I have an iGesture next to my Avant Stellar, so I get the best of both worlds. Besides, I never could get used to having zero tactile feedback on the FingerWorks keyboards (plus there's the whole FingerWorks selling all their IP to Apple and going out of business thing).
Oh, and the keys on the keyboard have the letters injection molded into the key caps, not just printed on, so no matter how hard you try you can't rub off the printing.
As an aside, I don't know why people would want a keyboard without letters on it. I don't look at them, but occasionally someone uses my computer who doesn't know where every key is. Why punish them? It's not like the printing gets in the way of my typing...
Why speak in the past tense. This exact keyboard with a little improvement exists. Read my comment here about the Avant Stellar. It used to be imported by Northgate computers as the Omnikey and is now imported by CVT. Also, Google "avant stellar"
No keyboard with the stupid, useless, caps lock key in the prime position (next to your pinky) is the "best" keyboard. No way in hell. If you can't dynamically move the keys *in the keyboard* so that the keyboard works identically across all of my computers (Linux AND Windows) through a keyboard switch, then it sucks.
I use the Avant Stellar, which allows me to remap any key I want IN THE KEYBOARD so no matter where I use it the keys are where I want them to be, not where some designer put them on a typewriter 40 years ago and scores of engineer sheep since have simply left them there rather than growing a pair!
The Avant Stellar comes with extra keys in the "strange" sizes to allow me to move the bigger keys like Control, Caps Lock, etc. It has 24 "function" keys, tactile feedback, and a metal back plate not chintzy plastic.
My only complaint with it is that they have yet to come out with a USB version of the keyboard (it's PS/2) which is annoying since I have to use a PS/2 to USB converter and my 8-port MiniView doesn't like it as well as a "real" USB keyboard.
It's also possible to make links that are invisible to humans not viewing page source, but if clicked by a robot will automatically ban that ip from accessing the web server. This might work if you don't want to be indexed at all, but usually you have a part of your public site that you want to be indexed and part of it that you don't want them to index. Usually banning an IP comes only after examining error logs and finding a heinous abuser and is not something I would feel comfortable doing in an automated fashion as you could end up banning sites and people who should be your friend (remember that proxies, potentially one IP, are often not just one person and could be thousands and some of those could be programs).
It seems to me that a much better plan would be to extend robots.txt to include a way for web sites to OPT IN to having their form-fronted "deep" data indexed. This would make sure that only sites that are ready for this kind of intrusion (and have data worth indexing behind their forms) get indexed. Why go for an OPT OUT methodology when the vast majority of the forms on the web front for stuff that wouldn't benefit from indexing.
Also, note that Google is not being altruistic when they say they will only process GET forms. From a programming POV yes it is no harder for them to submit POST forms than it is to submit GET forms. The problem is that they index their resulting data by storing URLs (which a GET request provides and a POST does not) so they would have no way to redirect a person clicking on the result list from Google to the POST form results (thatâ(TM)s just not supported by the browsers). So we are talking about a technical limitation, not a altruistic self-limitation.
IANA(web developer), but I never understood the point of robots.txt crap. Why put the site up if you don't want people to find it? Then as a web developer I'll explain it to you. I pay for the storage of my web site as well as every single byte that goes in or out of my web site (bandwidth). So, every query that is done against my web site by a query engine (or a user) costs me money. Generally I am willing to spend that money to get my content indexed in the various search engines, but it should be MY CHOICE since it is MY MONEY. The way I limit that today is using robots.txt and other techniques. Now, if the search engine wants to pay me to index my content, that's another thing entirely.
BTW, I agree that government sites should not use exclusion rules for public data, but the right thing to do is to complain to the oversight committee for that government web site, not blame the search engines.
So, in my thought experiment, the main direction the cable would fall would be down at an increasing speed,
Where did I go wrong? The earth spins while the cable moves straight towards the center of the earth, which causes a wrap to the east. The cable, which is spinning right along with the earth (even faster, in fact), is going to continue to move at an angle to the center of the earth. Disconnecting it from its tether does not instantly remove the angular momentum it already has, it simply allows a new force to change its direction, gravity.
Actually, no. The rotation of the earth would cause the ribbon to wrap around the earth in an easterly direction
If what you propose were true, a pin balanced on its end would always fall over to the east as well, as would a perfectly symmetrical tree, or a falling skyscraper.
