And another little detail emerges in "combining infrared and visible photovoltaics could allow up to 30 per cent", which to me means that this particular invention alone will not potentially get us to 30%, but the combination of existing (visible) technology with this new (infrared) technology might.
It would have been nice to see some numbers around what this technology alone could do, just to get a point of reference.
But I do acknowledge it for what it is, a novel and promising piece of the puzzle.
Personally, I think the real story will be in the uses they might find for engineered quantum dots. With just the Infrared-adsorbing dots, I can think of reducing the Infrared signature of a human body or fighter jet by painting this stuff on and bleeding off at least some of the heat by converting it to electricity. How about increasing the efficiency of almost anything powered by electricity by converting waste heat back into electricity? How about a CPU core painted over with this stuff to remove heat and reduce power consumption? How about an additional means of removing heat for the Space Shuttle on re-entry?
And maybe they can create quantum dots that have an affinity for heavy metals, so that lead poisoning or other poisoning could be lessened by simple drinking or injecting a solution of quantum dots? Even if the dots stay in the body, maybe the poisons could be rendered harmless. How about a cure for Mad Cow Disease?
The possibilites seem limited only by the imagination. That's the article I want to read.
Anybody else got some off the top ideas on using this stuff?
It's somewhat misleading to say that the cameras will see damage to the shuttle if more foam breaks off. The cameras are mounted on the side opposite the shuttle! Why? Cameras were mounted on the Shuttle side of the tank on a previous mission, but the lenses got smeared sometime during flight. (SRB Seperation, IIRC) The purpose of these cameras is to assess ice buildup and shedding and shedding of foam from the external tank in general, not specifically what hits the shuttle.
It's my understanding that these new cameras, if they had been mounted on the Columbia mission, would not have seen the foam that hit the shuttle, except possibly (though not likely) as a piece of debris in the exhaust plume.
Cameras were never intended as a 'fix', but as a way of gathering more data to identify and understand this and future problems, from which a better 'fix' could be implemented, hopefully before another tragedy.
Yes, if these cameras had been mounted on previous missions, NASA might have had better data as to the scope and frequency of the problem, and maybe something would have been done sooner, and maybe the Columbia tragedy could have been avoided. The fact that they tried to mount cameras on the External Tank on a previous mission shows, to me, that they were aware of a potential problem, and tried to gather data to assess the risk.
Ok, so this is way off topic to the original question, but it is the direction this thread has taken. Is the glass half empty or half full?
I've always thought of it as 'the glass is too big'.
The point is, EVRYBODY is biased. Everybody has opinions, beliefs, and life experiences, and filters all knowledge through what they have already learned.
Couldn't agree more. That USED to be what made the U.S. of A. great. We ALL agreed we were in this together, and that we had common dreams and goals for ourselves and our families. One political party could take a position on an issue that would be considered by some to be 'Good', while the other party's position could be looked at as 'Not as Good'. But everyone accepted we had the same basic beliefs and goals, we just disagreed on the BEST way to get there. But both political parties have decided that the only way to differentiate themselves is by pandering to their extremes. The problem is that the vast majority of us don't believe in either extreme. Party A says that to be a good partisan you must believe in A,B,C,D, and E. Party Z says you must believe in V,W,X,Y, and Z. Well, I think B is just wrong. D has some merit, but I don't think it's the best choice. But Z just seems totally Un-American. And V and W don't seem to me to be any of the Government's business. So I, and most other people I know, have to vote for a candidate based on which one stands on a platform that rubs me the wrong way the least. Kinda takes the excitement out of the whole election process. I understand why many don't vote. Everything must be seen in Black and White today. Every position on every issue is either 'Good' or 'Evil', depending on who's talking. And if the media (All of them) were just reporting the news (facts!), there would be no way for them to have ANY bias. I should be able to watch Fox News and CBS and get exactly the same FACTS reported. But Spinning is now a way of life, in all media. I remember when the 'best coverage' was determined by who got there first and who reported the most facts. Now it's determined by who makes my blood boil the least while reporting the facts, if there are any facts in the reporting at all.
