I'll bet l that California and the dozen or so other CARB states could still prosecute. At minimum they could change the smog test methodogy to defeat the defeat so that the cars cannot get a smog cert and could not be registered. This would open the door to civil suits for sure.
HFT could be curbed simply by raising the execution price for each consecutive trade a firm makes in an hour (or even in a minute). Won't affect most traders, but HFTs would become more expensive. There's really no incentive for the exchanges to do this, since they're raking in millions in co-location fees and they're able to claim lower execution times for most trades.
WordPerfect file from an Apple IIe. Used a ProTerm on the Apple IIe, and null-modem serial cable to a Mac with a Keyspan USB->Serial adaptor. Worked great.
It's not a question of backup and time required to backup, it's more of a question of what happens when your company gets sued. The plantiff's legal team could request that all of your records relevant to the complaint be turned over. It could take hundereds of man-hours to go through decades worth of data to find the relevent documents. After all, you don't want trade secrets and the like to be entered into any sort of public record.
This is especially important in the healthcare field. Hospitals and Doctors get sued all of the time. To respond to discovery requests and subpoenas, they can waste a lot of the IT team's time just scrubbing through years of personal e-mails. When I worked at major hospital a few years back, this was a huge concern.
This is going to be a hard sell not because it's larger, but because it's 4-engine aircraft. Twice the number of engines means twice the maintenance cost. The main reason why Boeing had done the smaller 777 was because airlines wanted a large, long-range aircraft that would perform well on only two engines. Plans to do a larger 747 were scrapped when they failed to spark any interest with the major international carriers.
There's something odd about this article. Here's what I noticed:
1. They don't list how many different authors generated the 928 papers. It could be that the same group of scientist are generating a lot of material that is naturally reaching the same conclusion.
2. Why did they select "climate change" as the keywords? What did other keywords yield? For example, "greenhouse gaseses" or "global warming".
3. The footnote #9 seems to indicate some degree of subjectivity:
"The first year for which the database consistently published abstracts was 1993. Some abstracts were deleted from our analysis because, although the authors had put 'climate change' in their key words, the paper was not about climate change."
This also would lead one to believe that the keyword process is not accurate and could be potentially missing many abstracts. If the authors have keyworded unrelated papers with "climate change", how are you certain that all related papers were keyworded with "climate change?". This leads back to point #1. If there are many of the same authors creating similar content, then it follows they are more likely to use the same keywords when they create their documents. Likewise, if different authors are creating many dissenting documents, then they could be using different keywords.
4. Why was just the ISI database searched? This study could be used just as easily to prove that the ISI database has a bias towards papers that favor the human involvement in climate chang theory.
I don't know whether or not human activities are causing the earth to warm, but I don't think we can draw any conclusions from this. To me, this article doesn't exactly look like science.
It's not that I watch too much TV, it's just that all of the shows that I want to watch are either back-to-back or scheduled at the same time. I need the extra tuners to avoid programming conflicts. Besides, it's not just me that uses the box. My wife uses it as well. There are some programs that she likes to watch that I don't care for and vice versa.
It's not a really high-powered system, since all I use it for is to watch TV, play DVDs, and listen to music. I put it together a little less than a year ago. The components are as follows:
AMD Athlon XP 2800+ Gigabyte nForce2 Mainboard 512 Mb RAM / 160 GB Hard Disk / DVD-R Drive nVidia GeForce 5200FX Graphics Antec Overature Case One Hauppauge PVR-250 (retail) Two Hauppauge PVR-250MCE (media center edition - bought cheap off of eBay) Some Cheap-o 802.11b board that works in Linux.
Currently, I'm running Fedora Core 1 on the box with MythTV 0.16. The GeForce board provides pretty good SVideo out and the on-board audio has a digital output which I have plugged into my receiver.
