I have no evidence to offer, this is merlely speculation and opinion:
If, perhaps the USPS never carried such vast quantaties of third class mail, they might not be in such bad financial trouble in the first place. I imagine there's a huge ammount of infrastructure the USPS built just so it could handle the huge ammounts of (low cost) spam that are delivered nationwide each day. If they only delivered business and personal (non-commercial type mail), the USPS might not need so many people, mail jeeps, and large over the road trucks, thus being smaller and more efficient.
I doubt that when Herodetus' derived saying "Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these courageous couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds" was associated with the USPS, that people envisioned dilligent workers braving the elements to deliver advertisements, of all things.
You're right, of course. Cutting the large quantaties of spam the USPS delivers today by even a little would probably bust them.
Hey, it's okay to disagree, but I'll stand by my affirmation that OSX is designed to be 90% MacOS, 10% UNIX. I also think that 10% of OSX's UNIX-iness only really matters to a very small percentage of Mac users.
On that note, the POSIX standards were developed to make sure that UNIX and UNIX-like kernels behaved in a way that made modules (core OS systems, not the linux kernel variety) portable between those systems and different architectures. After all, that was always the power behind UNIX--the plethora of programs that were designed for a specific functionality. Yes, the original AT&T UNIX was not POSIX compliant, however (dare I say) most modern UNIX and UNIX-like OSs are--and for good reason. UNIX to me, is not a particular OS, kernel or even a set of programs, but rather a ideology about how things should be designed, and how they should work.
Furthermore, I understand that Apple needs to provide an integrated user experience; and that many of the things needed for said experience are against UNIX ideology. I'm completely fine with OSX in up to its graphical interface. Aqua, Carbon and Quartz all have their specific function; however, Finder is a big massive bloated piece of software that often takes on so many tasks (that would often be better performed by smaller, more specialized programs), that it flies completely in the face of UNIX design goals. This coupled with most Mac programmers' inability/inexperience with multi-threading makes MacOSX (as a whole) a complete nightmare for real UNIX heads.
Despite some of the things I don't dig about OSX, I still like it, as a whole. When (or if) Apple programmers get around to modularizing most parts of Finder (I mean, does Finder itself really need to be doing anything like mounting drives, making SMB and Apple Share connections itself? Those tasks need to be delegated to modules specifically designed for those tasks--or at the very least in another thread.), OSX will improve in design and functionality a hundred fold. I sincerely look forward to the day that happens, I might add.
That said, people get a Mac because they want a machine that works with little fuss. People use UNIX because they want to get work done, with little fuss.
Iv'e been looking for a sbc with almost the exact same specs as this, and have been totally frustrated with the fact that very few exist, and most of the ones that do are either super expensive in low volume orders, or don't have everything I need.
Just wanted to thank ya, looks like a helluva nice peice of hardware, not too bad on the wallet either!
Ah, what's $30 in the long run anyway? I'm most likely not going to be getting it (the features/cost ratio just dosen't grab me by the balls) , so I'll be saving $160, right?:)
Nope, the above poster is correct, you have to know the exact path to the share you want to connect to (10.0-10.1.5, anyway). It's a really bad kludge, if you ask me.
CPU utilization shoots right up to the high 90's for Finder (the OSX SMB code must be here, somewhere), and the speed sucks. With my iBook, I managed to squeek about 70kB/s out of a server using a Samba share that will usually saturate my 100Mb ethernet. Quite pathetic. It's not a hardware issue, either, I assure you. The same pair of computers behaved quite well when using FTP, NFS, and SCP (a bit slower, but what do you expect while encrypting all the transmission). In fact, I was quite suprised when I was transferring some pictures via FTP from my iBook just how fast the little bugger is (most laptop ATA drives I've met are terribly slow, this one managed to saturate 100Mb quite easily.)
I'll definitely be trying this feature in 10.2 before I decide to plonk down $160 for this upgrade. If it still sucks, my iBook gets a fresh install of Debian.
That's analogous to saying that windows is 100% UNIX. Yah, you guessed it, you can run X11, KDE, GNOME, and a good deal of the programs that actually make a UNIX like system run, on any modern version of windows (and some of the older versions as well, but I won't make a claim I can't support.)
By your logic, you could claim that most operating systems invented since 1970 were UNIX, if only you could get those things running on it; and by and large, you could get the above programs to run on almost anything.