I remember when stocks were bought based on the amount of dividend they paid. The only time anybody bought and sold the same stock on the same day was because of a clerical error. I remember when Corporations conducted business with Customer Satisfaction as their primary goal. Nowadays the primary goal is Shareholder Satisfaction. I have a theory on how and why that changed, and who's to blame. We are to blame. And 401Ks. Our own greed got us here. When was the last time you changed your 401K because 'XYZ' only paid 12% return last quarter, but 'LMN' paid 14%? I've done it. Why isn't 12% 'good enough'? Greed. I remember when a talented, hard-working, and loyal employee base was considered an asset. Nowadays it is considered an expense, which must be kept under control at all times, or the share price will go down.
And when did it become OK in our culture to follow 'most' of the laws that we are all supposedly living by? Instead, we 'pick and choose' which laws apply to us. When did it become 'the American Way' to steal anything that we deem 'too expensive' or 'overpriced' in our feeble judgement? What ever happened to market forces? If it was too overpriced, DON"T BUY IT! The market will take care of itself. That used to be one of the reasons new companies were started. And if we can't sell it for less, than maybe our premise of it being 'overpriced' was wrong to begin with. Cable TV doesn't fit in the family budget? Steal it! Quality of content on CDs not worth the price? Steal it! The list goes on. We have laws about not committing violence against each other and each others property. And yet intimidating others to your point of view with violence or the threat of violence seems to be more widespread. When did it become OK to blow up other peoples' property and injure or kill others becaus
French Fries have always smelled like biodiesel exhaust.
Either way, it doesn't say much that the medium used in preparing food for healthy human consumption smells the same as burning it up in an Internal Combustion Engine. If this really takes off, are we ALL going to break out in Zits from the exhaust???
Offtopic, but in response to your post: Blago's PROMISE to defeat Mayor Daley's proposal was and is an act of defiance to Chicago's long standing attitude of "Me ONLY, the rest of the state be damned". I support Blago in this and hope he continues. What you didn't bother to mention is that there are two proposals for 3 more casino licenses - one proposal is for one license for the Chicago area, and 2 for downstate areas that currently have no licenses. This is the proposal that will pass, if any will. Daley's proposal is to take all three for the Chicago area, even though they already have casinos, including one license that sits idle because they can't find anybody that HASN'T been tainted by Mob connections to buy it.
Personally, I hope no more licenses are created. But if they are, downstate is finally going to get it's share. If Daley honestly wanted to get three licenses for the Chicago area, all he would have to do would be to use his political clout to push for 5 licenses, 3 for Chicago and 2 for Downstate. But he won't. He's on a power trip, as are most Chicago-area legislators.
Yes, Chicago will probably get another casino license, but not until AFTER Downstate gets their fair share. Daley could get what he wants, but his over-blown ego prevents him.
Back on topic: I don't think the sales tax by itself is going to be that big of a deal. I don't know anybody who was able to sell a custom project over shrink-wrapped software because they didn't have to pay sales tax on it, so I don't think it will have much affect on custom software sales. BUT, and I am not an accountant so I could be wrong, but I think retail software must be put on the books as an 'asset' that must be amortized over a number of years, and therefore qualifies as a taxable sale. Customized software, because it is considered 'buying labor', is non-taxable (currently), and can be expensed in the year it occurs. So if they change custom software to taxable status, does that mean it must now be put on the books as an 'asset'? THAT'S what might affect business, more than the sales tax itself. But even this could have a silver lining. It MIGHT create more jobs for programmers in Illinois. Companies might be more inclined to have more programmers as full time employees so that the programs they create can still be expensed.
Just a few thoughts. I'd appreciate any feedback from anybody that knows more about accounting than I.
Yeah, the old Santorini hypothesis, which still suffers from the same problems, the most glaring of which is that it's called "Atlantis" because its suppose to have been located in. . . wait for it. ..The Atlantic ocean. If it were to be found in the Med it would have been called Mediteris or something.
Or maybe it was the other way around -- it was called the Atlantic ocean because it was one huge body of water that could have once held a missing continent - Atlantis.
I can't believe nobody else has made this connection yet.
And if you don't check out the following article, don't just laugh it off.
As reported again just yesterday in this article at Space.com, the earth's magnetic poles MAY be in the 7,000 year process of swapping ends. What is known for sure is that the strength of the earth's magnetic field has decreased 20% in the last 150 years. And whether we are in the process of swapping poles, or this is just a temporary anomaly, the appearance of LOCALIZED fluctuations in the orientation and strength of the magnetic field of earth IS PREDICTED. And besides the obvious inducement of current in locally stronger magnetic fields, it may also allow a small local window for the 'solar wind' to penetrate, both of which would cause EXACTLY the kinds of phenomenon being reported.