They don't, because all these things, a space elevator included, travel through space at the same speed as the earth's rotation. Why would it suddenly, magically lose that momentum, were it severed from its counterweight? IANAE, but it seems to me that what would happen, as long as the bottom was still tethered, is that the top would start falling towards the earth pretty straight down, but the fall would be very slow, at first. The eddy currents in the atmosphere (potentially very high-velocity currents at higher altitudes, but with low atmosphere density) would introduce random fluctuations in the cable (it would bend in the wind but in different directions at different altitudes). It would not bend a lot simply because we are talking about a lot of mass to move and it would expend half the energy pulling on the tether and the falling weight.
These fluctuations would be essentially random, but would tend to be opposite to the direction of the earth spin because the earth causes a general speed up of the atmosphere at lower levels due to friction between the atmosphere and the surface of the Earth. Remember that we would build the elevator on the equator not only because that is where the earth is fattest, so the atmosphere is thinnest, but because it has the simplest set of forces on the resulting structure. Unfortunately, it is where the earth is moving the fastest relative to the atmosphere.
However, the cable being pulled by gravity would tend to straighten out the cable as it was falling to the ground. The speed of the cable falling would continue to rise. I'm not certain how wind resistance (and hence terminal velocity) would play in this, but since there is no head-end to form a pressure wave as in most falling objects (the object's head-end is already on the ground) I think its velocity would be very high. Also, the thickness of the atmosphere at lower levels would tend to act as a dampener to any movement except straight down.
So, in my thought experiment, the main direction the cable would fall would be down at an increasing speed, it would develop bends and kinks in the cable and the cable would drift away from the planets direction of spin pushed by the atmosphere (that part that is in the atmosphere, the part outside the atmosphere would feel a much simpler downward pull without any of the other forces).
So, it seems like it would fall in a way not dissimilar to how a long string of spaghetti looks like being sucked into the mouth of a small child. It would mostly end up in a relatively small area (relative to the size of the string). The final moments would potentially be the most dangerous since the end of the string would tend to concentrate all of the energy imparted by the atmosphere into the last few miles of the string.
Couldn't we just hook up adjustable tuned mass dampers every few hundred meters? It works for cars and skyscrapers. It seems to me that the cars (or whatever they end up being called) that travel the ribbon would have to have some sort of damper on them or any oscillation in the cable would make the occupants quite ill (even if the oscillation wasn't damaging the cable). Maybe that would be enough to dampen the cable itself.
I could easily see an oscillation in the cable that was essentially nil to the cable (meaning the oscillations cancel out when measured for the length of the cable) but are quite significant to the ants crawling up the cable.
To some extent, certainly. If I purchased a microwave, plugged it in, and it started spewing microwave radiation and irradiated some of my colleagues without me controlling it to any extent, then yes, I should not be liable.
In this case, there is no due care that needs to be taken, as the burden of due diligence reasonably falls on the accessor, as it does with the trespasser.
Your example is not relevant since what you are talking about is buying a broken piece of equipment. The microwave is certainly not designed to "spew" microwave radiation and so having it do so is completely unexpected (and uncontrollable) behavior. However, a router is providing completely expected (indeed, desired) behavior and you purchased and installed it specifically for that purpose.
If you went out and bought a device that produces uncontrolled microwaves, plugged it in at work and irradiated your colleagues you would certainly be liable for that action.
Slashdot Mirror
Now I can stop stapling actual geckos to stuff to attach them to my walls.
...You would need a car driving on a perfectly flat surface, in the same direction...
You commonly drive in multiple directions in the turning lane? I thought that was you! Stop that!
Yeah, it does, but you can remove them and assign those keys to anything, including a macro, or you could assign them to nothing.
I have an iGesture next to my Avant Stellar, so I get the best of both worlds. Besides, I never could get used to having zero tactile feedback on the FingerWorks keyboards (plus there's the whole FingerWorks selling all their IP to Apple and going out of business thing).
Oh, and the keys on the keyboard have the letters injection molded into the key caps, not just printed on, so no matter how hard you try you can't rub off the printing.
As an aside, I don't know why people would want a keyboard without letters on it. I don't look at them, but occasionally someone uses my computer who doesn't know where every key is. Why punish them? It's not like the printing gets in the way of my typing...
Why speak in the past tense. This exact keyboard with a little improvement exists. Read my comment here about the Avant Stellar. It used to be imported by Northgate computers as the Omnikey and is now imported by CVT. Also, Google "avant stellar"
Read my comment here about the Avant Stellar. It used to be imported by Northgate computers and is now imported by CVT. Also, Google "avant stellar"
No keyboard with the stupid, useless, caps lock key in the prime position (next to your pinky) is the "best" keyboard. No way in hell. If you can't dynamically move the keys *in the keyboard* so that the keyboard works identically across all of my computers (Linux AND Windows) through a keyboard switch, then it sucks.