Infact, last I heard, the WindowsNT kernel is more POSIX compliant than Darwin is. OSX is cool, I'll grant you that, but it's not UNIX. It was designed to be a Mac OS. The fact that it does have some UNIX compatibility has been a two way street for Apple. Long time Apple customers didn't know what to think about it. Apple promised a more reliable, faster and more robust experience; however customers thought it would ruin their computing ability (more stuff to learn, gotta know UNIX, etc.)
Trust me, if touting OSX's UNIX-iness hurt Apple more than it helped, you wouldn't have made that post. OSX is three things: a great marketing gimmick, an easy way out for apple (they borrowed a lot of code, at least they have the decency to it up), and a toy (at the moment, I've had mixed success with it. I look forward to watching OSX evolve a bit before I get serious with it.)
Uhhh....I used to run StarCraft on a P2 with 128MB under WINE and it ran just as good, if not better, than it ran under Win98.
As anoter poster higher up in the hiearchy put it: "x86 binaries don't work on different architectures without cpu emulation, so, no."
WINE is a replacement for the WIN32 API, SDK, etc, without being WIN32. It still runs on x86 machines, so WINE dosen't have to emulate the x86 architecture. It's another matter completely to try and optimize an emulator for some other architecure on a random architecture.
It's been a while since Iv'e needed to test a site, but I gotta say that siege has progressed since I last used it. Thanks for the tip on scout, looks like it makes life even a little bit easier:)
Cool, thanks for the info. I can see that I'll have to do a bit more research before I can go splurge on some LCDs (and not expect to have my ass busted by the taxes.) I faintly recall that dutied items are taxed at U.S. market value, and not at the price they were had for (makes sense--would help reduce market dilution from competition unloading their goods at outrageously low prices), but I'm not totally sure about that. I'll just have to be a smart shopper and not make too many spontaneous purchases.
I don't think I'll be shopping in Japan any time soon, even though they do have some really neat stuff (that will likely never make it to the US market), the prices as you noted are pretty outrageous. From what Iv'e seen on the web, I'd guess that 10% is a very conservative estimate:) I don't plan on hitting any of the big population centers (if such a place can be said to exist) in Japan anyway, but I will visit some old family friends on Okinawa, and perhaps visit some of the old temples.
At any rate, I'll be steering clear of shady looking characaters pawning off their CDs..:)
Wow, that's really amazing! I was planning on going for a tour of south Asia sometime in the near future. I may have to pick up 2 or 3 LCDs while I'm there. I'm curious, though.. Do you know how tax is handled on bringing items like this back into the States? Either way, I would likely be getting a hell of a deal, that's for sure. However, I was just wondering if FedEX-ing some goods to yourself would be a no-no, or if there is some procedure on importing things like this yourself, as I have very little experience out of country commerce.
I have had good luck with the neat little program called siege. It can stress a single URL, multiple URLs, follow links from a root URL (simulating an actual user), and have many multiple concurrent connections active. At the end, Siege can tell you all about the server performance, latency, etc.
I really like one of the other poster's idea about having a load tester read actual log files from Apache, then simulate real user activity. The only problem I can see with this method, is if you changed the layout of your site, all the program would get is a bunch of 404s. However, if one were so motivated, one could hack up such a thing relatively easy, I think. analog can parse Apache/httpd log files, could'nt be all that hard. Siege works well for me, though, so I'll stick with it.
Yeah, gzip can do great things to compress something, especially if there's some sort of pattern in it. Text, being the human readable thing that it is, normally has a ton of patterns. Naturally, something designed to compress word patterns would be especially good at that task, and that task only. Not that gzip is only good at doing text, because there's many applications for gzip. Computer binaries, for example, have many many data patterns. In fact, most everything a computer does has patterns. They're good at doing just that: very repatitive stuff, that humans could or would not want to do. Images often have patterns as well, just not in the same way that text does. JPEG and MPEG use certian techniques to exploit those patterns, and can also just plain throw some of that information away. Perhaps they will do some anti-aliasing to make the changes the algorithms have made look less mangled. If, perhaps, one could devise an algorithm that efficiently represented graphical data (patterns) as some sort of text with lots of patterns, then theoretically a compressor good at text compression could do lossless compression of images efficiently. The problem is, there's already a bunch of ways to compress image data pretty well, beit lossless or not. I don't personally think such a method would be in demand, or processor efficient enough to expore, though.