This could be happening in your or my backyard next year!!!
The point was that Microsofts response to the problem illustrated here has been "it isn't a problem download and use our tools", while they themselves do not.
Umm, No, the author just happened to post a link to a MSOffice uninstaller tool, which implied that the uninstaller included with MSOffice doesn't work well. I don't see anything that implies or suggests that this was MS's response to the 'problem' of included change data.
This illustrates the underlying problem. Features such as this that require seperate tools to sanitize them will tend to not produced sanitized documents.
Umm, No, again. To sanitize a Word document, just uncheck the box 'save revision data' (or something like that) , and save the document under a different name. Instant sanitation. No external tools. The irony is that even MS doesn't do this. This is SOP Rule #1 everyplace I've ever worked.
The author of the article said that the result of this "exposure" demonstrates a likely need for inline filtering in mail and web publishing systems to correct this MS oversight and stubbornness.
I interpreted the author to suggest that filters might be necessary to correct YOUR (non-MS) end-users oversight and stubborness for not saving sanitized versions of documents for publication.
Actually, Microsoft had a license to port Unix to the 286 and the AT architecture.
And shortly after releasing Xenix, Microsoft released MS-DOS 2.11, which was the first version of Dos with directories & subdirectories, with devices represented by reserved filenames (LPT1, COM1, etc.), the first one to use command-line I/O chaining ( | , > , , etc.) and the list goes on.
All miraculously new and original features for Dos, implemented exactly like Unix, just after MS got a peek at the Unix source.
Why that one's never ended up in court is beyond me. No, I will not be surprised if it really is Windows source and some files still have AT&T copyrights in it.
They're still in development. I know the article was reviewing existing (or soon to exist) technologies, but I would have liked to have seen a 'best-guess' comparison of the potential of OLED, just for grins.
I read somewhere that a current model year car would have a PM OLED dash display, which I plan to check out.
IMHO, OLED has the best potential for the future, once the materials science geeks find the right materials.
In 1979, I paid $500 for a 16k upgrade for my apple ][, to go from 16k to 32k total ram. And they were DIP chips, ceramic, with gold plated metal top. By the time I made the jump from 32k to 48k RAM, the price had dropped to $125!!
In light of this, let me re-phrase: I don't remember ever publicly hearing or reading of Apple pushing Pascal as 'the language of choice for development' after a few months.
In fact, now that I think about it, I don't remember Apple saying anything about using Pascal for development on the Mac when we looked at it either (the pre-release one with the slot for a 5-1/4" flippy drive). But as much as I personally would have loved to port our software to the Mac, our company chose not to. Maybe the subject would have come up if we had decided to pursue development.
I heard this jewel come from the podium at the first Apple developer's conference in an auditorium in one of the suburbs of Chicago, around 1980:
"Pascal is the language of choice for all future software development at Apple. If you want to write software for Apple computers, all of our development tools will support the Pascal language only. We both need one standard language to develop in and support, and we have chosen Pascal as the most popular and best language for development." (Or words to that effect)
This was said by one of the technical suits at Apple at the time who's name escapes me. The 'conference' was actually a 2-3 hour presentation on a Saturday afternoon. It was sparsely attended (maybe 200 people total), which only filled the auditorium to about 20% capacity. A personal highlight for me was running into Steve Jobs in the hallway and having a chance to shake his hand and chat with him briefly, which was no small feat considering he already had a squadron of bodyguards.
Obviuosly, the 'Pascal' proclamation was dropped within months. But it was encouraging to hear them acknowledge and attempt to support the needs of third-party developers.
I hate the DMCA as much as anybody, but let's do a reality check.
Newpaper ads have time-sensitive copy protection. They are not publicly viewable until the date of the newspaper's publication. Anybody that admits they got Black Friday info from any step of the publication process openly admits to 'circumventing' the time-sensitive copy protection, and admits a basis for having DMCA used against them. Seems to me the way to get around this is to DENY the source came from anywhere in the publication process.
After all, it's not the DATA the retailers are trying to keep secret. They publish it themselves, AT THE RIGHT (for them)TIME.
It's the TIMING of the release. Maybe therein lies the answer to getting this info out legally.