The hardest part is getting all of the drivers to work together (wireless boards are particuarly fickle in Linux). That's why I haven't upgraded to FC2. I'm afraid that something won't be supported and I don't want to take the machine "out of production" so to speak. It's fairly mission-critical, as my wife has just learned to trust the machine to record her shows. If it ever betrays her trust, then it's the end of the project.:-)
I got around this by getting a MythTV box and setting it to always record 5 minutes after and 5 minutes before. Sure you can do this with TiVo, but MythTV has one advantage - it can support more than two tuners. This is important because back to back shows will overlap with the extra end and beginning padding. I currently have three Hauppauge PVR-250 tuner boards in mine, and I haven't had any real scheduling conflicts with the scheme yet (although I'm thinking of getting a 4th just in case).
If you don't like Best Buy, you should try Fry's. Compared to Fry's, Best Buy treats you like royalty! You may even find an English or Spanish-speaking salesperson at Best Buy (I'll take either one).
There's one problem with a nuclear: portability. There's two good thing that petroleum based fuels have going for them, ubiquity and portibility. Petroleum fuels have a storage and delivery infrastructure and they're fairly inert as far as fuels go (gasoline is not explosive, although gasoline vapors are). For now, let's address the issue of portability, since I don't think that the infrastructure problem is as difficult.
Of course, we can't go totally nuclear. If we went totally nuclear, we would have millions of nuclear reactors zooming around on the streets. Just looking at the car next to me with a slow oil leak, this probably wouldn't be a good idea. Also, consider that a large portion of our fuels goes to fuel aviation. The public won't be so hot about having radioactive material zooming over their heads.
So, we can't go totally nuclear, what's left? We would have large nuclear power stations to generate power and transfer it into portable containers. But what would the containers look like? We could use the nuclear energy to generate hydrogen and carry that around. The problem with that is that hydrogen is a lot less inert than petroleum products. For automobiles, this would mean puncture-proof fuel tanks and the like (which isn't a horrible problem). For aircraft, this is unacceptable. The flying public probably won't accept aircraft zooming around with hundreds of pounds of hydrogen (think hindenberg).
Batteries are currently out of the question. We can't power a laptop for more than a few hours or make a small electric car go more than a few hundred miles.
While I believe that Nuclear power is a good thing, the main research problem here to be one of the container that the energy is stored in. It would need to allow for the efficient extraction of energy and would need to be safe enough to allow for transit both on the ground and in the air. Water, for instance, would be a poor container. While it is safe, the energy cannot be extracted efficiently.
My guess is that a caddied disk is more expensive to produce than the bare disk. There are more parts and more assembly steps. 3.5" disks are way more mechanically complicated than a typical CD manufacture. The steps for the maufacture of a CD are:
1. Create identical top face and bottom face plastics. 2. Punch identical top and bottom face out of plastics. 3. Create media. 4. Stick them together.
Pretty simple. For a 3.5" floppy, my guess is that would need to:
1. Create bottom face part. 2. Create top face part. 3. Create write protect tab. 4. Create metal shutter. 5. Create metal stutter spring. 6. Create media. 7. Create metal disc hub. 8. Attach media to metal disc hub. 9. Attach write protect tab to bottom. 10. Attach metal spring to face. 10. Snap top and bottom together 11. Attach shutter to face.
Pretty complicated, huh?
Even a 5.25" disc has more steps:
1. Create inner liner cloth. 2. Create face plastics. 3. Stick liner to face plastics. 4. Punch out top face 5. Punch out bottom face (it's smaller than the top, as the top wraps around it). 6. Create media. 7. Coat hub of media with plastic. 8. Stick the top, bottom, and media together. 9. Punch out write protect tab (could possibly be done in steps 4/5, but likely not).
Of course, I've never toured a floppy manufacturing plant (only auto plants). I'm just guessing as to how their made based on their components. This is besides the fact that they will be more bulky and heavier.
Yea. That's a great idea. Tie up the emergency system and the cops for your little prank. There's a reason why the cops showed up - they thought someone was in trouble. But obviously, you thought your prank was more important than someone else's life.
Yes, but it increases the testing matrix considerably. Keep in mind that the distro creator will need to test all of the included packages. I would much rather have the distro creator spend their time to fix bugs and put together a really solid distro, rather than worring about supporting every possible enviornment.
Besides the QA risk that additional undertested packages pose, there's also a security risk, too. The distro creator will need to watch for security bulletins and other nasties.