Ok, maybe it's splitting hairs, but I gotta say it anyway, even at the risk of being pendantic... GIF *compression* is actually lossless. Ok, so the format may not be able to support more than 256 colors normally; this much is true. However, LWZ compression (which is used in GIF) is quite similar to that used in the zip archive format. Heck, PNG even uses GZip. Pretty darn similar. Is using a text compressor the most efficient way to compress an image? I'll leave that one for someone else to decide..
I can sympathize with you on this (and you are right, 'tis a very common complaint amongst OSX users.) I have 640 MB of RAM on my 500Mhz iBook, everything configured correctly, though I haven't had the chance to upgrade to the latest and greatest version of OSX yet. Damn Beach Ball. It's horrid when viewing slashdot on IE. On pages with larger posts, it creeps. I feel that most of my woes are due to IE being a bitch, etc. For whatever reason, IE makes my system use the page file more than it should, even though the physical ram is still pretty much untouched. Mozilla and Opera don't seem to have that problem so much, but Mozilla seems to render stuff strangely, and Opera doesn't work quite right all the time either (SSL and flash pages seem to give it a hard time)
I even tried out the buffer compress feature on quartz (helped memory usage a tad, I'll admit), but I didn't notice any real change in real performance.
The only thing I have been able to do to dramatically increase performance on my poor machine was to install Linux on it. X11 worked beautifully, network throughput skyrocketed compared to OSX, and best of all, it doesn't slow to a crawl when I'm trying to do something. If there existed an OS that was as efficient as the average Linux distro, and had the plugable functionality of OSX, I'd be all over it.
The M998 has a Diesel 6.2 Liter V8. IIRC, some were prototyped with a much smaller engine (4.2-4.3 liter) for more efficency, but they wouldn't get out of their own way (not like a HMMWV is a Corvette to begin with)
Ah ha. Thanks, I did a quick google to see if I could track down the origional source( I know there were a bunch of variants of the DHMO warning spread around), but I gave up after about 3 seconds.
Dihydrogen Oxide (DHO) is colourless, odourless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people each year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHO, but the dangers of Dihydrogen Oxide do not end there.
Prolonged exposure to it's solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance.
Not only is DHO dangerous to humans it is also extremely hazardous to the environment. It is a major component of acid rain, it contributes to the greenhouse effect, and is a common cause of erosion of our natural landscape.
Worldwide contamination by DHO is reaching epidemic proportions. Quanti- ties of the chemical have been found in almost every stream, lake and reservoir in Australia today. But the pollution is global, and the contaminant has even been found in the Antarctic. So far governments and environmental watchdogs have been indifferent to the problem.
Despite the danger DHO is widely used as an industrial solvent and coolant, in nuclear power stations, as a fire retardant, as an additive in certain junk foods and other food products, and in a wide variety of other uses. Companies routinely dump DHO into rivers and oceans, and nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal.
The Australian government (In fact no government) has refused to ban the production, distribution or use of this damaging chemical due to its 'importance to the economic life of the nation'.
In fact the U.S. Navy and other military organizations are conducting experiments with DHO, and designing multi-billion-dollar devices to control and use it during warfare situations. Hundreds of military research facilities receive tons of it through a highly complicated underground distribution network. Many store huge quantities for later use.
Act now to prevent further contamination. Find out more about this dangerous chemical.
--Taken from a chain letter I happened upon a long time ago, origins unknown.
Yeah, nothing works quite as well as getting up-close-and-personal with your target then throwing your sidearm at them. Gun-hurling has quite a devistating psychological effect, to be sure. (most notably the belly laughing that follows almost immediately after)
Similarly, Toshiba was working on a web spider/search engine back when the www was becoming more public. Apparently, the Japanese people love Woody the Wood Pecker, and Toshiba adopted Woody as their mascot for this site, and referred to Woody as "Woody the Internet Pecker". Eventually, word of the English meaning of this got around to one of the bigwigs at Toshiba, and the whole project was cancled.
Amusingly, there are many stories like this floating around somewhere. I've forgotten most of em, sorry to say.