What if somebody didn't post this until Wednesday afternoon? Closed on Thanksgiving, so nobody to serve a cease and desist to until Friday, and by then they are publicly available, just in a more useable form if posted all together on the web.
I predict that someday, one of these 'newcomers' to the space race will invent some radical new concept in the design/manufacture/launching of rockets, that will eventually be adopted by the USA and others. But they, too, will suffer their share of failures along the way.
Condolences to the people killed/injured and their families, and hoping they did not die in vain and the Brazilian Space Program and all others will continue.
This would seem to imply that more attributed developers equals better code. That's just not true.
What about all the eyeballs that tried out an app and didn't find anything wrong? What about all the eyeballs that tried an app, found something that could be better, and submitted a bug report or suggestion for the developers, rather than write code for whatever reason?
IMHO, it's not the number of developers that makes for good, stable code. It's the number of dedicated, vocal users that are willing to take something for a test drive and report their results and suggestions. And Open Source users are not afraid to offer their opinions, good, bad, or otherwise.;-)
IIRC, MS did the original port of AT&T UNIX to the 8088, and called it XENIX.
Shortly thereafter, MS came out with MSDOS 2.11. It had amazing new features. And an amazing new slew of command-line characters to do wonderful new things.
Like subdirectories.
Like '|' for piping output.
Like '>' for redirecting output.
Like the other character for redirecting input.
Like 'COM' and 'LPT' and the whole concept of devices as filenames.
And the list goes on. Microsoft would have withered and died without these 'new' features. All stolen directly from UNIX. Which they implemented using the UNIX source code. (Bastards didn't even have the smarts to write their own 'clean' code.) Which they never would have had access to if they hadn't done the XENIX port.
Why Microsoft never got the shiite sued out of them for blatant feature stealing, I'll never understand.
Yes, storing Hydrogen in a compressed form is risky and inefficient.
So store it in a metal hydride. It can store more Hydrogen per volume than liquid Hydrogen. (Yes, it's true. Check it out for yourself.) And can be re-fueled in about the same time as filling up a gasoline tank, can be filled up when only half-empty, is filled at low pressure, would not release all the hydrogen instantaneously in a crash, and would not take up any more volume than an equivalent gasoline tank.
It is, IMHO, THE ANSWER. It can be used to feed fuel cells or hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines. And by distributing the energy as pure hydrogen, the SOURCE of the hydrogen could be from any one of hydrocarbon fuels, electrolysis of water, algae pools, or whatever. It would allow different regions to create hydrogen in the best way FOR THAT REGION, and would ensure that no ONE source has a monopoly on hydrogen.
Here's a couple links to places using this technology NOW!!
I don't remember the name of the product, but I used one of those head-mounted mouse pointers with a 128K Mac back in 1985 or 1986 timeframe. It wasn't accurate for very fine movement, and I got a headache and stiff neck after using it for a few days.
I believe it was based on infrared, and had a receiver that sat on top of the Mac, and a headphone-style headband with 3 transmitters, one on each side and one on top of the head, and a button that attached below the space bar for mouse clicks. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but the more I used it, the bigger PITA it became.
I sure hope this never catches on. I've been looking forward to true DTV since they started this stuff, but now they want to give us a blend of the worst of both worlds.
There's enough overlap in the old and new bandwidths that nobody has to worry about a 'brand new' TV set being 'suddenly' obsolete. At worst, you might have an 8-year old analog TV that no longer has analog signals to receive, but how often does a TV last longer than that? Even if the TV still worked fine, people usually want to replace by that time anyway, since the shadow mask is usually starting to warp, and there's some nifty new featurette that you just can't live without.
And it's only capable of carrying 80% of the info that REAL HDDTV can carry? What's that? I want it all!! That's the whole point of going digital!!!
Slashdot Mirror
And another little detail emerges in "combining infrared and visible photovoltaics could allow up to 30 per cent", which to me means that this particular invention alone will not potentially get us to 30%, but the combination of existing (visible) technology with this new (infrared) technology might.
It would have been nice to see some numbers around what this technology alone could do, just to get a point of reference.
But I do acknowledge it for what it is, a novel and promising piece of the puzzle.
Personally, I think the real story will be in the uses they might find for engineered quantum dots. With just the Infrared-adsorbing dots, I can think of reducing the Infrared signature of a human body or fighter jet by painting this stuff on and bleeding off at least some of the heat by converting it to electricity. How about increasing the efficiency of almost anything powered by electricity by converting waste heat back into electricity? How about a CPU core painted over with this stuff to remove heat and reduce power consumption? How about an additional means of removing heat for the Space Shuttle on re-entry?
