It's a common misconception that the Nevada desert is a wasteland. Guess what: It's not. There is a rather intricate ecosystem. Covering the desert wipes out this system.
On top of that, we'll probably fight you on it. We're already getting a recklessly designed dump. No, it's not the dump we object to; it's the slipshod way it's being handled. A nuclear depository 100 miles from my house doesn't bother me. A repository run by that band of chuckleheads does.
The law for the the dump ordered the DOEto study a list of sites (provided in the law) and to build a dump at the safest site. Guess how many sites are on the list? If you said "1" you were correct.
So yes, we are suspicious of *anything* pushed by the feds. If Nevada is in charge of the plants, maybe. If it's a federal project, prepare for a very long fight.
> quadra 990 (IIRC) and 2 of those *REALLY* old B/W 20+ inch monitors
>... so ya gotta imagine Im close to 6' tall, and the trashcans are 3'
> below my feet
If you're lifting them like that, those aren't the *old* ones. . . .
I had an Ehman 19" back in 1989 for my SE/30. Moving it around was done by staggering, not walking.
When it went bad, I sent it back under warranty. They told me to send it back in the original packing material? Huh? I explained that it came on a shipping pallet with a sheet of cardboard wrapped around it and a boxtop over that, all strapped together. He groaned. "Oh, one of those".
I'm reading this on the 1600x1200 15" screen of my thinkpad A21p. Sure, it's the upper end of the "heavier" thinkpad line, but it's hardly an exotic . . .
hawk
Mozilla, FreeBSD, and "search"
on
Mozilla 0.9.5
·
· Score: 2
But do you have it working adequately on FreeBSD? THey seem to have taken usign "search" rather than "entering a url" a bit too seriously. I regularly get offered search results from some domain or another (usually from my most recent page, sometimes from the domain of my homepage) instead of what I enter in the box, in the open web location dialog, or even on a link I click. This leaves it somewhat less than usable . . .
Given that you can't buy a car with that even in California, I'd have to say no:) It's either too expensive, or auto executives have yet to be convinced that it won't go Pinto in an accident . . .
As the article stated, his plan is to use solar cells on the garage to electrically break up water. That's hardly a problem, though scale could be an issue. Or just use *any* conveniently available source of electricity.
And a hydrogen engine is hardly novel; converting a gasoline engine to hydrogen is fairly trivial. Maybe he has a better design than other hydrogen engines; maybe not.,
The problem that has plagued hydrogen engines for a very long time is the issue of carrying the hydrogen around in the car in a matter that can survive a collision. It' nasty stuff. It goes *BOOM* very easily. Solve *this* problem and there's a whole row of hydrogen engines already ready to produce . . .
>I think that the 'next wave' of this is going to involve a backlash
>against the diluted power of academic senates vis a vis boards of
>directors at major universities. We need to find new ways to exert
>control over the process of research and the nature of research related
>discourse - control which is increasingly being co-opted by non academic
>(or nominally academic) administrators and lawyers.
Yes, that has to happen. And it's not likely to be pretty . . .
But it *can* happen. My Law School quite literally seceded from its
university--the deean, with faculty backing, gave an ultimatum: either
the law school took a building (in downtown San Diego) and a portion of
the debt and went its own way, or they were leaving en masse (which would
have wiped out hte accreditation). As an independent law school, it was the
faculty senate that ultimately held all the power--including the hiring
and firing of the dean.
Where I am now, the campus faculty congress has (almost) noreal power.
>You pay an wful lot for that certification it >seems, but then for work machines you'll
> always be happy to do so.
maybe not always:) we have another server to sit around and be stable. This isn't a production machine, but a researcfh machine. If a run has to be repeated, it's no big deal. If it toasts itself, however . . . That, and my big runs will need clusters and SP2's anyway . . .
>However, that is not going to be the case forever.
I certainly don't think that it's going to *stop* at the level of conversion of the current system to electronic media. THere wil *certainly* be changes, and I'd expect multi-stage review of some level to happen--perhaps the "A" journals raid the "B"'s, who raid the "C"'s, and so forth. I have no idea where it will ultimately land, but something "looser" will certainly come out of it.
However, I don't think it will get all the way to a slashdot-stlye free-for-all where anyone can jump in. That would be as silly as a slashdot poll on which code to use in the kernel . ..(oh, dear, I probably shouldn't have mentioned that . . .:)
For months now there have been reports that this announcement would be today, with the 1.6/1900+ tomorrow. Does anyone know if this is still likely? (or why that was expected in the first place???)
