I can't find the source right now, but the LHC is built on top of an older smaller collider, which is also built on top of an even older, smaller one... Each increase in size is defined by a specific math formula that states the increase in size is exponential. I'm not sure how many more upgrades they could still do and remain on earth but I believe it was 2 BEFORE the LHC. So this next upgrade is likely the largest that can be built on earth, the next upgrade after that would be around the orbit of the moon or so, and then after that the entire solar system. I believe I saw this on a Ted Talk prior to the LHC coming on-line.
You're assuming Police care at all about catching muggers. Unless the cops standing right there, these crimes are way too hard to deal with so they ignore them and instead focus their efforts on finding reasonable cause to search Minorities as they're easy targets.
Well first, they clearly state that these ARE NOT blackholes, they just look like them from the outside. Secondly, there are lots of blackholes about that are of many different sizes, including microscopic ones. Thirdly, it doesn't need to entirely evaporate, it just needs to shrink to the point that the event horizon meets the star. Lastly they did, in fact, make that statement if you read the article.
Even with Thermite, Halon wouldn't put it out but it would prevent it from starting anything else on fire. I suppose if they threw in enough thermite it would melt everything or damage it with heat. If the halon wasn't shut off I'd have to imagine a neighboring building caught fire first and fell on it or something.
Yea, if any of you haven't been in one of these data centers, the sear improbability of this kind of fire is staggering.
The rooms are usually kept so cold you need a jacket. There are firewalls everywhere (and I mean the physical kind) They have sprinkler systems in the looses sense of the term, They more likely dump CO2 to avoid damaging the equipment. If all else fails the room seal and Halon dumps (or one of its alternatives) making combustion almost completely impossible.
The only way I could see it happening is if things were shut down for a test or something... or some neighboring building that was much larger exploded or something.
In the US our constitution usually trumps all other law. Look to the old "Jim Crowe" laws we used to have. They were basically like this, rules that at first appearence appeared to be meant to do one thing but what they actually did was infringe on constiutional rights. They were all struck down eventually.
So a cop could ticket you here for unlawful use of your lights, but the very fact that the police had setup a speed trap would make flashing them legal, because you were no longer using the lights to illuminate the highway but instead making a statement and invoking your right to free speech. In our country "Free speech" is upheld as the ultimate right... not to be infringed upon accept in very dire situations. For example the "Shouting fire in a crowded theater" scenario. The police would have to prove that the flashing of your lights posed a significant hazard to the public to get the ticket to stick.
Lastly I'd like to point out that all of this is somewhat irrelevant. The police can badger you into submission by simply ticketing you for this every time, and then taking it to court every time. Though it may get struck down, the legal battle would cost you time and money.
Not exactly "News" but the only website subscription I've ever felt it worth paying was Consumer Reports. It pays for itself many times over every time I buy an appliance. It may sound lame, but my Vacuum cleaner has lasted 10 years... our dishwasher is insanely quiet... Our LCD TV has a better picture than my brother-in-laws $5000 sony and it cost us $700. Then we get into the automotive section and the sites likely saved me tens of thousands. For $20/year it's well worth it.
The company I work for got some of those subsidies. We had huge projects revolving around satisfying the huge regulatory overhead they brought with them. The problem is, it's insainly expensive to do rural broadband. You've got 50 people living on the side of a mountain, so the feds come in and want you to give them internet. That means getting a remote to within 30,000 feet of every single one of them. Now you've got to lay fiber to the remote site, using easments you haven't touched in 50 years... pissed off farmers... etc... you finally get it all done and what do you have? 50 people paying $40/month. So $24k/year and it cost over a million dollars to get them service.
The majority of ISPs are in fact telcos. All of the Non-telco ISPs buy their backbones from Telcos. The telephone companies of this country are the only reason the internet exists as it is. And yes indeed the telcos are required to provide rural Internet. Not in all places, it's up to the local governments. Usually it's measured in a percentage of customers served, or based on distance from the nearest remote.