And maybe they can create quantum dots that have an affinity for heavy metals, so that lead poisoning or other poisoning could be lessened by simple drinking or injecting a solution of quantum dots? Even if the dots stay in the body, maybe the poisons could be rendered harmless. How about a cure for Mad Cow Disease?
The possibilites seem limited only by the imagination. That's the article I want to read.
Anybody else got some off the top ideas on using this stuff?
It's somewhat misleading to say that the cameras will see damage to the shuttle if more foam breaks off. The cameras are mounted on the side opposite the shuttle! Why? Cameras were mounted on the Shuttle side of the tank on a previous mission, but the lenses got smeared sometime during flight. (SRB Seperation, IIRC) The purpose of these cameras is to assess ice buildup and shedding and shedding of foam from the external tank in general, not specifically what hits the shuttle.
It's my understanding that these new cameras, if they had been mounted on the Columbia mission, would not have seen the foam that hit the shuttle, except possibly (though not likely) as a piece of debris in the exhaust plume.
Cameras were never intended as a 'fix', but as a way of gathering more data to identify and understand this and future problems, from which a better 'fix' could be implemented, hopefully before another tragedy.
Yes, if these cameras had been mounted on previous missions, NASA might have had better data as to the scope and frequency of the problem, and maybe something would have been done sooner, and maybe the Columbia tragedy could have been avoided. The fact that they tried to mount cameras on the External Tank on a previous mission shows, to me, that they were aware of a potential problem, and tried to gather data to assess the risk.
entirely off topic, and this is not a troll. It's a legitimate question.
What's wrong or 'unhealthy' with high-fructose corn syrup? I hadn't heard anything bad about it. Am I missing something? Educate me!
Ok, so this is way off topic to the original question, but it is the direction this thread has taken.
Is the glass half empty or half full?
I've always thought of it as 'the glass is too big'.
The point is, EVRYBODY is biased. Everybody has opinions, beliefs, and life experiences, and filters all knowledge through what they have already learned.
Couldn't agree more. That USED to be what made the U.S. of A. great. We ALL agreed we were in this together, and that we had common dreams and goals for ourselves and our families. One political party could take a position on an issue that would be considered by some to be 'Good', while the other party's position could be looked at as 'Not as Good'. But everyone accepted we had the same basic beliefs and goals, we just disagreed on the BEST way to get there. But both political parties have decided that the only way to differentiate themselves is by pandering to their extremes. The problem is that the vast majority of us don't believe in either extreme. Party A says that to be a good partisan you must believe in A,B,C,D, and E. Party Z says you must believe in V,W,X,Y, and Z. Well, I think B is just wrong. D has some merit, but I don't think it's the best choice. But Z just seems totally Un-American. And V and W don't seem to me to be any of the Government's business. So I, and most other people I know, have to vote for a candidate based on which one stands on a platform that rubs me the wrong way the least. Kinda takes the excitement out of the whole election process. I understand why many don't vote.
Everything must be seen in Black and White today. Every position on every issue is either 'Good' or 'Evil', depending on who's talking. And if the media (All of them) were just reporting the news (facts!), there would be no way for them to have ANY bias. I should be able to watch Fox News and CBS and get exactly the same FACTS reported. But Spinning is now a way of life, in all media. I remember when the 'best coverage' was determined by who got there first and who reported the most facts. Now it's determined by who makes my blood boil the least while reporting the facts, if there are any facts in the reporting at all.
I remember when stocks were bought based on the amount of dividend they paid. The only time anybody bought and sold the same stock on the same day was because of a clerical error. I remember when Corporations conducted business with Customer Satisfaction as their primary goal. Nowadays the primary goal is Shareholder Satisfaction. I have a theory on how and why that changed, and who's to blame. We are to blame. And 401Ks. Our own greed got us here. When was the last time you changed your 401K because 'XYZ' only paid 12% return last quarter, but 'LMN' paid 14%? I've done it. Why isn't 12% 'good enough'? Greed. I remember when a talented, hard-working, and loyal employee base was considered an asset. Nowadays it is considered an expense, which must be kept under control at all times, or the share price will go down.
