I dropped my cell phone in a bathtub once about two years ago.
It continued to work for about a minute after the incident, and then worked the next day after drying out overnight. It was acting flakey for about a week until it would just not turn on anymore. I decided I would try more drastic action.
I preheated my oven to about 150F, shut the oven off, removed the faceplate and battery, wrapped it in a towel, and left it in for 45 minutes.
It's funny that any time apple comes up around here, there are at least 10 separte threads that start up on wheather or not Macs suck. It's always the same thing, over anf over agian. Macs are expenisve, Macs are nice macs are reliable, macs are shite. PCs are unreliable, PCs suck for graphics designers, PCs suck, Macs suck...
They are all either overpriced, shoddy, bloated, underperforming, overpowered, hard to use, featureless, poorly designed, poorly executed, shoehorned, mis-marketed, non-compatible, rushed out the door, late or all of the above.
So stop arguing! It's all the same crap anyway, and they all of the same problems. They're all too expensive because they're all worthless. And they're all hard to use because they're designed and built by morons!
As far as I'm concerned the last decent piece of technology is the door stop. It's easy to use, always works, inexpenisve, and never gets stolen. And if by some wild chance it's not properly stopping doors, you need only get a heavier one. All this and they come in any variety of colors.
I bet you get even get one in friggin' translucent blue plastic.
Last time I checked, people over 18 are allowed to star in porn movies, be a prostitute in Nevada, vote and participate in wars. Is this book _so_ awful, that you have to be over 21?
In case you all are unfamiliar with this whole "omens" thing, what they really mean is that te US has "jumped the shark."
Also, the Columbia was named after a famous US naval vessel. According to this link , it was one of the first US ships to circumnavigate the globe, though I head that it was _the_ first.
There's a neat program called nmap that uses this "bug" in TCPIP stacks to do a blind portscan using predictable tcpip sequences.
http://www.insecure.org/nmap/idlescan.html
explains it. Basically, you forge scan packets with the "zombie" hosts return address. Then you probe the zombie host. The response of the host you're trying to attack will cause the IPID field on the zombie host to get incremented different amounts depending on whether the port is opened or closed (1 if it's open 2 if it's closed). You can see this by sending a SYN\ACK packet to the zombie host and checking the response. Pretty clever.
The jury system puts a ban upon intelligence and honesty, and a premium upon ignorance, stupidity and perjury. It is a shame that we must continue to use a worthless system because it was good a thousand years ago...I desire to tamper with the jury law. I wish to so alter it as to put a premium on intelligence and character, and close the jury box against idiots, blacklegs, and people who do not read newspapers. But no doubt I shall be defeated--every effort I make to save the country "misses fire." - Mark Twain Roughing It
Nanotech material, once they arrive, will of course make 90% efficient material practical.
What kind of nanotech material are you talking about? Little nano robots that run around catching photons IN their nano baseball gloves and pitching them into nano furnaces that run nano generataors?
If you want people to take you seriously, a statement like, "nanotech materials _may_ be able to produce 90% efficient material," is more reasonable. "of course" is just silly.
By this reasoning, very few people are "reasonable." We all have tenents that we live by, assumptions that we make to get us out the front door in the morning. A great number of people are religious, but that doesn't make them "unreasonable." Even certain aspects of science are dogma. It seems to me that RMS has certain beliefs, which are mostly clear from the outset, and he follows them pretty closely.
At any rate, this is mostly a semantic argument, and gets further and further away from the actual question of whether RMS is "reasonable." When people say that he is unreasonable, we all (mostly) know what this means, though I think that it defies concise definition.
From what I've seen of him, he is mostly not reasonable. There is quite a bit of an egomaniac in him and he's often had trouble with figuring out what battles are worth fighting. His whole GNU/Linux naming rampage has been fairly bad for him politically and has alienated him from some of his most valuable supporters.