I think for Linux to be more successful on the desktop, it will need to focus on a core set of applications and do those really well. The "really well" part includes testing and documentation. One desktop environment is fine for most people, just as one web browser and one office suite are too.
I'm a developer, and yes, I know that it's much more sexy to go off and create your own little fiefdom rather than having to toil on someone else's design (dude, that soooo corporate). But most folks only care about the outcome and not the route.
Liberal activists are not exactly known for being the militant types (just ask any Republican), and are more often than not pigeonholed as hippies, peaceniks, treehuggers and even cowards by the more militant right wing.
Bwahahaha... That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard here. Perhaps you haven't heard of ELF, Black Bloc, or Ruckus? Maybe not, but perhaps the Black Panthers and BAMN may jog your memory. These groups aren't necessarily known for their peaceful tactics.
Oh yeah, what about the recent ransackings and shootings at Republican campaign headqurters? Lest we forget that Indymedia itself was born out of the "peaceful" demonstrations at the Seattle WTO conference.
There are radical kooks on both sides of the aisle. You cannot possibly devine that the intention of the the folks who posted that info is entirely peaceful.
About 6 years ago, when I was in college, we bought a case of this stuff called "Phat Boy" malt liquor from a local party store. It was basically a malt liquor with guarana and ginseng. It was the nastiest stuff I had ever tasted. It was awful. Of course, the reason why we bought was because it was $2.00/40oz bottle, so I couldn't complain much. I just hope this stuff tastes better.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll bet l that California and the dozen or so other CARB states could still prosecute. At minimum they could change the smog test methodogy to defeat the defeat so that the cars cannot get a smog cert and could not be registered. This would open the door to civil suits for sure.
HFT could be curbed simply by raising the execution price for each consecutive trade a firm makes in an hour (or even in a minute). Won't affect most traders, but HFTs would become more expensive. There's really no incentive for the exchanges to do this, since they're raking in millions in co-location fees and they're able to claim lower execution times for most trades.
Looks like I'll just have to get my kid Lawn Darts for Christmas instead.
Deploy the counter-Watsons to talk to the sales-Watsons. Only then will Watson learn that the only winning move is not to play.
WordPerfect file from an Apple IIe. Used a ProTerm on the Apple IIe, and null-modem serial cable to a Mac with a Keyspan USB->Serial adaptor. Worked great.
It's not a question of backup and time required to backup, it's more of a question of what happens when your company gets sued. The plantiff's legal team could request that all of your records relevant to the complaint be turned over. It could take hundereds of man-hours to go through decades worth of data to find the relevent documents. After all, you don't want trade secrets and the like to be entered into any sort of public record.
This is especially important in the healthcare field. Hospitals and Doctors get sued all of the time. To respond to discovery requests and subpoenas, they can waste a lot of the IT team's time just scrubbing through years of personal e-mails. When I worked at major hospital a few years back, this was a huge concern.
This is going to be a hard sell not because it's larger, but because it's 4-engine aircraft. Twice the number of engines means twice the maintenance cost. The main reason why Boeing had done the smaller 777 was because airlines wanted a large, long-range aircraft that would perform well on only two engines. Plans to do a larger 747 were scrapped when they failed to spark any interest with the major international carriers.
There's something odd about this article. Here's what I noticed:
1. They don't list how many different authors generated the 928 papers. It could be that the same group of scientist are generating a lot of material that is naturally reaching the same conclusion.
2. Why did they select "climate change" as the keywords? What did other keywords yield? For example, "greenhouse gaseses" or "global warming".
3. The footnote #9 seems to indicate some degree of subjectivity:
"The first year for which the database consistently published abstracts was 1993. Some abstracts were deleted from our analysis because, although the authors had put 'climate change' in their key words, the paper was not about climate change."
This also would lead one to believe that the keyword process is not accurate and could be potentially missing many abstracts. If the authors have keyworded unrelated papers with "climate change", how are you certain that all related papers were keyworded with "climate change?". This leads back to point #1. If there are many of the same authors creating similar content, then it follows they are more likely to use the same keywords when they create their documents. Likewise, if different authors are creating many dissenting documents, then they could be using different keywords.