Nah, the courts are that crazy. If a company (Tobacco and firearms manufactures to be specific here--not trying to beat around the bush) can be held responsible for the actions of an informed individual (ie: knows that guns kill, tobacco is a known carcinogen, other common sense bullshit, etc.), then I don't see it very far off for courts to make parents responsible for some minors' actions. I'm sure that many lawyers would jump at the idea--if it was monetairly rewarding enough for them.
Untill then, they'll volture over old ladies driving with hot coffee obtained from multi-billion dollar international conglomerates...
Iv'e thought alot about the possible problems with the file transfer that ReplayTV can do, but i've yet to come up with a really good reason SonicBlue could get into trouble with the court.
I look at it this way: TV is broadcast freely, with only one expectation: you watch the commercials that come along with the shows. Now, there are certianly many methods to get around the commercials (going to the fridge, bathroom, staring off into space, switching chanels, using a VCR that can skip them, or using a PVR that essentially does the same thing in real time, etc. etc.).
The thing that ReplayTV dosen't do is strip the commercials before sending the video to another ReplayTV. In that sense, it's not much different than taping a whole show, commercials and all to a VHS tape, then giving it to your grandma to watch. If she chooses to skip the commercials (in whatever manner grandmas prefer to skip commercials), then that's grandma's problem, not yours, not Panosonic or Sony or whoever the hell manufactured said VCR--and least of all the networks problem, because the commercials are still there, the viewer just opted out of watching them. Of course, I'm probably wrong, but I don't care.
You gotta look for the release overlay (and if you still have a valid support contract, you can download the maintainance overlay, rather than get it by mail) at support.sgi.com. Beware, these overlays are massive.
I was just reading this older article and thought I may be the source of your enlightenemnt. According to everything2, a smither is a light fine rain. So, being blown to smitherenes would require enough explosive to (in essence) turn a body into a light fine rain or mist of body parts; kinda like the guy in Saving Private Ryan who mis-timed putting that sticky bomb on the tank sprocket.
Slashdot Mirror
I have no evidence to offer, this is merlely speculation and opinion:
If, perhaps the USPS never carried such vast quantaties of third class mail, they might not be in such bad financial trouble in the first place. I imagine there's a huge ammount of infrastructure the USPS built just so it could handle the huge ammounts of (low cost) spam that are delivered nationwide each day. If they only delivered business and personal (non-commercial type mail), the USPS might not need so many people, mail jeeps, and large over the road trucks, thus being smaller and more efficient.
I doubt that when Herodetus' derived saying "Neither snow, nor rain, nor heat, nor gloom of night stays these courageous couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds" was associated with the USPS, that people envisioned dilligent workers braving the elements to deliver advertisements, of all things.
You're right, of course. Cutting the large quantaties of spam the USPS delivers today by even a little would probably bust them.
Hey, it's okay to disagree, but I'll stand by my affirmation that OSX is designed to be 90% MacOS, 10% UNIX. I also think that 10% of OSX's UNIX-iness only really matters to a very small percentage of Mac users.
On that note, the POSIX standards were developed to make sure that UNIX and UNIX-like kernels behaved in a way that made modules (core OS systems, not the linux kernel variety) portable between those systems and different architectures. After all, that was always the power behind UNIX--the plethora of programs that were designed for a specific functionality. Yes, the original AT&T UNIX was not POSIX compliant, however (dare I say) most modern UNIX and UNIX-like OSs are--and for good reason. UNIX to me, is not a particular OS, kernel or even a set of programs, but rather a ideology about how things should be designed, and how they should work.
Furthermore, I understand that Apple needs to provide an integrated user experience; and that many of the things needed for said experience are against UNIX ideology. I'm completely fine with OSX in up to its graphical interface. Aqua, Carbon and Quartz all have their specific function; however, Finder is a big massive bloated piece of software that often takes on so many tasks (that would often be better performed by smaller, more specialized programs), that it flies completely in the face of UNIX design goals. This coupled with most Mac programmers' inability/inexperience with multi-threading makes MacOSX (as a whole) a complete nightmare for real UNIX heads.
Despite some of the things I don't dig about OSX, I still like it, as a whole. When (or if) Apple programmers get around to modularizing most parts of Finder (I mean, does Finder itself really need to be doing anything like mounting drives, making SMB and Apple Share connections itself? Those tasks need to be delegated to modules specifically designed for those tasks--or at the very least in another thread.), OSX will improve in design and functionality a hundred fold. I sincerely look forward to the day that happens, I might add.