I have $5k burning a hole in my boss's pocket waiting to order my workstation. mmm, dual athlons, 4 15krpm scsi drives, 2g of ddr, and a 21" screen. \end{\drool}
Look, the amount of time to create a paper is *massive*. I've sat for months before writing a word, and on the currentproject I've been solving the same equations for weeks now. Two "non-evolutionary" papers a year is a staggering workload.
I'll be able to place these in upper journals. Three or four of those will lead to tenure, giving me close to ten swings in the pre-tenure period--some of which will miss.
If I send those to a slashdot-style forum, my boss will laugh. They'll count something less than a one-line quote in a small town newspaper.
Also, given the areas aI work in, there are only a small handful of people world-wide qualified to comment. [I don't think a single member of my committe understood my entire dissertation, but I usually had two of the three major professors {yes, with a joint degree and resarch funding from an outside department 3 of the 5 committe members are major professors; it broke the latex style sheet} understanding any given point]. I really don't *care* what most of the readership of such a site would think of the paper--hopefully folks might learn something, but almost none are qualified to comment. (Ironic sidenote: the current project stemmed from violating my rule about battles of wits with unarmed persons here on slashdot--the proof that he's wrong is actually interesting . ..)
On the other hand, there's clearly room for traditional peer review with on-line publication. I'll continue submitting to the theft-style journals, as they're the "A" journals [and most even have submission *fees*] until tenure. Post-tenure, I still wouldn't toss things off to slashdot-style sites, as publication still matters for raises and full professors--but I'll certainly be in a position to keep ownership.
also, even the preliminary injunction has a rathyer relaxed standard of proof. A "reasonable likelihood" of prevailing on the merits must be shown--but the facts may turn out otherwise (and the interpretation of the law may change). Recall that an appeals court overturned the injunction agains windows 95, claiming this standard hadn't been met--only to have the DoJ wipe up the courtroom with microsoft at trial.
>You ever see someone with a four-cup/day habit go cold turkey?
I've quit a two or three *pot* a day habit cold turkey. Of course, the fact that I didn't know just *how far* past two a day I was was part of the reason.
Then again, caffeeine doesn't faze me. It doesn't keep me awake or alert, or make me jittery (OK, a grand total of twice I got jittery, but that's from the multiple pots in a sitting thing:).
When I dumped the multi-pot a day habit in grad school, I wnet over to decaff without a problem. OK, a little problem; I had to change to flavored beans to mask the funny taste from the lack of caffination.
Add a few more years, and there's some difficulty. I make decaff in my office, but my wife makes the regular stuff at home. So with decaff all week and then real stuff on the weekends, I did start getting mild headaches on monday or tuesday (this didn't used to happen), so now I have a cup of my wife's at home before I leave.
I am a lawyer, but htis is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, contact an attorney licensed in your jurisdcition.
The issuance of a TRO should not be taken as meaning *anything*. TRO's are issued as an emergency measure to maintain the status quo, and are issued without hearing on the requestof one party. They don't have any finding on the issues; they are just meant to prevent permanent damage pending a hearing on a temporary injunction (which is still not a full ruling on the merits) pending the final outcome of litigation.
>But imagine what it would be like to watch tv and have ads appear
>overlayed over the program you're watching, or in boxes that pop up
>and cover half the screen in the middle of a moving scene....
Not to mention having to clean up all the ones that accumulate behind it . . .
>But does anybody have an exact tally to the dozens of times that
>the prime directive has been violated??
Lesssee. Take the total number of episodes, multiply by one, divide by one, add 0, and raise to the first power. That should give a reasonably active count . . .
> Recording to disk hasn't been possible until quite recently
really? Ever heard of "instant replay"? ABC used a modified hard disk in the '70s to do this on Monday Night football--they just recorded analog instead of digital.
Is there really *anybody* who *didn't* want to do this with their vcr (or, for t
hat matter, didn't *try* it, having failed to think things through [namely that
it stopped recording while you played {Not that *I* ever made that mistake}]).
For that matter, the prior art is ancient. It's called "Instant Replay," and wa
s used widely by the American Broadcasting Company for an obscure program called
"Monday Night Football". They used a new device from the computer industry cal
led a "hard drive", onto which they recorded the last several seconds of the vid
eo signal rather than the usual "digital" storage used on such machines.