My opinion of him was finally gelled when I read the newsgroup conversations of the GNU/Lucid/X Emacs debacle. It at least showed that he had a very deep problem with working with other developers and even a bit of control-freakishness over the whole thing. A great deal of the problem was poor communication in both directions, but I felt that he had made a lot of the mistakes, and seemed reluctant to make an effort to meet the Lucid people halfway.
I still admire RMS, he's sort of the great gand-daddy of open source and he deserves a lot of credit for laying the foundations that allowed GNU and Linux to flourish. Even withhis faults, we wouldn't be where we are today without him.
Appened is an ugly perl hack job that counts up who's responsible for what. I was interesed int he two types of bills, the "What About The Children?" (watc) type (CIPA,COPA and CDA), and "In The Pocket Of The Media" (itpotm) (P2P, DMCA and CBDTPA).
Total: D:19 R:74
Sponsored more than one:2 R:7
Sponsored the DMCA D:3 R:7
itpotm D:9 R:9
watc D:11 R:69
If I haven't made any mistakes, You can see that the republican party is mostly responsible for watc bills, while the Dems are more responsible for the itpotm bills, in fact, given a Republican majority in the House, the Dems have more than their fair share. I believe this is because the media centers are primarily democratic.
OTOH, Republicans are more responsible for the DMCA, which is the most egregious of them all.
Just cat the list of reps to the program to get a tally, if the program gets confused it will stop.
#!/usr/bin/perl -n #Make sure you don't put in any extra space # or the program will quit 1;/\(([DR])\-.* (\d) bill/||die;
There are plenty of reasons why this would not have worked.
1) The specific heat of LN2 is much lower than water. This means that although you can get it cooler, you might not be able to get away enough heat to make a difference, or it might form a vapor barrier that prevents the LN2 for cooling efficiently. My guess would have been that you needed to actively pump it or agitate it. In fact, you probably can get quite a bit more cooling this way. If you've ever pour LN2 on your hand, you know that it doesn't really do very much (unless you cup your hand). Try this with boiling water and see if it hurts or not.
2) Since none of these components were designed to withstand low temperatures, there's a chance that something could have cracked. If there was something that had a vastly thermal expansion coefficient in the packaging and/or became very brittle (e.g. plastic), it could have just split open. Apparently that's not a big problem either. My bet is that they cooled it down pretty slowly before they turned it on.
I think the condensation issue is not as bad as one might think. It takes quite a bit of ions in order for water to become very conductive. It might be worthwhile to rinse your board in distilled water before trying this, but you probably don't have to bother. Just don't pour any salt on your board and it should be OK.
Why are tech pundits always claiming the sky is falling?
For over 10 years I've heard that a lack of basic research is threatening to cause the United States to lose it's technological edge. As the technology industry continues to be battered, it isn't surprising that the amount of basic research that is being done is declining. Decreasing revenues and an uncertain future make new investment difficult to justify. This will change, as it always has in the past.
It's true that many of the behemouths (such as Bell Labs) have taken a beating, but other tech companies (for instance Micron) have started new research divisions. Biotech research has increased by leaps and bounds in the last few years. IBM research has had its share of increased and decreased funding, but continues to be a productive and profitable venture for IBM.
Although comercial oriented university research is something that has had an increase in the last few years, it is by no means dominant. For those with close ties to companies, the hassle of dealing with patents and trade secrets is going to be a price you pay for extra grants. Anything that stops research is bad, even if it ends up with more grant money. Fortunately, there are many universities in the US that would love to attract talented researchers. If all the big name schools mire their researchers in paperwork and IP nonsense, they will go elsewhere.
I don't want to undemphasize the importance of basic research. Deep cuts to the NSF and a _real_ decline basic research would indeed be something to worry about, as would a real, continued decrease in industry research. I don't think this is happening.
[...] but do we have to promote companies which we are simultaneously pursuing in court for numerous violations of our laws?
This isn't a very good argument, at least on its face. If you were being unfairly imprisioned in another country, it wouldn't be right for the US State Department to refuse to help you because you had unresolved legal problems back in the US (asuming you're not a fugitive). It might undermine their ability to help you, but the State department's job is to look out for US interests in other countries, not to apply self interpreted legal punishment on people and corperations.
