As I understand it, when we say "gravity," we really mean General Relativity. And when we say "quantum physics," we really mean the Standard Model.
So, what you're saying is that you don't understand it? Gravity is general relativity in the way that a compass is Electromagnetism - one small consequence in a much larger topic that focusses around something else. The primary concern of general relativity is the speed of light; gravity driven space curvature is simply a component. To suggest that they're the same thing is deeply ignorant.
As far as the standard model and quantum physics, that's more like a compass and thermodynamics - they're not really related other than that they describe similar things at similar scales. I can't imagine why you would think they're one and the same - quantum physics is the study of the interaction between matter and energy (often between light quanta and electrons), whereas the standard model is a description of the believed particle system creating matter and the fundamental forces (except gravity, which hasn't yet been worked into place.) About the only thing I can think of that might give you the notion that the standard model and quantum physics are the same thing is that the standard model is a quantum field theory; you might as well say that a compass is the same thing as someone who has a magnetic personality, because that's the same sort of one-word-similarity you're riding right now.
In fact, if you knew much about physics, you'd remember what a big deal it was when it was shown that the standard model was compatible with quantum physics. That wouldn't have happened if they were the same thing, now, would it have?
Both are the best established explanations for their respective fields.
So were the phlogiston, the aether theory of light propogation and the concept of Republican ethics. All these things have been discarded as childish. No scientist gives one quarter of one damn whose explanation is well established, kthx.
That means once you've unified the Standard Model with gravity in a way that gives the same correct results we knew from General Relativity, you've got a theory of everything.
You need to stop learning your physics from saturday morning cartoons. What you're describing - or rather, trying to describe - is the Grand Unification Theory, not the Theory of Everything. On one hand, I'm angry at physicists for using such vague terminologies, because it leads stupid people into saying stupid things, because they don't have the sense - what with being stupid and all - not to pretend that they have a deep understanding of a physical system they've never so much as read a textbook on at the college level.
On the other hand, well, if you can't even sort out which theory you're talking about... I trust my point is proven. Maybe next time you'll read a book before writing a post, no?
Speaking of which, why does Windows still use a variable sized swap file?
Because the standard size, 2xRAM, occasionally ends up not being enough. I can't imagine why you think this is abnormal; essentially every OS on Earth does this. Maybe what you're trying to do is to point out the way Windows used to do swap files, where it'd only set aside what it's using; given that you're whining about fragmentation already, and pointing out that you do something which will have essentially zero effect on fragmentation under NTFS, which is the only time that nonsense really came up anyway, I'm kind of betting that's what you meant. That hasn't been the case since Windows 98, though, so it's kind of hard to tell. Maybe you could explain what you think is bad here?
And how about moving IE's temp files somewhere else? Okay, you can still set permissions on the folder, but get it out of the user's profile.
The profile is where user specific data is kept, and the cache is user specific. It's in the right place. Why would they move it?
And I'm tired of seeing C:\WINDOWS\Temp Temp directories do not belong in the OS directory.
... why?
Yeah, I'm whining.
Yeah, you are.
But I spend 15 extra minutes just getting the directories and swap arranged correctly every time I set up someone's Windows machine.
Yeah, you keep implying that there's a level of correctness here, but you don't seem to have any reasoning behind it. From this end, it looks more like "every time I set up a Windows machine, I change a bunch of defaults to what I expect, even though there's no actual reason, because if it behaves differently than the way I want, the hell with the extra hassle it will cause during support, I'm gonna change it."
Please, do explain why your expectations are more correct than OS defaults. Let's find out why the OS temp file shouldn't be in the OS directory and why user web cache shouldn't be in the user tree.
Re:Mushrooms, oranges and horse dung ??
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 1
They share several indoles, terpenes and so forth which create smells and flavors. This shouldn't be surprising: horse dung is made from vegetable matter. Some of it's going to survive.
The actual charts are enormous, and I'm not retyping them; if you want to see them, buy this book.
Re:Two cents worth...
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 4, Informative
That's nothing but a new name for an age old process.
By this logic, it should be called food alchemy. Believe it or not, just because you don't know the difference doesn't mean that there isn't one.
The process of adding heat to reagents (a.k.a. cooking) is in itself a chemical process.