In other words, this is an old story even by slasdot standards. We're used to stories from yesterday, or last week, or even last year. But they've topped themselves, as "Fusion is only ten years away" was old news long before any of them were born . . .
Who really cares? The easy solution here is to continue not reading it.
No, I don't want Salon to go away--*something* has to remeain to make slashdot look like serious journalism.
Then again, maybe I shouldn't be so harsh--I've never heard any other editor admit that they used a single source, knowing of a prior perjury conviction and an axe to grind against the target of the story, and explain it away on the basis "it's ok because republicans are evil." . . .
[yes, I really did see this in an interview on one of the cable news channels after they ran one of their lap-dog pieces trying to refocus attention during the impeachment.]
So they make you read advertising on the way--the content of an ad is less biased and more truthful, anyway . . .
Slashdot Mirror
>Mail is about the same as Internet from a strict legal point of view.
No. Mail fraud is a specific federal crime. There is also wire fraud, which may cover an internet experience.
Both, however, can be the basis for a RICO (Racketeering) complaint, civily or criminally.
hawk, esq.
On top of that, we'll probably fight you on it. We're already getting a recklessly designed dump. No, it's not the dump we object to; it's the slipshod way it's being handled. A nuclear depository 100 miles from my house doesn't bother me. A repository run by that band of chuckleheads does.
The law for the the dump ordered the DOEto study a list of sites (provided in the law) and to build a dump at the safest site. Guess how many sites are on the list? If you said "1" you were correct.
So yes, we are suspicious of *anything* pushed by the feds. If Nevada is in charge of the plants, maybe. If it's a federal project, prepare for a very long fight.
hawk, displaced Nevadan
>
> below my feet
If you're lifting them like that, those aren't the *old* ones. . . .
I had an Ehman 19" back in 1989 for my SE/30. Moving it around was done by staggering, not walking.
When it went bad, I sent it back under warranty. They told me to send it back in the original packing material? Huh? I explained that it came on a shipping pallet with a sheet of cardboard wrapped around it and a boxtop over that, all strapped together. He groaned. "Oh, one of those".
hawk, who still prefers greyscale to color
hawk
hawk
hawk
hawk
hawk
Given that you can't buy a car with that even in California, I'd have to say no
hawk
And a hydrogen engine is hardly novel; converting a gasoline engine to hydrogen is fairly trivial. Maybe he has a better design than other hydrogen engines; maybe not.,
The problem that has plagued hydrogen engines for a very long time is the issue of carrying the hydrogen around in the car in a matter that can survive a collision. It' nasty stuff. It goes *BOOM* very easily. Solve *this* problem and there's a whole row of hydrogen engines already ready to produce . . .
hawk
>against the diluted power of academic senates vis a vis boards of
>directors at major universities. We need to find new ways to exert
>control over the process of research and the nature of research related
>discourse - control which is increasingly being co-opted by non academic
>(or nominally academic) administrators and lawyers.
Yes, that has to happen. And it's not likely to be pretty . . .
But it *can* happen. My Law School quite literally seceded from its
university--the deean, with faculty backing, gave an ultimatum: either
the law school took a building (in downtown San Diego) and a portion of
the debt and went its own way, or they were leaving en masse (which would
have wiped out hte accreditation). As an independent law school, it was the
faculty senate that ultimately held all the power--including the hiring
and firing of the dean.
Where I am now, the campus faculty congress has (almost) noreal power.
*sigh*.
hawk
> always be happy to do so.
maybe not always
hawk
I certainly don't think that it's going to *stop* at the level of conversion of the current system to electronic media. THere wil *certainly* be changes, and I'd expect multi-stage review of some level to happen--perhaps the "A" journals raid the "B"'s, who raid the "C"'s, and so forth. I have no idea where it will ultimately land, but something "looser" will certainly come out of it.
However, I don't think it will get all the way to a slashdot-stlye free-for-all where anyone can jump in. That would be as silly as a slashdot poll on which code to use in the kernel . .
hawk
I have $5k burning a hole in my boss's pocket waiting to order my workstation. mmm, dual athlons, 4 15krpm scsi drives, 2g of ddr, and a 21" screen. \end{\drool}
hawk
I'll be able to place these in upper journals. Three or four of those will lead to tenure, giving me close to ten swings in the pre-tenure period--some of which will miss.
