Is this Higgs particle increasing in mass because the fermion is passing through/near it, or does the fermion increase in mass as a result of passing through/near this Higgs particle? Or am I misunderstanding the mechanics of this and the additional mass is due to the 'clustering' of these fermions in close proximity to each other?
Thanks for the link. It does help visualize this a bit better.
Sometimes I'm still amazed at the oddest places that exist on the internet. I find this simple.wikipedia.org link much more 'readable' to the laymen.
So if I'm reading the 'simple' version correctly, they are tying to narrow down the mass of the mysterious 4th Higgs Boson? These Bosons are the 'conduit' (I apologize if the terminology doesn't fit properly) that this energy flows through from fermion to fermion?
I would imagine this is how my family and friends feel when I start speaking computer gibberish. I'd consider myself relatively competent to understand basic principles like gravity, mass, weight, etc, but can someone dumb this down?
I know that's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field, but can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?
I get the impression this is a hunt for some as yet unknown particle?
Well that and the fact that the fix is a bit easier that formatting and reinstalling. From TFA: I had the same problem. Since I didn't have time to identify which one of today's updates caused the problem, I removed them all and now my computer is back to normal.
Follow these steps:
1. Boot from your Windows XP CD or DVD and start the recovery console (see this Microsoft article for help with this step)
Once you are in the Repair Screen..
2. Type this command: CHDIR $NtUninstallKB978262$\spuninst
3. Type this command: BATCH spuninst.txt
4. Type this command: systemroot
5. Repeat steps 2 - 4 for each of the following updates provided by FindMeFollowMe:
I have to agree. I have no interest in BNet. I would rather play with a few of my close friends (as in people I actually know and have met in person). I find most people in these online communities to be about as desirable as 'Anonymous' for personalities. They tend to be irresponsible, infantile, or just douche bags in general when the whim suits them.
I'm one of those that was very disappointed that I would even have to log into BNet just to play Diablo. What I find most amusing out of all of this is that the 'social aspect' that the younger crowd extols as being the be all end all of platforms, turns out more social misfits than I've seen in my life. Younger people are simply socially awkward in many aspects these days. They lack basic social skills. They get so used to hiding behind an IP address, that they just don't know how to interact very well when they are face to face with a real person.
"I also wouldn't list Apple's '1984' as a particularly good ad. It was expensive, confusing, and made absolutely no mention of the product being advertised."
Yet here we are, still talking about it years later. It is the definition of a good ad. It evokes curiosity, and people talked about it. They told two friends, and so on. The end of the ad basically said that Apple would be releasing the Mac. That was pretty much all that was needed.
"You forgot the mass-brainwash and Reality Distortion Field."
I'm amazed that we got down through what, about 10 posts before the trolls started showing up. Did you ever consider that perhaps the reality distortion field exists, but you happen to be the one that's in it? I don't consider the opinions of most geeks (including myself) to be mainstream when it comes to comparing geeks with 'joe user'. Reality cuts both ways my friend. Food for thought...
As to the App store, I've never thought it was that difficult of a concept. People (including myself) like the idea that an app has been certified. It leaves me with a certain confidence that it is safe. Oh, I'm not naive enough to think that no malware will ever get through. I seem to recall one that did (using unapproved API's to snoop user contacts), but it was immediately removed by Apple. I am fairly confident that I won't have an issue and that's key. I also have the leverage of Apple behind purchases I make. If something is bogus, or doesn't work, I have a method to recoup my cash which normally wouldn't be available to me.
App store is convenient, and honestly, even being a geek, I have no need for Skype on a cell phone. I don't use any 3rd party Google apps, other than the built in Maps and gmail. I don't find it restrictive in the slightest. In that respect, I expect I'm much more in tune with my non-nerd cousins.
As to the Red Hat Exchange, did it have enough visibility, or any benefits over just grabbing what you needed off of Google?
I've re-read this 3 times, and I'm still not sure. It seems the information can be passed instantaneously across a distance, but some other piece of this requires plain old speed of light. Is there an engineer in the house?
"The technique relies on the strange quantum phenomenon called entanglement, in which two particles share the same existence. This deep connection means that a measurement on one particle immediately influences the other, even though they are light-years apart. Bennett and company worked out how to exploit this to send information. (The influence between the particles may be immediate, but the process does not violate relativity because some informatiom has to be sent classically at the speed of light.) They called the technique teleportation. "
How long before something like this makes it's way into communications? Granted it's no 'beam me up Scotty', but it's getting pretty damn close, at least from an energy perspective. Is this instantaneous across a distance?
I never mentioned the 56k limit. I'm referring to the fact that the same signal is used but tweaked each generation to allow greater speeds in ways that weren't even considered. For instance, from 300 baud modems to 56K modems. Frequency shifts, phase shifting, duplexing, echo cancellation, QAM, etc. All of these pieces allowed more data to be sent over the same old twisted pair in ways they never thought possible.
All of those advances were evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and they benefited all sorts of communication mediums in use today. Had we just stumbled on the next big thing without taking that path, we would have lost the benefits of struggling at the limits of that particular technology.