One which essentially nobody - including professional food chemists - understands in even the simplest of organic foods. Cooks sure as hell don't - they know how long to fry it, and generally what's going to happen when you fry it, but one mention of the single most prevalent chemical in the reaction, phospholipthene, and you're greeted with a bunch of glassy looks.
You might as well argue that being a coffee barista is a chemist's process too; it turns out that frothing milk - the process of building a colloid from the 40 or so whey caseins and half dozen fats in cow's milk is more complex than broiling steak, baking bread and aging tofu put together. 'Course, they just get a five minute training on it, like a cook does: use at least four ounces of milk, keep the milk as cold as you can, keep the steam a quarter inch under the surface. That's cooking: being oblivious of the chemistry, and focussing on the food.
Molecular gastronomy is a powerful tool for cooks, but it isn't cooking, and it's essentially useless on its own.
Take baking, for example. For those who've never tried it, baking is a very precise exercise.
Nonsense. You can vary the amounts of almost every ingredient in a bread dough by 200% or more and it'll still be just fine.
You have to add precise amounts of reagents, mix them together in a certain order, and add a precise amount of heat for a precise amount of time.
Have you ever baked? At all? Do you know what a bagel actually is? Did you know that if you want a crusty bread, you can just brush the half-cooked loaf with water, then oil, and increase cooking time ~20%? None of those three things you said are true; baking is, with notable rare exceptions like souffle, one of the most forgiving and imprecise forms of cooking there is. You almost couldn't have chosen a less appropriate example, short of slow-roasting meats or curing foods over months.
That whole undertaking is very chemical in nature.
What, because you need a specific amount of a specific stuff and you have to put it in at the right time? By that logic, putting gas in your car is a work of chemistry, as is washing your clothes (and let's not even get started on mixing paint.) Just because something is made out of chemicals doesn't mean using it is chemistry. Humans are made out of chemicals, too, y'know. In fact, everything is. You might want to look up the word "tautology."
If you time it wrong, add the wrong amount of heat and/or reagents, then you're going to end up with some pretty disastrous results.
Ah, so ironing my clothes is chemistry, using hot glue guns is chemistry, soldering is chemistry and alka-seltzer is chemistry. Got it.
You're one of those people who argues that anything you can describe a process for is art, aren't you?
The chemical reactions that make a cake or a loaf of bread is not very different than making a vinegar/baking soda volcano.
The chemical reaction in vinegar volcanoes is a hydrogen exchange salt reaction.
CH_3 COOH + NaHCO_3 --> CH_3 COONa + H_2 CO_3
There are more than two hundred chemical reactions involved in bread, but the one you're probably thinking of is the yeast breaking sugar and alkali into alcohol and carbon dioxide. This is two primary reactions with dozens of variants:
Law enforcement would fight tooth and nail to keep the GPS data from being deleted.
And they would fail. Turns out that law enforcement can't actually just step in and say "track this data even though you don't want to," whether or not it would be convenient for them. Some decisions are just up to the company.
Once stored, it's too tempting to use for other purposes.
Well, maybe the company may change its mind and choose to store it. However, "law enforcement" can't just magically demand things. Welcome to not-a-police-state.
You end up with the same problem with renting from Uhaul.
These are small, cheap vehicles. The reserved rental model doesn't make sense for them. There's a reason they're trying to get you to think in terms of shopping carts: they expect the city to buy a bunch of extra and to leave them waiting for often for capacity demand.
I do not see the City Car working in the US.
I'm not sure why. About half of US car rentals now work this way. Go hit travelocity. Ten years ago, when you reserved a car, you'd be told exactly what you're getting. Now they all say "Chevy Aero or similar" (or whatever make and model you pick, anyway.) If there was less variation between models, as is the case here, why shouldn't it work?
News flash: cars aren't made out of transistors. Moore's law doesn't apply.
By the way, Santa Cruz doesn't actually have an individual mass transit system. Skateboards are individually owned. Given that the important part of this is the community-driven switch away from gasoline...
Couple of hundred capacitors hooked to a lightning rod to distribute the brunt, some of those huge electric arc generators like Dr Frankenstein had? Sounds like a plan.
Actually, this would be great for laptops. The issue isn't so much that it can't hold quite as long a charge time as how little time it takes to recharge - it's literally borderline instantaneous. The vast majority of the time you're using a laptop, you'll have several second bursts where it's convenient to hit a wall socket - your stop at the coffee shop, your quick access to the cigarette lighter, your pause at the ticket desk before the flight, et cetera. For me, it's not the "I can stay charged for four hours" so much as the "I don't have to be tethered for an hour and a half every four hours."