That said, people get a Mac because they want a machine that works with little fuss. People use UNIX because they want to get work done, with little fuss.
Iv'e been looking for a sbc with almost the exact same specs as this, and have been totally frustrated with the fact that very few exist, and most of the ones that do are either super expensive in low volume orders, or don't have everything I need.
Just wanted to thank ya, looks like a helluva nice peice of hardware, not too bad on the wallet either!
Ah, what's $30 in the long run anyway? I'm most likely not going to be getting it (the features/cost ratio just dosen't grab me by the balls) , so I'll be saving $160, right? :)
Nope, the above poster is correct, you have to know the exact path to the share you want to connect to (10.0-10.1.5, anyway). It's a really bad kludge, if you ask me.
CPU utilization shoots right up to the high 90's for Finder (the OSX SMB code must be here, somewhere), and the speed sucks. With my iBook, I managed to squeek about 70kB/s out of a server using a Samba share that will usually saturate my 100Mb ethernet. Quite pathetic. It's not a hardware issue, either, I assure you. The same pair of computers behaved quite well when using FTP, NFS, and SCP (a bit slower, but what do you expect while encrypting all the transmission). In fact, I was quite suprised when I was transferring some pictures via FTP from my iBook just how fast the little bugger is (most laptop ATA drives I've met are terribly slow, this one managed to saturate 100Mb quite easily.)
I'll definitely be trying this feature in 10.2 before I decide to plonk down $160 for this upgrade. If it still sucks, my iBook gets a fresh install of Debian.
That's analogous to saying that windows is 100% UNIX. Yah, you guessed it, you can run X11, KDE, GNOME, and a good deal of the programs that actually make a UNIX like system run, on any modern version of windows (and some of the older versions as well, but I won't make a claim I can't support.)
By your logic, you could claim that most operating systems invented since 1970 were UNIX, if only you could get those things running on it; and by and large, you could get the above programs to run on almost anything.
Infact, last I heard, the WindowsNT kernel is more POSIX compliant than Darwin is. OSX is cool, I'll grant you that, but it's not UNIX. It was designed to be a Mac OS. The fact that it does have some UNIX compatibility has been a two way street for Apple. Long time Apple customers didn't know what to think about it. Apple promised a more reliable, faster and more robust experience; however customers thought it would ruin their computing ability (more stuff to learn, gotta know UNIX, etc.)
Trust me, if touting OSX's UNIX-iness hurt Apple more than it helped, you wouldn't have made that post. OSX is three things: a great marketing gimmick, an easy way out for apple (they borrowed a lot of code, at least they have the decency to it up), and a toy (at the moment, I've had mixed success with it. I look forward to watching OSX evolve a bit before I get serious with it.)
Uhhh....I used to run StarCraft on a P2 with 128MB under WINE and it ran just as good, if not better, than it ran under Win98.
As anoter poster higher up in the hiearchy put it: "x86 binaries don't work on different architectures without cpu emulation, so, no."
WINE is a replacement for the WIN32 API, SDK, etc, without being WIN32. It still runs on x86 machines, so WINE dosen't have to emulate the x86 architecture. It's another matter completely to try and optimize an emulator for some other architecure on a random architecture.
It's been a while since Iv'e needed to test a site, but I gotta say that siege has progressed since I last used it. Thanks for the tip on scout, looks like it makes life even a little bit easier :)
Cool, thanks for the info. I can see that I'll have to do a bit more research before I can go splurge on some LCDs (and not expect to have my ass busted by the taxes.) I faintly recall that dutied items are taxed at U.S. market value, and not at the price they were had for (makes sense--would help reduce market dilution from competition unloading their goods at outrageously low prices), but I'm not totally sure about that. I'll just have to be a smart shopper and not make too many spontaneous purchases.
:) I don't plan on hitting any of the big population centers (if such a place can be said to exist) in Japan anyway, but I will visit some old family friends on Okinawa, and perhaps visit some of the old temples.
:)
I don't think I'll be shopping in Japan any time soon, even though they do have some really neat stuff (that will likely never make it to the US market), the prices as you noted are pretty outrageous. From what Iv'e seen on the web, I'd guess that 10% is a very conservative estimate
At any rate, I'll be steering clear of shady looking characaters pawning off their CDs..