In some counties the phone company is required to have a working phone in every home with the ability to dial 911, regardless of weather the home is occupied or not. We have techs escorted into the abandon home by the sheriff so they can install a phone the telco has to provide. As insane as it sounds, it's a fact. No cable company, or other ISP like google is required to do any such thing, and ironically the local telco is likely required by those very same regulations to provide the backbone out of their territory for their own competition. We don't have Google in any of our exchanges so I can't speak from experience on this, but I seriously doubt whichever phone company is in the area doesn't play some part in getting googles fiber network to the Internet.
Ones that had an interest it keeping rural internet access viable. Internet access is ONLY profitable in city centers. Telco monopolies in these areas are why people in rural areas even have phone service, let alone internet. The telco is required to provide service to any existing home in the area so they spread out the cost. If cities continue to allow competition into the only part of the market that's profitable and not put the same requirements on these new ISPs as the telcos, then the telcos will fail and there will be no rural phone and internet service. Look at the current cable footprint in your town... that's the ONLY place internet will be available without a cellphone if this continues. Do you want that?
I don't like monopolies either, but there's a reason telcos are setup the way they are... and it has nothing to do with helping them make lots of money. In fact, it significantly hurts their bottom line. If you let them compete on equal footing (i.e. removed service requirements) They'd drop their rural customers in a heartbeat and destroy Google and others almost immediately because they already have all the infrastructure in place.
Except that no vendor will support it. Unless they get someone like oracle involved that would be willing to mass-port a large number of apps. It's one thing to buy a web app and know it'll work with Chrome OS, it's an entirely different thing to then have problems with that web app... go to your vendor, and have them close your ticket immediately with "Using unsupported OS" which is exactly what they'd do.
Yes, it's such a simple black and white issue right? Big bad corporations pay republicans to let them do what they want with their networks. While the benevolent democrats want to restrain these corporations from profiting off the suffering of their customers. Because there would be no downside at all from the government coming in and dictating how your ISP handles your traffic eh? There's no way they'd ever abuse that power... no way... oh wait, it's pretty much guaranteed... that's right.
I don't support either party. As far as I'm concerned we only have 1 party in this country, and that parties goals are simple... power. So I rarely can support either of their strategies. But one thing I am sure of is that we don't need any new laws, or any more things illegal. If the ISPs want to twist what the internet is, ruin it and leave us with a closed garden mess... well, so be it. It'll be sad, but at least all we've lost is the internet. I'd rather lose the internet than to have it changed into a propaganda system approved by the feds like Network TV has been for decades.
If you have a facebook account, you already look like a twat so I'm not really sure why you're holding back when it comes to clicking the "like" button.:-)
First off, "A Prairie Home Companion" isn't anyones favorite show... it's a leftist talk show with skits featuring horrible acting, which I wouldn't mind as I do like SNL but I give SNL a pass because it's funny, where as, Prairie Home Companion is about as un-funny as anything I've ever heard. Sadly, most of the shows surrounding it on Sundays are awesome and some of my favorite radio... so I have to spend part of the day enjoying the radio, then screech in horror as I race to turn it off as soon as I hear Garrison Keillors voice, then wait for the show to go off before I switch back.
Secondly, Deaf people don't listen to the radio you morons. I've had several deaf friends over the years and none of them owned a radio that I knew of. They watch TV with subtitles and TV solved the whole "Deaf people alerts" problem long ago by putting the alerts in TEXT on the TV. I believe they even have a little flashy light thing that you can hook up via SAP to alert them should they be in another room.
There are far more examples of central banks doing things to hurt the economy than there are of them helping it. It would be one thing if they ONLY protected us against inflation by adjusting the interest rate/money supply, but because they are run by politics most often, they feel pressure and medal in things they certainly should not. The fed can do nothing more than add a splint, the economy must heal itself just like a broken leg. What the fed does now is similar to what "Sports medicine" does to get million dollar athletes back on the field. Yes, they may win the game tonight but what happens to them in the long run? What the US Federal reserve is doing now is horrific in its implications. The looming disaster will be far worse than what would have happened had they not intervened at all.