Combine that with the ever-present promise of wireless power, and we could even recharge just walking *past* the right place - and make no mistake, retailers will set up those right places just to get you to come in.
And I'll still doubt the anonymous ones. I very fully believe CI are scumbags; I'm not doubting that. However, scumbags often have scumbags for competition. If they want to post anonymously, fine; the price they pay is that nobody takes them seriously. If they have something worthwhile to say, they should grow some short hairs. Criticism from anonymity has zero value.
eBay. Do you think people getting blades from eBay check the police to see if they've got hot hardware? Most people don't even think of it in the first place. Even those few who do are usually telling the seller to send straight to their datacenter; chances are the hardware is never actually touching the buyer's hands.
it wouldn't be hard to see Dell doing a trace on em
What are you, kidding? I paid $300 for a next-day warranty program and it takes Dell three hours to find it, every time. I'm the damn owner, and I've got all the data in hand. You think Dell's tracking serial numbers on servers held by unknown buyers at unknown datacenters? Before we even get into that Dell doesn't spend the time to do that when they have to, perhaps you could tell me *how* Dell could track stuff like that?
Thirdly, no legit business, at least any I have worked in, would touch (some) state of the art servers at half price, no support, from a questionble source with no history.
Two thirds of my dedicated customers are individuals, rather than businesses. I don't do colocation, so this doesn't affect me, but several of my friends who are colocated bought their hardware from, you guessed it, eBay, because to one guy a $2500 savings is often a big deal.
Bet they end up abroad.
Well, I just looked up ten blade sales at random on eBay, and nine of them went to US or US Junior (Canada,) so I'll take that bet at 2:1 odds, if you like. I could use the money.
Yes, the servers are expensive peices of kit, but I think frankly, its more likely that there is specific data for a specific site that is being stolen rather than just some hardware
I very much doubt this is correct. If they were after data, it would be safer, cheaper and easier to find a security exploit, and then they could get data updates every week or two without anyone noticing. The hardware, en masse, would be seriously profitable - considering that the average blade costs 3-4k new, a 44u rack even at used prices is carrying 50 or 60 thousand dollars of hardware.
I really doubt data thieves would show up in person, even if they were trying to deprive the real owners of the data. It just doesn't make sense.
There are way too many anonymous cowards "speaking up." I believe you're a competitor who's lying to exploit the situation. Either take off the mask or stop speaking, please.
You might be surprised. Remember that those one year old blades often cost $4000 or more new - CPU clusters, high end raid cards, buttloads of ram, tons of drives. Take a look at eBay. Search for 1u blade. Even if they're only getting $1500 each, which isn't an unreasonable markdown for a year old blade, a 44U rack at $1500 per is sixty six thousand dollars.
People with the sophistication to sell stolen data almost never take the risk of a literal invasion. These guys are just selling off servers. Modern blades - even used blades - are potentially worth several thousand dollars each, and a standard rack is 44U. Clean out three racks - there's your kid's college payments. Clean out five racks, and you're toe to toe with a better bank robbery. Clean out fifteen racks, and you might as well have just hit an armored car. Given that you can get rid of most of this stuff on eBay and that most people on eBay wouldn't even think to check if their new blade was hot, much less know how to check, and you've got one of the safest mid-range thefts possible.
According to this show Masterminds I watch on CourtTV, the fencing of stolen goods is actually a whole lot riskier than stealing the goods in the first place. Fencing blades would be damned easy. This makes a lot of sense to me. That's why when my datacenter said they had six foot thick walls, armed guards, dogs and barbed wire fences, I checked, and then got nice and comfy.
All things equal, get servers in two datacenters on different sides of the country, replicate across them, and you're a hell of a lot safer. Natural disaster, uplink cleavage, major power outage, bad employee: there are things a datacenter just can't protect against. Redundancy is where it's at, no doubt in my mind.
Posting something like that from an anonymous coward account stinks of CI's competition trying to exploit the situation. Don't get up on a soapbox until you take off the mask. Whereas I tend to look poorly on a host that has four incidents in two years without attempting to improve security, I also look sternly on someone getting preachy about being willing to say things in public without even saying who they are.
Criticism from behind the anonymous coward mask is why that account is called anonymous coward. You're not about to get fired for speaking up. Grow some short hairs and use your real account.
