Well, no, actually they take a photo of the subject, make a sort of translucent negative, and put it in front of the object and make the object disappear from view. Slightly more ingenious because the background can change.
Not sure how they handle the "light behind the 'cloaked object' isn't shining through it" scenario. Presumably you could bend the light around the object and back into it's orignal path - but that's the 'embedded cloaking device' as far as I can tell.
How about simply having an I'm-going-drinking mode that you can't turn off for x many hours, that keeps your outgoing mails in an outbox for review for y hours. Emails in the outbox could be deleted or edited before the delay finishes, and maybe you could have a setting to keep-and-send-only-after-approval to stop anything sent going out at all until you've (hopefully) sobered up and checked it for "what-the-heck-was-I-thinking?".
One problem with the void idea, though, is that it negates a principle that has reined in astronomy for more than 450 years: namely, that our place in the universe isn't special.... "This idea that we live in a void would really be a statement that we live in a special place,"
Hold on a second...
Current thinking is that 74 percent of the universe could be made up of this exotic dark energy, with another 21 percent being dark matter, and normal matter comprising the remaining 5 percent.
So, being part of the 5 percent of "normal" matter isn't living in a "special place"?
want to be seen with* (not "want to bad")
Sorry, I usually am better about stuff like that. That's OK. We all just assumed you made a typo when typing "want to bed".
Perhaps you're not a lover of technology, after all.
a) Industry sources say the patent is basically worthless
b) Americom wants to collect it's insurance
c) Third party goes to insurer, says "We'll buy the satellite and recover it ourselves"
d) Insurer says "No one told us you could recover satellites" so we haven't taken possession of the satellite (if we did, we'd have to worry about getting rid of it, you see). BTW, good risk evaluation & mitigation, guys. I've got a sandcastle I'd like to insure for $50M vs. water damage. Interested?
e) Third party goes to Americom, says "We'll buy the satellite and recover it ourselves"
f) Americom ignores them, meanwhile tries real hard to de-orbit the satellite really quick.
Now, if this were a movie/book, sticking in "QA finds a problem in the satellite before launch, PHB's decide to launch it anyway, have an unfortunate, totally unforeseen and obviously accidental problem, ditch the unit and collect from insurance" somewhere would fit in naturally.
Hollywood is just a French movie's way of reproducing.
I think the point of the cosmic ray MBH and Strangelet arguement is that cosmic rays have very high velocities relative to Earth, much higher than escape velocity. If a MBH or strangelet formation occurs, the momentum of the object will carry it away from Earth. However, in the LHC, two particles of approximately the same but opposite velocity are smashed together. It is therefore possible, that the resultant object may have a low velocity relative to Earth, less than escape velocity, and so it will remain in the region of the planet (presumably, it will sink to the gravitic centre of the Earth) and have opportunities to interact.
If black holes evaporate as per Hawking's calculations, then there still won't be a problem with MBH's (we believe) since they will be gone before they can grow. If the calculations are incorrect, and my understanding is that there have been no confirmed observations of the phenomenon, we end up with a black hole at the centre of the planet, which despite the small size will likely grow due to the high density in the core and/or the possibility of it gaining a nett electrical charge (and thus having a greater local attraction to matter than gravity alone). How fast it would grow, I don't know. Personally, don't want to find out in person, either;-).
As for strangelets, I'm not sure how certain the strangelet + normal matter = 2 strangelets interaction is, but if it's fairly likely, then slow moving strangelets would really suck if you're on the same planet.
My vote is to run the first tests on a moon of Mars. That way, Nothing Can Go Wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, no, actually they take a photo of the subject, make a sort of translucent negative, and put it in front of the object and make the object disappear from view. Slightly more ingenious because the background can change.
Not sure how they handle the "light behind the 'cloaked object' isn't shining through it" scenario. Presumably you could bend the light around the object and back into it's orignal path - but that's the 'embedded cloaking device' as far as I can tell.
Or you could wait a bit, and just surf from Australia. Yay.
Well, that'd work in Melbourne. Much more efficient to have 100 cars using an overhead cable than one tram. :-)
How about simply having an I'm-going-drinking mode that you can't turn off for x many hours, that keeps your outgoing mails in an outbox for review for y hours. Emails in the outbox could be deleted or edited before the delay finishes, and maybe you could have a setting to keep-and-send-only-after-approval to stop anything sent going out at all until you've (hopefully) sobered up and checked it for "what-the-heck-was-I-thinking?".
As mentioned in the article:
One problem with the void idea, though, is that it negates a principle that has reined in astronomy for more than 450 years: namely, that our place in the universe isn't special. ... "This idea that we live in a void would really be a statement that we live in a special place,"
Hold on a second...
Current thinking is that 74 percent of the universe could be made up of this exotic dark energy, with another 21 percent being dark matter, and normal matter comprising the remaining 5 percent.
So, being part of the 5 percent of "normal" matter isn't living in a "special place"?
Looks like we've reached "sufficiently advanced" for certain values of distinguisher ;-)
Sorry, I usually am better about stuff like that. That's OK. We all just assumed you made a typo when typing "want to bed".
Perhaps you're not a lover of technology, after all.
PS. Soylent green is people too.
Link seems to work for me, too.
It's on ASUS's FAQ page for the EEE if you need to know 100% sure. I saw it the other day, pretty sure it was 1024*768 for the old one.
From the article:
a) Industry sources say the patent is basically worthless
b) Americom wants to collect it's insurance
c) Third party goes to insurer, says "We'll buy the satellite and recover it ourselves"
d) Insurer says "No one told us you could recover satellites" so we haven't taken possession of the satellite (if we did, we'd have to worry about getting rid of it, you see). BTW, good risk evaluation & mitigation, guys. I've got a sandcastle I'd like to insure for $50M vs. water damage. Interested?
e) Third party goes to Americom, says "We'll buy the satellite and recover it ourselves"
f) Americom ignores them, meanwhile tries real hard to de-orbit the satellite really quick.
Now, if this were a movie/book, sticking in "QA finds a problem in the satellite before launch, PHB's decide to launch it anyway, have an unfortunate, totally unforeseen and obviously accidental problem, ditch the unit and collect from insurance" somewhere would fit in naturally.
Hollywood is just a French movie's way of reproducing.It gives me the willies.
If black holes evaporate as per Hawking's calculations, then there still won't be a problem with MBH's (we believe) since they will be gone before they can grow. If the calculations are incorrect, and my understanding is that there have been no confirmed observations of the phenomenon, we end up with a black hole at the centre of the planet, which despite the small size will likely grow due to the high density in the core and/or the possibility of it gaining a nett electrical charge (and thus having a greater local attraction to matter than gravity alone). How fast it would grow, I don't know. Personally, don't want to find out in person, either ;-).
As for strangelets, I'm not sure how certain the strangelet + normal matter = 2 strangelets interaction is, but if it's fairly likely, then slow moving strangelets would really suck if you're on the same planet.
My vote is to run the first tests on a moon of Mars. That way, Nothing Can Go Wrong.