And when did it become OK in our culture to follow 'most' of the laws that we are all supposedly living by? Instead, we 'pick and choose' which laws apply to us. When did it become 'the American Way' to steal anything that we deem 'too expensive' or 'overpriced' in our feeble judgement? What ever happened to market forces? If it was too overpriced, DON"T BUY IT! The market will take care of itself. That used to be one of the reasons new companies were started. And if we can't sell it for less, than maybe our premise of it being 'overpriced' was wrong to begin with. Cable TV doesn't fit in the family budget? Steal it! Quality of content on CDs not worth the price? Steal it! The list goes on.
We have laws about not committing violence against each other and each others property. And yet intimidating others to your point of view with violence or the threat of violence seems to be more widespread. When did it become OK to blow up other peoples' property and injure or kill others becaus
--OR--
French Fries have always smelled like biodiesel exhaust.
Either way, it doesn't say much that the medium used in preparing food for healthy human consumption smells the same as burning it up in an Internal Combustion Engine. If this really takes off, are we ALL going to break out in Zits from the exhaust???
Food for thought (or driving)
Offtopic, but in response to your post:
Blago's PROMISE to defeat Mayor Daley's proposal was and is an act of defiance to Chicago's long standing attitude of "Me ONLY, the rest of the state be damned". I support Blago in this and hope he continues. What you didn't bother to mention is that there are two proposals for 3 more casino licenses - one proposal is for one license for the Chicago area, and 2 for downstate areas that currently have no licenses. This is the proposal that will pass, if any will. Daley's proposal is to take all three for the Chicago area, even though they already have casinos, including one license that sits idle because they can't find anybody that HASN'T been tainted by Mob connections to buy it.
Personally, I hope no more licenses are created. But if they are, downstate is finally going to get it's share. If Daley honestly wanted to get three licenses for the Chicago area, all he would have to do would be to use his political clout to push for 5 licenses, 3 for Chicago and 2 for Downstate. But he won't. He's on a power trip, as are most Chicago-area legislators.
Yes, Chicago will probably get another casino license, but not until AFTER Downstate gets their fair share. Daley could get what he wants, but his over-blown ego prevents him.
Back on topic: I don't think the sales tax by itself is going to be that big of a deal. I don't know anybody who was able to sell a custom project over shrink-wrapped software because they didn't have to pay sales tax on it, so I don't think it will have much affect on custom software sales. BUT, and I am not an accountant so I could be wrong, but I think retail software must be put on the books as an 'asset' that must be amortized over a number of years, and therefore qualifies as a taxable sale. Customized software, because it is considered 'buying labor', is non-taxable (currently), and can be expensed in the year it occurs. So if they change custom software to taxable status, does that mean it must now be put on the books as an 'asset'? THAT'S what might affect business, more than the sales tax itself. But even this could have a silver lining. It MIGHT create more jobs for programmers in Illinois. Companies might be more inclined to have more programmers as full time employees so that the programs they create can still be expensed.
Just a few thoughts. I'd appreciate any feedback from anybody that knows more about accounting than I.
Yeah, the old Santorini hypothesis, which still suffers from the same problems, the most glaring of which is that it's called "Atlantis" because its suppose to have been located in. . . wait for it. . .The Atlantic ocean. If it were to be found in the Med it would have been called Mediteris or something.
Or maybe it was the other way around -- it was called the Atlantic ocean because it was one huge body of water that could have once held a missing continent - Atlantis.
It's a chicken / egg thing.
I can't believe nobody else has made this connection yet.
And if you don't check out the following article, don't just laugh it off.
As reported again just yesterday in this article at Space.com, the earth's magnetic poles MAY be in the 7,000 year process of swapping ends. What is known for sure is that the strength of the earth's magnetic field has decreased 20% in the last 150 years. And whether we are in the process of swapping poles, or this is just a temporary anomaly, the appearance of LOCALIZED fluctuations in the orientation and strength of the magnetic field of earth IS PREDICTED. And besides the obvious inducement of current in locally stronger magnetic fields, it may also allow a small local window for the 'solar wind' to penetrate, both of which would cause EXACTLY the kinds of phenomenon being reported.
This could be happening in your or my backyard next year!!!
The point was that Microsofts response to the problem illustrated here has been "it isn't a problem download and use our tools", while they themselves do not.