4. Why was just the ISI database searched? This study could be used just as easily to prove that the ISI database has a bias towards papers that favor the human involvement in climate chang theory.
I don't know whether or not human activities are causing the earth to warm, but I don't think we can draw any conclusions from this. To me, this article doesn't exactly look like science.
[Steve Reality Distortion Field, engage!]
I believe the proper syntax for that call is:
[Steve realityDistortion: YES];
It's not that I watch too much TV, it's just that all of the shows that I want to watch are either back-to-back or scheduled at the same time. I need the extra tuners to avoid programming conflicts. Besides, it's not just me that uses the box. My wife uses it as well. There are some programs that she likes to watch that I don't care for and vice versa.
It's not a really high-powered system, since all I use it for is to watch TV, play DVDs, and listen to music. I put it together a little less than a year ago. The components are as follows:
:-)
AMD Athlon XP 2800+
Gigabyte nForce2 Mainboard
512 Mb RAM / 160 GB Hard Disk / DVD-R Drive
nVidia GeForce 5200FX Graphics
Antec Overature Case
One Hauppauge PVR-250 (retail)
Two Hauppauge PVR-250MCE (media center edition - bought cheap off of eBay)
Some Cheap-o 802.11b board that works in Linux.
Currently, I'm running Fedora Core 1 on the box with MythTV 0.16. The GeForce board provides pretty good SVideo out and the on-board audio has a digital output which I have plugged into my receiver.
The hardest part is getting all of the drivers to work together (wireless boards are particuarly fickle in Linux). That's why I haven't upgraded to FC2. I'm afraid that something won't be supported and I don't want to take the machine "out of production" so to speak. It's fairly mission-critical, as my wife has just learned to trust the machine to record her shows. If it ever betrays her trust, then it's the end of the project.
So when do the robots start fighting? Do all three models join together to form a larger robot?
I got around this by getting a MythTV box and setting it to always record 5 minutes after and 5 minutes before. Sure you can do this with TiVo, but MythTV has one advantage - it can support more than two tuners. This is important because back to back shows will overlap with the extra end and beginning padding. I currently have three Hauppauge PVR-250 tuner boards in mine, and I haven't had any real scheduling conflicts with the scheme yet (although I'm thinking of getting a 4th just in case).
You mean SunOS? It's the one that Sun killed about 10 years ago to make way for Solaris. It ran a heck of a lot better on my IPX than Solaris did.
No, Circuit City and Best Buy are not owned by the same company. Look them up. The ticker symbol for Best Buy is "BBY". Circuit City's is "CC".
They've been competitors for a long time.
If you don't like Best Buy, you should try Fry's. Compared to Fry's, Best Buy treats you like royalty! You may even find an English or Spanish-speaking salesperson at Best Buy (I'll take either one).
There's one problem with a nuclear: portability. There's two good thing that petroleum based fuels have going for them, ubiquity and portibility. Petroleum fuels have a storage and delivery infrastructure and they're fairly inert as far as fuels go (gasoline is not explosive, although gasoline vapors are). For now, let's address the issue of portability, since I don't think that the infrastructure problem is as difficult.
Of course, we can't go totally nuclear. If we went totally nuclear, we would have millions of nuclear reactors zooming around on the streets. Just looking at the car next to me with a slow oil leak, this probably wouldn't be a good idea. Also, consider that a large portion of our fuels goes to fuel aviation. The public won't be so hot about having radioactive material zooming over their heads.
So, we can't go totally nuclear, what's left? We would have large nuclear power stations to generate power and transfer it into portable containers. But what would the containers look like? We could use the nuclear energy to generate hydrogen and carry that around. The problem with that is that hydrogen is a lot less inert than petroleum products. For automobiles, this would mean puncture-proof fuel tanks and the like (which isn't a horrible problem). For aircraft, this is unacceptable. The flying public probably won't accept aircraft zooming around with hundreds of pounds of hydrogen (think hindenberg).
Batteries are currently out of the question. We can't power a laptop for more than a few hours or make a small electric car go more than a few hundred miles.