I use the Avant Stellar, which allows me to remap any key I want IN THE KEYBOARD so no matter where I use it the keys are where I want them to be, not where some designer put them on a typewriter 40 years ago and scores of engineer sheep since have simply left them there rather than growing a pair!
The Avant Stellar comes with extra keys in the "strange" sizes to allow me to move the bigger keys like Control, Caps Lock, etc. It has 24 "function" keys, tactile feedback, and a metal back plate not chintzy plastic.
My only complaint with it is that they have yet to come out with a USB version of the keyboard (it's PS/2) which is annoying since I have to use a PS/2 to USB converter and my 8-port MiniView doesn't like it as well as a "real" USB keyboard.
Also, note that Google is not being altruistic when they say they will only process GET forms. From a programming POV yes it is no harder for them to submit POST forms than it is to submit GET forms. The problem is that they index their resulting data by storing URLs (which a GET request provides and a POST does not) so they would have no way to redirect a person clicking on the result list from Google to the POST form results (thatâ(TM)s just not supported by the browsers). So we are talking about a technical limitation, not a altruistic self-limitation.
BTW, I agree that government sites should not use exclusion rules for public data, but the right thing to do is to complain to the oversight committee for that government web site, not blame the search engines.
Where did I go wrong? The earth spins while the cable moves straight towards the center of the earth, which causes a wrap to the east. The cable, which is spinning right along with the earth (even faster, in fact), is going to continue to move at an angle to the center of the earth. Disconnecting it from its tether does not instantly remove the angular momentum it already has, it simply allows a new force to change its direction, gravity.
They don't, because all these things, a space elevator included, travel through space at the same speed as the earth's rotation. Why would it suddenly, magically lose that momentum, were it severed from its counterweight? IANAE, but it seems to me that what would happen, as long as the bottom was still tethered, is that the top would start falling towards the earth pretty straight down, but the fall would be very slow, at first. The eddy currents in the atmosphere (potentially very high-velocity currents at higher altitudes, but with low atmosphere density) would introduce random fluctuations in the cable (it would bend in the wind but in different directions at different altitudes). It would not bend a lot simply because we are talking about a lot of mass to move and it would expend half the energy pulling on the tether and the falling weight.
These fluctuations would be essentially random, but would tend to be opposite to the direction of the earth spin because the earth causes a general speed up of the atmosphere at lower levels due to friction between the atmosphere and the surface of the Earth. Remember that we would build the elevator on the equator not only because that is where the earth is fattest, so the atmosphere is thinnest, but because it has the simplest set of forces on the resulting structure. Unfortunately, it is where the earth is moving the fastest relative to the atmosphere.
However, the cable being pulled by gravity would tend to straighten out the cable as it was falling to the ground. The speed of the cable falling would continue to rise. I'm not certain how wind resistance (and hence terminal velocity) would play in this, but since there is no head-end to form a pressure wave as in most falling objects (the object's head-end is already on the ground) I think its velocity would be very high. Also, the thickness of the atmosphere at lower levels would tend to act as a dampener to any movement except straight down.
So, in my thought experiment, the main direction the cable would fall would be down at an increasing speed, it would develop bends and kinks in the cable and the cable would drift away from the planets direction of spin pushed by the atmosphere (that part that is in the atmosphere, the part outside the atmosphere would feel a much simpler downward pull without any of the other forces).
So, it seems like it would fall in a way not dissimilar to how a long string of spaghetti looks like being sucked into the mouth of a small child. It would mostly end up in a relatively small area (relative to the size of the string). The final moments would potentially be the most dangerous since the end of the string would tend to concentrate all of the energy imparted by the atmosphere into the last few miles of the string.
Where did I go wrong?
I could easily see an oscillation in the cable that was essentially nil to the cable (meaning the oscillations cancel out when measured for the length of the cable) but are quite significant to the ants crawling up the cable.
In this case, there is no due care that needs to be taken, as the burden of due diligence reasonably falls on the accessor, as it does with the trespasser.
Your example is not relevant since what you are talking about is buying a broken piece of equipment. The microwave is certainly not designed to "spew" microwave radiation and so having it do so is completely unexpected (and uncontrollable) behavior. However, a router is providing completely expected (indeed, desired) behavior and you purchased and installed it specifically for that purpose.
If you went out and bought a device that produces uncontrolled microwaves, plugged it in at work and irradiated your colleagues you would certainly be liable for that action.