Umm, No, the author just happened to post a link to a MSOffice uninstaller tool, which implied that the uninstaller included with MSOffice doesn't work well. I don't see anything that implies or suggests that this was MS's response to the 'problem' of included change data.
This illustrates the underlying problem. Features such as this that require seperate tools to sanitize them will tend to not produced sanitized documents.
Umm, No, again. To sanitize a Word document, just uncheck the box 'save revision data' (or something like that) , and save the document under a different name. Instant sanitation. No external tools. The irony is that even MS doesn't do this. This is SOP Rule #1 everyplace I've ever worked.
The author of the article said that the result of this "exposure" demonstrates a likely need for inline filtering in mail and web publishing systems to correct this MS oversight and stubbornness.
I interpreted the author to suggest that filters might be necessary to correct YOUR (non-MS) end-users oversight and stubborness for not saving sanitized versions of documents for publication.
...and click-on, and click-on, and click-on, and click-on.
I Promise to single-handedly make any web site feeding a Bush pop-up rich beyond their wildest dreams with click-thru revenue.
Of course, I'll vote for Anybody But Bush.
I'll waste his money and put him out of a job just like he wastes my money and keeps me out of a job.
That's the only way we can stop political pop-ups: No Return On Investment. Let's give them some 'hard data' to show them it's not worth it!
Actually, Microsoft had a license to port Unix to the 286 and the AT architecture.
And shortly after releasing Xenix, Microsoft released MS-DOS 2.11, which was the first version of Dos with directories & subdirectories, with devices represented by reserved filenames (LPT1, COM1, etc.), the first one to use command-line I/O chaining ( | , > , , etc.) and the list goes on.
All miraculously new and original features for Dos, implemented exactly like Unix, just after MS got a peek at the Unix source.
Why that one's never ended up in court is beyond me. No, I will not be surprised if it really is Windows source and some files still have AT&T copyrights in it.
Yes, I did see parts of the Dos 2.11 source.
They're still in development. I know the article was reviewing existing (or soon to exist) technologies, but I would have liked to have seen a 'best-guess' comparison of the potential of OLED, just for grins.
I read somewhere that a current model year car would have a PM OLED dash display, which I plan to check out.
IMHO, OLED has the best potential for the future, once the materials science geeks find the right materials.
Ok, well, you started it.
In 1979, I paid $500 for a 16k upgrade for my apple ][, to go from 16k to 32k total ram. And they were DIP chips, ceramic, with gold plated metal top. By the time I made the jump from 32k to 48k RAM, the price had dropped to $125!!
That's a factoid I hadn't heard. Thanks.
In light of this, let me re-phrase: I don't remember ever publicly hearing or reading of Apple pushing Pascal as 'the language of choice for development' after a few months.
In fact, now that I think about it, I don't remember Apple saying anything about using Pascal for development on the Mac when we looked at it either (the pre-release one with the slot for a 5-1/4" flippy drive). But as much as I personally would have loved to port our software to the Mac, our company chose not to. Maybe the subject would have come up if we had decided to pursue development.
I heard this jewel come from the podium at the first Apple developer's conference in an auditorium in one of the suburbs of Chicago, around 1980:
"Pascal is the language of choice for all future software development at Apple. If you want to write software for Apple computers, all of our development tools will support the Pascal language only. We both need one standard language to develop in and support, and we have chosen Pascal as the most popular and best language for development." (Or words to that effect)
This was said by one of the technical suits at Apple at the time who's name escapes me. The 'conference' was actually a 2-3 hour presentation on a Saturday afternoon. It was sparsely attended (maybe 200 people total), which only filled the auditorium to about 20% capacity. A personal highlight for me was running into Steve Jobs in the hallway and having a chance to shake his hand and chat with him briefly, which was no small feat considering he already had a squadron of bodyguards.
Obviuosly, the 'Pascal' proclamation was dropped within months. But it was encouraging to hear them acknowledge and attempt to support the needs of third-party developers.
I hate the DMCA as much as anybody, but let's do a reality check.
:)
Newpaper ads have time-sensitive copy protection. They are not publicly viewable until the date of the newspaper's publication. Anybody that admits they got Black Friday info from any step of the publication process openly admits to 'circumventing' the time-sensitive copy protection, and admits a basis for having DMCA used against them. Seems to me the way to get around this is to DENY the source came from anywhere in the publication process.
After all, it's not the DATA the retailers are trying to keep secret. They publish it themselves, AT THE RIGHT (for them)TIME.