No they don't. That was true in the 60s and 70s... there wasn't a lot of way to get leadership experience in the US back then. But now they don't care about leadership experience. The kind of jobs the military prepares you for have been outsourced.
I disagree that it's worthless. Clearly it IS pork, but it very well could be rented out to any number of up and coming civilian aerospace companies. That kind of facility doesn't have to go to waste if we don't want it to.
You don't seem to get it. That's exactly what's happening. The military is cutting troops, not re-enlisting them. When your entire career has been spent sitting in a bunker waiting for the order to destroy the world, getting laid off is a bit more of a threat to you than others. I know quite a few career military guys and they all fear for their jobs right now. Not that it's a bad thing, our military is way way too big... but you can understand why these people are going to such lengths.
Sorry, you're full of shit Henry Newman. How many people follow specifications about burn-in on a drive when they buy it wholesale OEM and it comes in nothing more than a plastic bag? How many people only buy drives released recently? If you're like most people and you want a 1.5TB drive you go out and buy the cheapest one that meets your needs. If Seagate still has 8 yr old drives on the market, then it's damned right that their failure rate should be considered. And so what if a drive "has a well-known problem that Seagate publicly admitted to"? As long as Seagate publicly admits all the issues with every drive they release we should then adjust stats to eliminate those flaws? That's ridiculous. This study was about "If you go out and buy a drive off the market, this is the rate you can expect it to fail at." I don't think any consumer that got a Seagate drive, had it fail and lose all their data, would then say "Oh! Well they publicly admitted to a problem! Shit! My bad!"
Sounds like Mr Newman is going to get a nice paycheck soon.
Yea, I work for a telecom, I'm using my industry term. But the same rules apply to other businesses that use credit cards/accounts/billing, they're just under different legislation.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't find the source right now, but the LHC is built on top of an older smaller collider, which is also built on top of an even older, smaller one... Each increase in size is defined by a specific math formula that states the increase in size is exponential. I'm not sure how many more upgrades they could still do and remain on earth but I believe it was 2 BEFORE the LHC. So this next upgrade is likely the largest that can be built on earth, the next upgrade after that would be around the orbit of the moon or so, and then after that the entire solar system. I believe I saw this on a Ted Talk prior to the LHC coming on-line.
You're assuming Police care at all about catching muggers. Unless the cops standing right there, these crimes are way too hard to deal with so they ignore them and instead focus their efforts on finding reasonable cause to search Minorities as they're easy targets.
Well first, they clearly state that these ARE NOT blackholes, they just look like them from the outside.
Secondly, there are lots of blackholes about that are of many different sizes, including microscopic ones.
Thirdly, it doesn't need to entirely evaporate, it just needs to shrink to the point that the event horizon meets the star.
Lastly they did, in fact, make that statement if you read the article.
unless your intent is to destroy the data in a fire.
How could they burn them all up if they'd done that?
Even with Thermite, Halon wouldn't put it out but it would prevent it from starting anything else on fire. I suppose if they threw in enough thermite it would melt everything or damage it with heat. If the halon wasn't shut off I'd have to imagine a neighboring building caught fire first and fell on it or something.
Yea, if any of you haven't been in one of these data centers, the sear improbability of this kind of fire is staggering.
The rooms are usually kept so cold you need a jacket.
There are firewalls everywhere (and I mean the physical kind)
They have sprinkler systems in the looses sense of the term, They more likely dump CO2 to avoid damaging the equipment.
If all else fails the room seal and Halon dumps (or one of its alternatives) making combustion almost completely impossible.
The only way I could see it happening is if things were shut down for a test or something...
or some neighboring building that was much larger exploded or something.
In the US our constitution usually trumps all other law. Look to the old "Jim Crowe" laws we used to have. They were basically like this, rules that at first appearence appeared to be meant to do one thing but what they actually did was infringe on constiutional rights. They were all struck down eventually.