Wow, that's really amazing! I was planning on going for a tour of south Asia sometime in the near future. I may have to pick up 2 or 3 LCDs while I'm there. I'm curious, though.. Do you know how tax is handled on bringing items like this back into the States? Either way, I would likely be getting a hell of a deal, that's for sure. However, I was just wondering if FedEX-ing some goods to yourself would be a no-no, or if there is some procedure on importing things like this yourself, as I have very little experience out of country commerce.
I have had good luck with the neat little program called siege. It can stress a single URL, multiple URLs, follow links from a root URL (simulating an actual user), and have many multiple concurrent connections active. At the end, Siege can tell you all about the server performance, latency, etc.
I really like one of the other poster's idea about having a load tester read actual log files from Apache, then simulate real user activity. The only problem I can see with this method, is if you changed the layout of your site, all the program would get is a bunch of 404s. However, if one were so motivated, one could hack up such a thing relatively easy, I think. analog can parse Apache/httpd log files, could'nt be all that hard. Siege works well for me, though, so I'll stick with it.
Yeah, and add to that the fact that the "newer" versions of windows are explicitly designed disallow this sort of behavior in the first place.
Truely a governement supported monopoly. Makes sick.
Yeah, gzip can do great things to compress something, especially if there's some sort of pattern in it. Text, being the human readable thing that it is, normally has a ton of patterns. Naturally, something designed to compress word patterns would be especially good at that task, and that task only. Not that gzip is only good at doing text, because there's many applications for gzip. Computer binaries, for example, have many many data patterns. In fact, most everything a computer does has patterns. They're good at doing just that: very repatitive stuff, that humans could or would not want to do.
Images often have patterns as well, just not in the same way that text does. JPEG and MPEG use certian techniques to exploit those patterns, and can also just plain throw some of that information away. Perhaps they will do some anti-aliasing to make the changes the algorithms have made look less mangled.
If, perhaps, one could devise an algorithm that efficiently represented graphical data (patterns) as some sort of text with lots of patterns, then theoretically a compressor good at text compression could do lossless compression of images efficiently.
The problem is, there's already a bunch of ways to compress image data pretty well, beit lossless or not. I don't personally think such a method would be in demand, or processor efficient enough to expore, though.
Ok, maybe it's splitting hairs, but I gotta say it anyway, even at the risk of being pendantic... GIF *compression* is actually lossless. Ok, so the format may not be able to support more than 256 colors normally; this much is true. However, LWZ compression (which is used in GIF) is quite similar to that used in the zip archive format. Heck, PNG even uses GZip. Pretty darn similar. Is using a text compressor the most efficient way to compress an image? I'll leave that one for someone else to decide..
I can sympathize with you on this (and you are right, 'tis a very common complaint amongst OSX users.) I have 640 MB of RAM on my 500Mhz iBook, everything configured correctly, though I haven't had the chance to upgrade to the latest and greatest version of OSX yet. Damn Beach Ball. It's horrid when viewing slashdot on IE. On pages with larger posts, it creeps. I feel that most of my woes are due to IE being a bitch, etc. For whatever reason, IE makes my system use the page file more than it should, even though the physical ram is still pretty much untouched. Mozilla and Opera don't seem to have that problem so much, but Mozilla seems to render stuff strangely, and Opera doesn't work quite right all the time either (SSL and flash pages seem to give it a hard time)
I even tried out the buffer compress feature on quartz (helped memory usage a tad, I'll admit), but I didn't notice any real change in real performance.
The only thing I have been able to do to dramatically increase performance on my poor machine was to install Linux on it. X11 worked beautifully, network throughput skyrocketed compared to OSX, and best of all, it doesn't slow to a crawl when I'm trying to do something. If there existed an OS that was as efficient as the average Linux distro, and had the plugable functionality of OSX, I'd be all over it.
The M998 has a Diesel 6.2 Liter V8.
IIRC, some were prototyped with a much smaller engine (4.2-4.3 liter) for more efficency, but they wouldn't get out of their own way (not like a HMMWV is a Corvette to begin with)
Ah ha. Thanks, I did a quick google to see if I could track down the origional source( I know there were a bunch of variants of the DHMO warning spread around), but I gave up after about 3 seconds.
Damnd nasty stuff that Dihydrogen Monoxide is.
Subject: Warning -- Dihydrogen Oxide !