This is a teeny tiny favor compared to the lenient settlement they got from the Justice Department.
Say the avaeage american eats 25 ice cream cones a yaer (one every other week). That's 6.25 billion a year. Now lets suppose that 25% of ice cream cone eaters are sloppy ice cream cone eaters, and create some sort of a mess.
Let's further suppose that it takes one minute to clean up the ice cream cone mess, and that costs about $15 per hour including benifits, suprivisors, etc.
That means the US loses 312 million per year due to ice cream cone messes! Surly we can reduce this cost with public awareness ads.
Slashdot Mirror
Cowboyneal is my backdoor.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was a poll.
I dropped my cell phone in a bathtub once about two years ago.
It continued to work for about a minute after the incident, and then worked the next day after drying out overnight. It was acting flakey for about a week until it would just not turn on anymore. I decided I would try more drastic action.
I preheated my oven to about 150F, shut the oven off, removed the faceplate and battery, wrapped it in a towel, and left it in for 45 minutes.
It has worked ever since.
It's funny that any time apple comes up around here, there are at least 10 separte threads that start up on wheather or not Macs suck. It's always the same thing, over anf over agian. Macs are expenisve, Macs are nice macs are reliable, macs are shite. PCs are unreliable, PCs suck for graphics designers, PCs suck, Macs suck...
Well, I've got news for you.
It _all_ sucks.
Everything.
Everything sucks. Macs, PC's, Linux, BeOS, Amiga, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Solaris, VMS, CMS, VM/ESA, IRIX, HPUX, TOPS andf MULTIX. C++, C#, C, FORTAN, ALGOL, PASCAL, Perl, Python, Java, Lisp and Prolog. Word, StarOffice, Openoffice, WordPerfect, Latex, Tex, and troff. Emacs, vi, pico, notepad, wordpad and pico.
It all sucks.
Athlons, PIIIs, P4's, Alpha, MIPS, SPARC, PowerPC and mainframes. RISC, CISC, VLIW. USB, PCI, AGP, SBUS, ISA, EISA, Firewire, SCSI, IDE, Fiberchannel, Microchannel.
They are all either overpriced, shoddy, bloated, underperforming, overpowered, hard to use, featureless, poorly designed, poorly executed, shoehorned, mis-marketed, non-compatible, rushed out the door, late or all of the above.
So stop arguing! It's all the same crap anyway, and they all of the same problems. They're all too expensive because they're all worthless. And they're all hard to use because they're designed and built by morons!
As far as I'm concerned the last decent piece of technology is the door stop. It's easy to use, always works, inexpenisve, and never gets stolen. And if by some wild chance it's not properly stopping doors, you need only get a heavier one. All this and they come in any variety of colors.
I bet you get even get one in friggin' translucent blue plastic.
The most intellegent thing I've ever heard on this topic was in "Tom the Dancing Bug" cartoon.
Last time I checked, people over 18 are allowed to star in porn movies, be a prostitute in Nevada, vote and participate in wars. Is this book _so_ awful, that you have to be over 21?
It looks for the occurance of the word recession in major newspapers, and it's a pretty good predictor (better than most economists).
Unfortunately, a lot of the related articles are subscribed content.
Also, the Columbia was named after a famous US naval vessel. According to this link , it was one of the first US ships to circumnavigate the globe, though I head that it was _the_ first.
Crap!
That was no HP calculator... that was Me!!!!
No. Not TCP sequence numbers. IPID. Read the link I posted.
There's a neat program called nmap that uses this "bug" in TCPIP stacks to do a blind portscan using predictable tcpip sequences.
http://www.insecure.org/nmap/idlescan.html
explains it. Basically, you forge scan packets with the "zombie" hosts return address. Then you probe the zombie host. The response of the host you're trying to attack will cause the IPID field on the zombie host to get incremented different amounts depending on whether the port is opened or closed (1 if it's open 2 if it's closed). You can see this by sending a SYN\ACK packet to the zombie host and checking the response. Pretty clever.