While I believe that Nuclear power is a good thing, the main research problem here to be one of the container that the energy is stored in. It would need to allow for the efficient extraction of energy and would need to be safe enough to allow for transit both on the ground and in the air. Water, for instance, would be a poor container. While it is safe, the energy cannot be extracted efficiently.
This is a really hard problem!
My guess is that a caddied disk is more expensive to produce than the bare disk. There are more parts and more assembly steps. 3.5" disks are way more mechanically complicated than a typical CD manufacture. The steps for the maufacture of a CD are:
1. Create identical top face and bottom face plastics.
2. Punch identical top and bottom face out of plastics.
3. Create media.
4. Stick them together.
Pretty simple. For a 3.5" floppy, my guess is that would need to:
1. Create bottom face part.
2. Create top face part.
3. Create write protect tab.
4. Create metal shutter.
5. Create metal stutter spring.
6. Create media.
7. Create metal disc hub.
8. Attach media to metal disc hub.
9. Attach write protect tab to bottom.
10. Attach metal spring to face.
10. Snap top and bottom together
11. Attach shutter to face.
Pretty complicated, huh?
Even a 5.25" disc has more steps:
1. Create inner liner cloth.
2. Create face plastics.
3. Stick liner to face plastics.
4. Punch out top face
5. Punch out bottom face (it's smaller than the top, as the top wraps around it).
6. Create media.
7. Coat hub of media with plastic.
8. Stick the top, bottom, and media together.
9. Punch out write protect tab (could possibly be done in steps 4/5, but likely not).
Of course, I've never toured a floppy manufacturing plant (only auto plants). I'm just guessing as to how their made based on their components. This is besides the fact that they will be more bulky and heavier.
As they said when I was there, "you can't spell 'geeks' without 'eecs'". Of course, that was uttered by LSA folks that probably don't have jobs now.
Yea. That's a great idea. Tie up the emergency system and the cops for your little prank. There's a reason why the cops showed up - they thought someone was in trouble. But obviously, you thought your prank was more important than someone else's life.
Yes, but it increases the testing matrix considerably. Keep in mind that the distro creator will need to test all of the included packages. I would much rather have the distro creator spend their time to fix bugs and put together a really solid distro, rather than worring about supporting every possible enviornment.
Besides the QA risk that additional undertested packages pose, there's also a security risk, too. The distro creator will need to watch for security bulletins and other nasties.
I think for Linux to be more successful on the desktop, it will need to focus on a core set of applications and do those really well. The "really well" part includes testing and documentation. One desktop environment is fine for most people, just as one web browser and one office suite are too.
I'm a developer, and yes, I know that it's much more sexy to go off and create your own little fiefdom rather than having to toil on someone else's design (dude, that soooo corporate). But most folks only care about the outcome and not the route.
Liberal activists are not exactly known for being the militant types (just ask any Republican), and are more often than not pigeonholed as hippies, peaceniks, treehuggers and even cowards by the more militant right wing.
Bwahahaha... That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard here. Perhaps you haven't heard of ELF, Black Bloc, or Ruckus? Maybe not, but perhaps the Black Panthers and BAMN may jog your memory. These groups aren't necessarily known for their peaceful tactics.
Oh yeah, what about the recent ransackings and shootings at Republican campaign headqurters? Lest we forget that Indymedia itself was born out of the "peaceful" demonstrations at the Seattle WTO conference.
There are radical kooks on both sides of the aisle. You cannot possibly devine that the intention of the the folks who posted that info is entirely peaceful.
About 6 years ago, when I was in college, we bought a case of this stuff called "Phat Boy" malt liquor from a local party store. It was basically a malt liquor with guarana and ginseng. It was the nastiest stuff I had ever tasted. It was awful. Of course, the reason why we bought was because it was $2.00/40oz bottle, so I couldn't complain much. I just hope this stuff tastes better.
I bet it was those sharks with friggen laser beams. Either that or ill-tempered sea bass. Everyone deserve a warm meal!
I seem to recall that they already tried this before with the Multimedia PC standard? Wikipeda helped fill in my fuzzy memory:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multimedia_PC