Dihydrogen Oxide (DHO) is colourless, odourless, tasteless, and kills
uncounted thousands of people each year. Most of these deaths are caused
by accidental inhalation of DHO, but the dangers of Dihydrogen Oxide
do not end there.
Prolonged exposure to it's solid form causes severe tissue damage.
Symptoms of DHO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination,
and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte
imbalance.
Not only is DHO dangerous to humans it is also extremely hazardous to
the environment. It is a major component of acid rain, it contributes
to the greenhouse effect, and is a common cause of erosion of our natural
landscape.
Worldwide contamination by DHO is reaching epidemic proportions. Quanti-
ties of the chemical have been found in almost every stream, lake and
reservoir in Australia today. But the pollution is global, and the
contaminant has even been found in the Antarctic. So far governments
and environmental watchdogs have been indifferent to the problem.
Despite the danger DHO is widely used as an industrial solvent and
coolant, in nuclear power stations, as a fire retardant, as an additive
in certain junk foods and other food products, and in a wide variety of
other uses. Companies routinely dump DHO into rivers and oceans, and
nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal.
The Australian government (In fact no government) has refused to ban the
production, distribution or use of this damaging chemical due to its
'importance to the economic life of the nation'.
In fact the U.S. Navy and other military organizations are conducting
experiments with DHO, and designing multi-billion-dollar devices to
control and use it during warfare situations. Hundreds of military
research facilities receive tons of it through a highly complicated
underground distribution network. Many store huge quantities for
later use.
Act now to prevent further contamination. Find out more about this
dangerous chemical.
--Taken from a chain letter I happened upon a long time ago, origins unknown.
Yeah, nothing works quite as well as getting up-close-and-personal with your target then throwing your sidearm at them. Gun-hurling has quite a devistating psychological effect, to be sure.
(most notably the belly laughing that follows almost immediately after)
Similarly, Toshiba was working on a web spider/search engine back when the www was becoming more public. Apparently, the Japanese people love Woody the Wood Pecker, and Toshiba adopted Woody as their mascot for this site, and referred to Woody as "Woody the Internet Pecker". Eventually, word of the English meaning of this got around to one of the bigwigs at Toshiba, and the whole project was cancled.
Amusingly, there are many stories like this floating around somewhere. I've forgotten most of em, sorry to say.
Nah, the courts are that crazy. If a company (Tobacco and firearms manufactures to be specific here--not trying to beat around the bush) can be held responsible for the actions of an informed individual (ie: knows that guns kill, tobacco is a known carcinogen, other common sense bullshit, etc.), then I don't see it very far off for courts to make parents responsible for some minors' actions. I'm sure that many lawyers would jump at the idea--if it was monetairly rewarding enough for them.
Untill then, they'll volture over old ladies driving with hot coffee obtained from multi-billion dollar international conglomerates...
Iv'e thought alot about the possible problems with the file transfer that ReplayTV can do, but i've yet to come up with a really good reason SonicBlue could get into trouble with the court.
I look at it this way: TV is broadcast freely, with only one expectation: you watch the commercials that come along with the shows. Now, there are certianly many methods to get around the commercials (going to the fridge, bathroom, staring off into space, switching chanels, using a VCR that can skip them, or using a PVR that essentially does the same thing in real time, etc. etc.).
The thing that ReplayTV dosen't do is strip the commercials before sending the video to another ReplayTV. In that sense, it's not much different than taping a whole show, commercials and all to a VHS tape, then giving it to your grandma to watch. If she chooses to skip the commercials (in whatever manner grandmas prefer to skip commercials), then that's grandma's problem, not yours, not Panosonic or Sony or whoever the hell manufactured said VCR--and least of all the networks problem, because the commercials are still there, the viewer just opted out of watching them. Of course, I'm probably wrong, but I don't care.
You gotta look for the release overlay (and if you still have a valid support contract, you can download the maintainance overlay, rather than get it by mail) at support.sgi.com. Beware, these overlays are massive.
I was just reading this older article and thought I may be the source of your enlightenemnt. According to everything2, a smither is a light fine rain. So, being blown to smitherenes would require enough explosive to (in essence) turn a body into a light fine rain or mist of body parts; kinda like the guy in Saving Private Ryan who mis-timed putting that sticky bomb on the tank sprocket.
Yummy.
I personally think the fact that he has people arguing over whether or not this stunt is art--makes it art; and that's all that matters.