Has anyone figured out what LEMKE means yet?
The jury system puts a ban upon intelligence and honesty, and a premium upon ignorance, stupidity and perjury. It is a shame that we must continue to use a worthless system because it was good a thousand years ago...I desire to tamper with the jury law. I wish to so alter it as to put a premium on intelligence and character, and close the jury box against idiots, blacklegs, and people who do not read newspapers. But no doubt I shall be defeated--every effort I make to save the country "misses fire."
- Mark Twain Roughing It
Found in someone's sig file:
Emacs: It's a nice OS, but to compete with
Linux or Windows it needs a better text
editor. - Alexander Duscheleit
(Usual Slashdot interview rules.)
Ahh crap.
(Hides rubber hose, lubricant, and yak.)
Nanotech material, once they arrive, will of course make 90% efficient material practical.
What kind of nanotech material are you talking about? Little nano robots that run around catching photons IN their nano baseball gloves and pitching them into nano furnaces that run nano generataors?
If you want people to take you seriously, a statement like, "nanotech materials _may_ be able to produce 90% efficient material," is more reasonable. "of course" is just silly.
By this reasoning, very few people are "reasonable." We all have tenents that we live by, assumptions that we make to get us out the front door in the morning. A great number of people are religious, but that doesn't make them "unreasonable." Even certain aspects of science are dogma. It seems to me that RMS has certain beliefs, which are mostly clear from the outset, and he follows them pretty closely.
At any rate, this is mostly a semantic argument, and gets further and further away from the actual question of whether RMS is "reasonable." When people say that he is unreasonable, we all (mostly) know what this means, though I think that it defies concise definition.
From what I've seen of him, he is mostly not reasonable. There is quite a bit of an egomaniac in him and he's often had trouble with figuring out what battles are worth fighting. His whole GNU/Linux naming rampage has been fairly bad for him politically and has alienated him from some of his most valuable supporters.
My opinion of him was finally gelled when I read the newsgroup conversations of the GNU/Lucid/X Emacs debacle. It at least showed that he had a very deep problem with working with other developers and even a bit of control-freakishness over the whole thing. A great deal of the problem was poor communication in both directions, but I felt that he had made a lot of the mistakes, and seemed reluctant to make an effort to meet the Lucid people halfway.
I still admire RMS, he's sort of the great gand-daddy of open source and he deserves a lot of credit for laying the foundations that allowed GNU and Linux to flourish. Even withhis faults, we wouldn't be where we are today without him.
Get me a danish!!
Other topics that are perfect for objective debate such as:
Is Emacs slow?
Is vi easy to use?
Is perl a good language?
Do you like RMS?
Is your mother ugly?
Is Christianity the best religion?
Cowboy Neal?
Appened is an ugly perl hack job that counts up who's responsible for what. I was interesed int he two types of bills, the "What About The Children?" (watc) type (CIPA,COPA and CDA), and "In The Pocket Of The Media" (itpotm) (P2P, DMCA and CBDTPA).
/\(([DR])\-.* (\d) bill/||die;
;$foo{$1}++;$_=<>; /DMCA/&&$dmca{$party}++ ; ;
Total: D:19 R:74
Sponsored more than one:2 R:7
Sponsored the DMCA D:3 R:7
itpotm D:9 R:9
watc D:11 R:69
If I haven't made any mistakes, You can see that the republican party is mostly responsible for watc bills, while the Dems are more responsible for the itpotm bills, in fact, given a Republican majority in the House, the Dems have more than their fair share. I believe this is because the media centers are primarily democratic.
OTOH, Republicans are more responsible for the DMCA, which is the most egregious of them all.
Just cat the list of reps to the program to get a tally, if the program gets confused it will stop.
