tank and boat runs on it (except the nuclear ones). That alone is a good reason to develop national oil reserves.
Wow, Its cool how you know exactly what streets will be like in 50 years (They will be made out of dirt) AND that electricity will be readily available, yet no fuels to alternatively power vehicles. Particularly shocking to me is that they will not be able to use concrete to pave roads. They will HAVE to resort to dirt roads in the future.
I will predict you are 100% wrong. That in 50 years we will have roads paved with something and cars will be run on something other than pure electricity. Heck, even the ROMANS didn't use dirt roads when they could avoid it. And that was 19 centuries before asphalt.
Powerful - to you, apparently the holy grail of powerful is opening a 4 GB text file. To others, the ability to use Photoshop, Microsoft Office, and other programs is powerful. There is nothing in Linux I can't do on my Apple computer, and precious little I can't do on my windows XP box. Stable - I've had Windows XP boxes that were as stable as my Linux boxes. Curiously my least stable computers are the one that run OS X. It seems to depend more on hardware and what types of software you use.
Simple - I fail to see how installing Linux is any easier than OS x or Windows XP. THey all are really easy.
Inexpensive - Linux itself is free, but if you need support, or if you need to accomplish certain tasks, then Linux can get as expensive as any other OS.
It all boils down to what you are trying to do. I use Windows XP, Windows Vista, OS X, and Linux (I prefer Debian and try to avoid the GUI since I use my linux boxes for extremely specialized tasks like web filtering or caching or web serving). Each OS has its place.
I'm not that worried about this for 2 reasons: Hackers usually want something that is easily available to hack. These pacemakers are not so common as to be everywhere and easy to access. It would take some work to find and set up a situation where you can hack a pacemaker. The second reason is there are a lot easier ways to kill people than this. If someone goes through this much effort to kill you, they could have done it any number of different ways already. So if you die this way, think of it as living longer than you would have otherwise.
Actually water is the main ingredient in dihydrogen-monoxide. DHMO.org has confirmed this is a dangerous and deadly substance.
All of your questions are answered here: http://www.tektonics.org/lp/merrit01.html If you have something specific to ask, I'd be very happy to answer you specifically with text. But if all you have is links and second-hand objections, I'll answer with links.
Really, 2 Contradictory Genesis stories? Funny because when I read Genesis 1, I see a brief summary verse in Genesis 1:1 and then Genesis goes into a more detailed description of the actual events. Whether you believe the story as true or not is up to your beliefs and world view, but stop this silly accusation of biblical contradictions. There really are no contradictions in the Bible that I have found substantiated. Feel free to try to prove me wrong on that.
Oh and you excellent and brief treatment of the subject really offers up no proof of what you claim in your post. When you claim something, please try to be accurate.
So a school district is paying less than .5 percent of its budget on the operating system on all of its computers and you don't think this is sustainable? I would disagree with you there. That seems perfectly sustainable. Perhaps its not the best use of its budget in your opinion, but it doesn't stretch the imagination in any way that I can see. If you combine that with the idea that they are most likely also paying for Microsoft Office in addition to the OS, that seems very reasonable. How much would you have to pay to have a team of people support the district and keep Linux working properly in an office environment? I would be willing to bet the costs are very close to a wash, if not then they balance towards Microsoft at this point in time.