If I send those to a slashdot-style forum, my boss will laugh. They'll count something less than a one-line quote in a small town newspaper.
Also, given the areas aI work in, there are only a small handful of people world-wide qualified to comment. [I don't think a single member of my committe understood my entire dissertation, but I usually had two of the three major professors {yes, with a joint degree and resarch funding from an outside department 3 of the 5 committe members are major professors; it broke the latex style sheet} understanding any given point]. I really don't *care* what most of the readership of such a site would think of the paper--hopefully folks might learn something, but almost none are qualified to comment. (Ironic sidenote: the current project stemmed from violating my rule about battles of wits with unarmed persons here on slashdot--the proof that he's wrong is actually interesting . .
On the other hand, there's clearly room for traditional peer review with on-line publication. I'll continue submitting to the theft-style journals, as they're the "A" journals [and most even have submission *fees*] until tenure. Post-tenure, I still wouldn't toss things off to slashdot-style sites, as publication still matters for raises and full professors--but I'll certainly be in a position to keep ownership.
doc hawk
also, even the preliminary injunction has a rathyer relaxed standard of proof. A "reasonable likelihood" of prevailing on the merits must be shown--but the facts may turn out otherwise (and the interpretation of the law may change). Recall that an appeals court overturned the injunction agains windows 95, claiming this standard hadn't been met--only to have the DoJ wipe up the courtroom with microsoft at trial.
hawk, esq.
I've quit a two or three *pot* a day habit cold turkey. Of course, the fact that I didn't know just *how far* past two a day I was was part of the reason.
Then again, caffeeine doesn't faze me. It doesn't keep me awake or alert, or make me jittery (OK, a grand total of twice I got jittery, but that's from the multiple pots in a sitting thing
When I dumped the multi-pot a day habit in grad school, I wnet over to decaff without a problem. OK, a little problem; I had to change to flavored beans to mask the funny taste from the lack of caffination.
Add a few more years, and there's some difficulty. I make decaff in my office, but my wife makes the regular stuff at home. So with decaff all week and then real stuff on the weekends, I did start getting mild headaches on monday or tuesday (this didn't used to happen), so now I have a cup of my wife's at home before I leave.
hawk
The issuance of a TRO should not be taken as meaning *anything*. TRO's are issued as an emergency measure to maintain the status quo, and are issued without hearing on the requestof one party. They don't have any finding on the issues; they are just meant to prevent permanent damage pending a hearing on a temporary injunction (which is still not a full ruling on the merits) pending the final outcome of litigation.
hawk, esq.
>overlayed over the program you're watching, or in boxes that pop up
>and cover half the screen in the middle of a moving scene....
Not to mention having to clean up all the ones that accumulate behind it . . .
:)
hawk
>the prime directive has been violated??
Lesssee. Take the total number of episodes, multiply by one, divide by one, add 0, and raise to the first power. That should give a reasonably active count . . .
:)
hawk
really? Ever heard of "instant replay"? ABC used a modified hard disk in the '70s to do this on Monday Night football--they just recorded analog instead of digital.
hawk
Is there really *anybody* who *didn't* want to do this with their vcr (or, for t
hat matter, didn't *try* it, having failed to think things through [namely that
it stopped recording while you played {Not that *I* ever made that mistake}]).
For that matter, the prior art is ancient. It's called "Instant Replay," and wa
s used widely by the American Broadcasting Company for an obscure program called
"Monday Night Football". They used a new device from the computer industry cal
led a "hard drive", onto which they recorded the last several seconds of the vid
eo signal rather than the usual "digital" storage used on such machines.
hawk
:)
hawk
Sure. My bos is buyiing a mainfraim for my desktop; isn't yours?
hawk, who really could use a multi-node zseries on his desktop
No, I don't want Salon to go away--*something* has to remeain to make slashdot look like serious journalism.
Then again, maybe I shouldn't be so harsh--I've never heard any other editor admit that they used a single source, knowing of a prior perjury conviction and an axe to grind against the target of the story, and explain it away on the basis "it's ok because republicans are evil." . . .
[yes, I really did see this in an interview on one of the cable news channels after they ran one of their lap-dog pieces trying to refocus attention during the impeachment.]
So they make you read advertising on the way--the content of an ad is less biased and more truthful, anyway . . .
hawk