#!/usr/bin/perl -n
#Make sure you don't put in any extra space
# or the program will quit
1;
$party=$1; $b=$2
($2>1) && $morethan1{$party}++ ;
(/P2P/||/DMCA/||/CBDTPA/)&&( $MPAA{$party}++ );
(/CIPA/||/COPA/||/CDA/)&&($watc{$party}++)
END{
print "bad D:".$foo{D}." R:".$foo{R}."\n";
print "very bad D:".$morethan1{D}." R:".$morethan1{R}."\n";
print"dmca D:".$dmca{D}." R:".$dmca{R}."\n";
print"itpotm D:".$MPAA{D}." R:".$MPAA{R}."\n";
print"watc D:".$watc{D}." R:".$watc{R}."\n";
}
There are plenty of reasons why this would not have worked.
1) The specific heat of LN2 is much lower than water. This means that although you can get it cooler, you might not be able to get away enough heat to make a difference, or it might form a vapor barrier that prevents the LN2 for cooling efficiently. My guess would have been that you needed to actively pump it or agitate it. In fact, you probably can get quite a bit more cooling this way. If you've ever pour LN2 on your hand, you know that it doesn't really do very much (unless you cup your hand). Try this with boiling water and see if it hurts or not.
2) Since none of these components were designed to withstand low temperatures, there's a chance that something could have cracked. If there was something that had a vastly thermal expansion coefficient in the packaging and/or became very brittle (e.g. plastic), it could have just split open. Apparently that's not a big problem either. My bet is that they cooled it down pretty slowly before they turned it on.
I think the condensation issue is not as bad as one might think. It takes quite a bit of ions in order for water to become very conductive. It might be worthwhile to rinse your board in distilled water before trying this, but you probably don't have to bother. Just don't pour any salt on your board and it should be OK.
Why are tech pundits always claiming the sky is falling?
For over 10 years I've heard that a lack of basic research is threatening to cause the United States to lose it's technological edge. As the technology industry continues to be battered, it isn't surprising that the amount of basic research that is being done is declining. Decreasing revenues and an uncertain future make new investment difficult to justify. This will change, as it always has in the past.
It's true that many of the behemouths (such as Bell Labs) have taken a beating, but other tech companies (for instance Micron) have started new research divisions. Biotech research has increased by leaps and bounds in the last few years. IBM research has had its share of increased and decreased funding, but continues to be a productive and profitable venture for IBM.
Although comercial oriented university research is something that has had an increase in the last few years, it is by no means dominant. For those with close ties to companies, the hassle of dealing with patents and trade secrets is going to be a price you pay for extra grants. Anything that stops research is bad, even if it ends up with more grant money. Fortunately, there are many universities in the US that would love to attract talented researchers. If all the big name schools mire their researchers in paperwork and IP nonsense, they will go elsewhere.
I don't want to undemphasize the importance of basic research. Deep cuts to the NSF and a _real_ decline basic research would indeed be something to worry about, as would a real, continued decrease in industry research. I don't think this is happening.
You forgot to add:
P.S.
I am not a crackpot
to your story submission.
This isn't a very good argument, at least on its face. If you were being unfairly imprisioned in another country, it wouldn't be right for the US State Department to refuse to help you because you had unresolved legal problems back in the US (asuming you're not a fugitive). It might undermine their ability to help you, but the State department's job is to look out for US interests in other countries, not to apply self interpreted legal punishment on people and corperations.
This is a teeny tiny favor compared to the lenient settlement they got from the Justice Department.
Say the avaeage american eats 25 ice cream cones a yaer (one every other week). That's 6.25 billion a year. Now lets suppose that 25% of ice cream cone eaters are sloppy ice cream cone eaters, and create some sort of a mess.
Let's further suppose that it takes one minute to clean up the ice cream cone mess, and that costs about $15 per hour including benifits, suprivisors, etc.
That means the US loses 312 million per year due to ice cream cone messes! Surly we can reduce this cost with public awareness ads.
That's
The reason why AllTheWeb will surpass google is that it has a much catchier name.
As a bonus, alltheweb (when properly separtaed with spaces) is proper English.