If you read the police report, you'll find that CI is just lying. No hole was cut in the wall; an office door's lock was jimmied open. No guard was tased; the office was uninhabited at the time. Their guards aren't 24/7.
If I were a police investigator, I'd start probing.
They already started. Their reports are public. Enjoy.
It's the state doing that, not the city. The city periodically tries to fight for its right to bullet up. Remember, Chicago is the world's capital of tommy gun nostalgia.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to be confused about the meaning of the word "simply."
42 > 9 billion.
As far as the standard model and quantum physics, that's more like a compass and thermodynamics - they're not really related other than that they describe similar things at similar scales. I can't imagine why you would think they're one and the same - quantum physics is the study of the interaction between matter and energy (often between light quanta and electrons), whereas the standard model is a description of the believed particle system creating matter and the fundamental forces (except gravity, which hasn't yet been worked into place.) About the only thing I can think of that might give you the notion that the standard model and quantum physics are the same thing is that the standard model is a quantum field theory; you might as well say that a compass is the same thing as someone who has a magnetic personality, because that's the same sort of one-word-similarity you're riding right now.
In fact, if you knew much about physics, you'd remember what a big deal it was when it was shown that the standard model was compatible with quantum physics. That wouldn't have happened if they were the same thing, now, would it have?So were the phlogiston, the aether theory of light propogation and the concept of Republican ethics. All these things have been discarded as childish. No scientist gives one quarter of one damn whose explanation is well established, kthx.You need to stop learning your physics from saturday morning cartoons. What you're describing - or rather, trying to describe - is the Grand Unification Theory, not the Theory of Everything. On one hand, I'm angry at physicists for using such vague terminologies, because it leads stupid people into saying stupid things, because they don't have the sense - what with being stupid and all - not to pretend that they have a deep understanding of a physical system they've never so much as read a textbook on at the college level.
On the other hand, well, if you can't even sort out which theory you're talking about... I trust my point is proven. Maybe next time you'll read a book before writing a post, no?
Please, do explain why your expectations are more correct than OS defaults. Let's find out why the OS temp file shouldn't be in the OS directory and why user web cache shouldn't be in the user tree.
They share several indoles, terpenes and so forth which create smells and flavors. This shouldn't be surprising: horse dung is made from vegetable matter. Some of it's going to survive.
The actual charts are enormous, and I'm not retyping them; if you want to see them, buy this book.
By this logic, it should be called food alchemy. Believe it or not, just because you don't know the difference doesn't mean that there isn't one.
One which essentially nobody - including professional food chemists - understands in even the simplest of organic foods. Cooks sure as hell don't - they know how long to fry it, and generally what's going to happen when you fry it, but one mention of the single most prevalent chemical in the reaction, phospholipthene, and you're greeted with a bunch of glassy looks.
You might as well argue that being a coffee barista is a chemist's process too; it turns out that frothing milk - the process of building a colloid from the 40 or so whey caseins and half dozen fats in cow's milk is more complex than broiling steak, baking bread and aging tofu put together. 'Course, they just get a five minute training on it, like a cook does: use at least four ounces of milk, keep the milk as cold as you can, keep the steam a quarter inch under the surface. That's cooking: being oblivious of the chemistry, and focussing on the food.
Molecular gastronomy is a powerful tool for cooks, but it isn't cooking, and it's essentially useless on its own.
Nonsense. You can vary the amounts of almost every ingredient in a bread dough by 200% or more and it'll still be just fine.
Have you ever baked? At all? Do you know what a bagel actually is? Did you know that if you want a crusty bread, you can just brush the half-cooked loaf with water, then oil, and increase cooking time ~20%? None of those three things you said are true; baking is, with notable rare exceptions like souffle, one of the most forgiving and imprecise forms of cooking there is. You almost couldn't have chosen a less appropriate example, short of slow-roasting meats or curing foods over months.
What, because you need a specific amount of a specific stuff and you have to put it in at the right time? By that logic, putting gas in your car is a work of chemistry, as is washing your clothes (and let's not even get started on mixing paint.) Just because something is made out of chemicals doesn't mean using it is chemistry. Humans are made out of chemicals, too, y'know. In fact, everything is. You might want to look up the word "tautology."