It's the TIMING of the release. Maybe therein lies the answer to getting this info out legally.
What if somebody didn't post this until Wednesday afternoon? Closed on Thanksgiving, so nobody to serve a cease and desist to until Friday, and by then they are publicly available, just in a more useable form if posted all together on the web.
Of course, I could be wrong.
I predict that someday, one of these 'newcomers' to the space race will invent some radical new concept in the design/manufacture/launching of rockets, that will eventually be adopted by the USA and others. But they, too, will suffer their share of failures along the way.
Condolences to the people killed/injured and their families, and hoping they did not die in vain and the Brazilian Space Program and all others will continue.
Now if they would just publish the results of the 2004 elections, they'd really have a scoop.
Hell, they could probably publish it 3 days after the election and beat the Supreme Court.
This would seem to imply that more attributed developers equals better code. That's just not true.
;-)
What about all the eyeballs that tried out an app and didn't find anything wrong? What about all the eyeballs that tried an app, found something that could be better, and submitted a bug report or suggestion for the developers, rather than write code for whatever reason?
IMHO, it's not the number of developers that makes for good, stable code. It's the number of dedicated, vocal users that are willing to take something for a test drive and report their results and suggestions. And Open Source users are not afraid to offer their opinions, good, bad, or otherwise.
IIRC, MS did the original port of AT&T UNIX to the 8088, and called it XENIX.
Shortly thereafter, MS came out with MSDOS 2.11. It had amazing new features. And an amazing new slew of command-line characters to do wonderful new things.
Like subdirectories.
Like '|' for piping output.
Like '>' for redirecting output.
Like the other character for redirecting input.
Like 'COM' and 'LPT' and the whole concept of devices as filenames.
And the list goes on. Microsoft would have withered and died without these 'new' features. All stolen directly from UNIX. Which they implemented using the UNIX source code. (Bastards didn't even have the smarts to write their own 'clean' code.) Which they never would have had access to if they hadn't done the XENIX port.
Why Microsoft never got the shiite sued out of them for blatant feature stealing, I'll never understand.
I don't know why all the confusion, but CNBC is reporting that the surgery definitely happened. They didn't mention a source for their info.
Yes, storing Hydrogen in a compressed form is risky and inefficient.
So store it in a metal hydride. It can store more Hydrogen per volume than liquid Hydrogen. (Yes, it's true. Check it out for yourself.) And can be re-fueled in about the same time as filling up a gasoline tank, can be filled up when only half-empty, is filled at low pressure, would not release all the hydrogen instantaneously in a crash, and would not take up any more volume than an equivalent gasoline tank.
It is, IMHO, THE ANSWER. It can be used to feed fuel cells or hydrogen-powered internal combustion engines. And by distributing the energy as pure hydrogen, the SOURCE of the hydrogen could be from any one of hydrocarbon fuels, electrolysis of water, algae pools, or whatever. It would allow different regions to create hydrogen in the best way FOR THAT REGION, and would ensure that no ONE source has a monopoly on hydrogen.
Here's a couple links to places using this technology NOW!!
Ovonics/ Energy Conversion Devices or Hydrogen Components' Solid Hydrogen
Actually, DishPlayer from Dish Network was first to market.
I don't remember the name of the product, but I used one of those head-mounted mouse pointers with a 128K Mac back in 1985 or 1986 timeframe. It wasn't accurate for very fine movement, and I got a headache and stiff neck after using it for a few days.
I believe it was based on infrared, and had a receiver that sat on top of the Mac, and a headphone-style headband with 3 transmitters, one on each side and one on top of the head, and a button that attached below the space bar for mouse clicks. It seemed like a good idea at the time, but the more I used it, the bigger PITA it became.
I sure hope this never catches on. I've been looking forward to true DTV since they started this stuff, but now they want to give us a blend of the worst of both worlds. There's enough overlap in the old and new bandwidths that nobody has to worry about a 'brand new' TV set being 'suddenly' obsolete. At worst, you might have an 8-year old analog TV that no longer has analog signals to receive, but how often does a TV last longer than that? Even if the TV still worked fine, people usually want to replace by that time anyway, since the shadow mask is usually starting to warp, and there's some nifty new featurette that you just can't live without. And it's only capable of carrying 80% of the info that REAL HDDTV can carry? What's that? I want it all!! That's the whole point of going digital!!!