So a cop could ticket you here for unlawful use of your lights, but the very fact that the police had setup a speed trap would make flashing them legal, because you were no longer using the lights to illuminate the highway but instead making a statement and invoking your right to free speech. In our country "Free speech" is upheld as the ultimate right... not to be infringed upon accept in very dire situations. For example the "Shouting fire in a crowded theater" scenario. The police would have to prove that the flashing of your lights posed a significant hazard to the public to get the ticket to stick.
Lastly I'd like to point out that all of this is somewhat irrelevant. The police can badger you into submission by simply ticketing you for this every time, and then taking it to court every time. Though it may get struck down, the legal battle would cost you time and money.
Not exactly "News" but the only website subscription I've ever felt it worth paying was Consumer Reports. It pays for itself many times over every time I buy an appliance. It may sound lame, but my Vacuum cleaner has lasted 10 years... our dishwasher is insanely quiet... Our LCD TV has a better picture than my brother-in-laws $5000 sony and it cost us $700. Then we get into the automotive section and the sites likely saved me tens of thousands. For $20/year it's well worth it.
The company I work for got some of those subsidies. We had huge projects revolving around satisfying the huge regulatory overhead they brought with them. The problem is, it's insainly expensive to do rural broadband. You've got 50 people living on the side of a mountain, so the feds come in and want you to give them internet. That means getting a remote to within 30,000 feet of every single one of them. Now you've got to lay fiber to the remote site, using easments you haven't touched in 50 years... pissed off farmers... etc... you finally get it all done and what do you have? 50 people paying $40/month. So $24k/year and it cost over a million dollars to get them service.
The majority of ISPs are in fact telcos. All of the Non-telco ISPs buy their backbones from Telcos. The telephone companies of this country are the only reason the internet exists as it is. And yes indeed the telcos are required to provide rural Internet. Not in all places, it's up to the local governments. Usually it's measured in a percentage of customers served, or based on distance from the nearest remote.
In some counties the phone company is required to have a working phone in every home with the ability to dial 911, regardless of weather the home is occupied or not. We have techs escorted into the abandon home by the sheriff so they can install a phone the telco has to provide. As insane as it sounds, it's a fact. No cable company, or other ISP like google is required to do any such thing, and ironically the local telco is likely required by those very same regulations to provide the backbone out of their territory for their own competition. We don't have Google in any of our exchanges so I can't speak from experience on this, but I seriously doubt whichever phone company is in the area doesn't play some part in getting googles fiber network to the Internet.
Cause I was sooo totally serious there man...
Well, we don't want a bunch of old ladies to hit on at work. They need to change it to "Young hot women" or something.
Ones that had an interest it keeping rural internet access viable. Internet access is ONLY profitable in city centers. Telco monopolies in these areas are why people in rural areas even have phone service, let alone internet. The telco is required to provide service to any existing home in the area so they spread out the cost. If cities continue to allow competition into the only part of the market that's profitable and not put the same requirements on these new ISPs as the telcos, then the telcos will fail and there will be no rural phone and internet service. Look at the current cable footprint in your town... that's the ONLY place internet will be available without a cellphone if this continues. Do you want that?
I don't like monopolies either, but there's a reason telcos are setup the way they are... and it has nothing to do with helping them make lots of money. In fact, it significantly hurts their bottom line. If you let them compete on equal footing (i.e. removed service requirements) They'd drop their rural customers in a heartbeat and destroy Google and others almost immediately because they already have all the infrastructure in place.
Except that no vendor will support it. Unless they get someone like oracle involved that would be willing to mass-port a large number of apps. It's one thing to buy a web app and know it'll work with Chrome OS, it's an entirely different thing to then have problems with that web app... go to your vendor, and have them close your ticket immediately with "Using unsupported OS" which is exactly what they'd do.
Yes, it's such a simple black and white issue right? Big bad corporations pay republicans to let them do what they want with their networks. While the benevolent democrats want to restrain these corporations from profiting off the suffering of their customers. Because there would be no downside at all from the government coming in and dictating how your ISP handles your traffic eh? There's no way they'd ever abuse that power... no way... oh wait, it's pretty much guaranteed... that's right.