Ah, so ironing my clothes is chemistry, using hot glue guns is chemistry, soldering is chemistry and alka-seltzer is chemistry. Got it.
You're one of those people who argues that anything you can describe a process for is art, aren't you?
The chemical reaction in vinegar volcanoes is a hydrogen exchange salt reaction.
CH_3 COOH + NaHCO_3 --> CH_3 COONa + H_2 CO_3
There are more than two hundred chemical reactions involved in bread, but the one you're probably thinking of is the yeast breaking sugar and alkali into alcohol and carbon dioxide. This is two primary reactions with dozens of variants:
C_6 H_12 O_6 + Therm. --> 2 (C_2 H_5 OH) + 2 CO_2
2 (C_3 H_6 O_3) + K_2 CO_3 --> 2(KC_3 H_5 O_3) + H_2 O + CO_2
The two processes are, in fact, very different. One is a simple chemical reac
News flash: cars aren't made out of transistors. Moore's law doesn't apply.
...
By the way, Santa Cruz doesn't actually have an individual mass transit system. Skateboards are individually owned. Given that the important part of this is the community-driven switch away from gasoline
Couple of hundred capacitors hooked to a lightning rod to distribute the brunt, some of those huge electric arc generators like Dr Frankenstein had? Sounds like a plan.
Actually, this would be great for laptops. The issue isn't so much that it can't hold quite as long a charge time as how little time it takes to recharge - it's literally borderline instantaneous. The vast majority of the time you're using a laptop, you'll have several second bursts where it's convenient to hit a wall socket - your stop at the coffee shop, your quick access to the cigarette lighter, your pause at the ticket desk before the flight, et cetera. For me, it's not the "I can stay charged for four hours" so much as the "I don't have to be tethered for an hour and a half every four hours."
Combine that with the ever-present promise of wireless power, and we could even recharge just walking *past* the right place - and make no mistake, retailers will set up those right places just to get you to come in.
And I'll still doubt the anonymous ones. I very fully believe CI are scumbags; I'm not doubting that. However, scumbags often have scumbags for competition. If they want to post anonymously, fine; the price they pay is that nobody takes them seriously. If they have something worthwhile to say, they should grow some short hairs. Criticism from anonymity has zero value.
I stand corrected. Thank you for better information. (No, I had meant official government; I was simply mistaken.)
What I would not give to see ten "I find your ideas fascinating and would like to subscribe to your newsletter"s right now...
I really doubt data thieves would show up in person, even if they were trying to deprive the real owners of the data. It just doesn't make sense.
There are way too many anonymous cowards "speaking up." I believe you're a competitor who's lying to exploit the situation. Either take off the mask or stop speaking, please.
Kinda makes you stop and think, no?
People with the sophistication to sell stolen data almost never take the risk of a literal invasion. These guys are just selling off servers. Modern blades - even used blades - are potentially worth several thousand dollars each, and a standard rack is 44U. Clean out three racks - there's your kid's college payments. Clean out five racks, and you're toe to toe with a better bank robbery. Clean out fifteen racks, and you might as well have just hit an armored car. Given that you can get rid of most of this stuff on eBay and that most people on eBay wouldn't even think to check if their new blade was hot, much less know how to check, and you've got one of the safest mid-range thefts possible.
According to this show Masterminds I watch on CourtTV, the fencing of stolen goods is actually a whole lot riskier than stealing the goods in the first place. Fencing blades would be damned easy. This makes a lot of sense to me. That's why when my datacenter said they had six foot thick walls, armed guards, dogs and barbed wire fences, I checked, and then got nice and comfy.
All things equal, get servers in two datacenters on different sides of the country, replicate across them, and you're a hell of a lot safer. Natural disaster, uplink cleavage, major power outage, bad employee: there are things a datacenter just can't protect against. Redundancy is where it's at, no doubt in my mind.
Posting something like that from an anonymous coward account stinks of CI's competition trying to exploit the situation. Don't get up on a soapbox until you take off the mask. Whereas I tend to look poorly on a host that has four incidents in two years without attempting to improve security, I also look sternly on someone getting preachy about being willing to say things in public without even saying who they are.
Criticism from behind the anonymous coward mask is why that account is called anonymous coward. You're not about to get fired for speaking up. Grow some short hairs and use your real account.
It's the state doing that, not the city. The city periodically tries to fight for its right to bullet up. Remember, Chicago is the world's capital of tommy gun nostalgia.