I don't support either party. As far as I'm concerned we only have 1 party in this country, and that parties goals are simple... power. So I rarely can support either of their strategies. But one thing I am sure of is that we don't need any new laws, or any more things illegal. If the ISPs want to twist what the internet is, ruin it and leave us with a closed garden mess... well, so be it. It'll be sad, but at least all we've lost is the internet. I'd rather lose the internet than to have it changed into a propaganda system approved by the feds like Network TV has been for decades.
Yea, our vendor now charges us $10,000 to give us a QUOTE on potential projects. It's kind of a joke at this point.
If you have a facebook account, you already look like a twat so I'm not really sure why you're holding back when it comes to clicking the "like" button. :-)
First off, "A Prairie Home Companion" isn't anyones favorite show... it's a leftist talk show with skits featuring horrible acting, which I wouldn't mind as I do like SNL but I give SNL a pass because it's funny, where as, Prairie Home Companion is about as un-funny as anything I've ever heard. Sadly, most of the shows surrounding it on Sundays are awesome and some of my favorite radio... so I have to spend part of the day enjoying the radio, then screech in horror as I race to turn it off as soon as I hear Garrison Keillors voice, then wait for the show to go off before I switch back.
Secondly, Deaf people don't listen to the radio you morons. I've had several deaf friends over the years and none of them owned a radio that I knew of. They watch TV with subtitles and TV solved the whole "Deaf people alerts" problem long ago by putting the alerts in TEXT on the TV. I believe they even have a little flashy light thing that you can hook up via SAP to alert them should they be in another room.
There are far more examples of central banks doing things to hurt the economy than there are of them helping it. It would be one thing if they ONLY protected us against inflation by adjusting the interest rate/money supply, but because they are run by politics most often, they feel pressure and medal in things they certainly should not. The fed can do nothing more than add a splint, the economy must heal itself just like a broken leg. What the fed does now is similar to what "Sports medicine" does to get million dollar athletes back on the field. Yes, they may win the game tonight but what happens to them in the long run? What the US Federal reserve is doing now is horrific in its implications. The looming disaster will be far worse than what would have happened had they not intervened at all.
No they don't. That was true in the 60s and 70s... there wasn't a lot of way to get leadership experience in the US back then. But now they don't care about leadership experience. The kind of jobs the military prepares you for have been outsourced.
I disagree that it's worthless. Clearly it IS pork, but it very well could be rented out to any number of up and coming civilian aerospace companies. That kind of facility doesn't have to go to waste if we don't want it to.
You don't seem to get it. That's exactly what's happening. The military is cutting troops, not re-enlisting them. When your entire career has been spent sitting in a bunker waiting for the order to destroy the world, getting laid off is a bit more of a threat to you than others. I know quite a few career military guys and they all fear for their jobs right now. Not that it's a bad thing, our military is way way too big... but you can understand why these people are going to such lengths.
Sorry, you're full of shit Henry Newman. How many people follow specifications about burn-in on a drive when they buy it wholesale OEM and it comes in nothing more than a plastic bag? How many people only buy drives released recently? If you're like most people and you want a 1.5TB drive you go out and buy the cheapest one that meets your needs. If Seagate still has 8 yr old drives on the market, then it's damned right that their failure rate should be considered. And so what if a drive "has a well-known problem that Seagate publicly admitted to"? As long as Seagate publicly admits all the issues with every drive they release we should then adjust stats to eliminate those flaws? That's ridiculous. This study was about "If you go out and buy a drive off the market, this is the rate you can expect it to fail at." I don't think any consumer that got a Seagate drive, had it fail and lose all their data, would then say "Oh! Well they publicly admitted to a problem! Shit! My bad!"
Sounds like Mr Newman is going to get a nice paycheck soon.
Yea, I work for a telecom, I'm using my industry term. But the same rules apply to other businesses that use credit cards/accounts/billing, they're just under different legislation.