But there is a limit, no mistake about it. Look at modems. They went through this same limit/new limit methodology for years before they were replaced outright. I think this definitely puts silicon in it's death throws, but I expect some last minute breakthroughs that will push it a bit farther than previously though possible. This is a good thing, in that it forces us to optimize current technologies in ways that we didn't previously consider (like compression did for modems) that in turn was applied to all sorts of communication technologies, and arguably to other technologies outside of communications.
I just see this as a necessary step before pushing off into the next big thing.
Irrelevant for this issue, as it appears to affect all versions of IE with Win 2000, XP, and Server 2003 affected. From TFA:
"The IE vulnerability disclosed on Wednesday, which is caused by incorrectly rendering local files in the browser, affects several versions, including Internet Explorer 5.01 and IE 6 on Windows 2000; IE 6 on Windows 2000 Service Pack 4; and IE6, IE 7, and IE 8 on Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, Microsoft said."
Unless someone is running Vista, or Win 7, they are at risk.
A site that sells antivirus software claiming there are a lot of dangerous viruses? But wait, there's more! Your PC is infected! Click here for your free virus scan! Act before it's too late!;)
No, they state that they are more secure. I don't think I've ever seen someone claim they are invulnerable. That would be foolish. That said, the issue here seems to be with Verisign issuing a certificate for Apple Computer, not with the phone OS itself. At some point you have to trust your root certificate credentials.
For this specific post, yes, it's harmless. Now assume you have a presidential nominee, who supports the most important anti-drm agenda since DRM's inception. Now assume that some corporation like the RIAA, didn't like this, and started throwing out thousands of hired AstroTurfers to politically assassinate the nominee in the public opinion arena by spreading FUD.
We've already seen directly what the power of FUD can do and everyone on/. should be familiar with it's dangers, having either spread it, or been exposed to it at some point. Now take your experience in the electronic world, your Google skills, and your general common sense and toss those out, and give the same information to some frightened voter who doesn't have access to any of those things.
You bring up a good point. How will they separate the two? Would this legislation require all foreign visitors to register on a site in any case just to verify that it didn't need their registration?;)
I don't think they've thought this entirely (I find that funny as you pointed out a major flaw in it within a few minutes of it being posted). Has anyone familiar with legalese read through the actual bill who can comment?
I know that you're joking but your post is a good example in general of the danger of anonymous (granted it's not a political post..lol). It clouds issues about important matters when anyone can simply post any information as fact, without anything to back it up. If it's convincing it doesn't need fact in too many people's minds. I makes finding the truth difficult at best and flames ignorance on a subject at it's worst.
I know being a geek that I'm supposed to be all pro-electronic freedom and such, but I actually like some aspects of this. Certainly not all but some aspects in any case. I'm so tired of reading statements posted by anonymous people stating this person did this, and that person did that, and this one is the anti-christ, and that one is a pedophile, etc, etc, ad-nauseum. I suspect all of those 'bold' claims will disappear if people are forced to put their names behind their statements unless they have facts to back up their statements. The rhetoric is so thick now, I get disgusted just glancing at anything regarding politics on the net.
That said, I think whistle blowing is a critical right of free speech, and I don't see any protections for that in this legislation. If anything, it is worded so broadly that it will undoubtedly be abused by those in power, and no politician should be trusted to do the right thing.
I think in that case, the hardware vendors simply released a product that wasn't ready for prime time. Possibly to try to recoup R&D costs. I can't imagine that they weren't aware of the performance issue with invalid page data.
Larger capacities made possible by this 25nm technology should help to alleviate the issue somewhat, or at least extend the time before it becomes noticeable. That plus support for the TRIM command should go a long way towards deflecting the issue.
Slashdot Mirror
Isn't that what a warp bubble is for?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
Is this Higgs particle increasing in mass because the fermion is passing through/near it, or does the fermion increase in mass as a result of passing through/near this Higgs particle? Or am I misunderstanding the mechanics of this and the additional mass is due to the 'clustering' of these fermions in close proximity to each other?
Thanks for the link. It does help visualize this a bit better.
Sometimes I'm still amazed at the oddest places that exist on the internet. I find this simple.wikipedia.org link much more 'readable' to the laymen.
So if I'm reading the 'simple' version correctly, they are tying to narrow down the mass of the mysterious 4th Higgs Boson? These Bosons are the 'conduit' (I apologize if the terminology doesn't fit properly) that this energy flows through from fermion to fermion?
I would imagine this is how my family and friends feel when I start speaking computer gibberish. I'd consider myself relatively competent to understand basic principles like gravity, mass, weight, etc, but can someone dumb this down?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
I know that's probably a hopeless request without some sort of basis in this field, but can someone give the "particle physics for dummies" equivalent here?
I get the impression this is a hunt for some as yet unknown particle?
Can I get a *Woosh*? ;)
Well that and the fact that the fix is a bit easier that formatting and reinstalling. From TFA:
I had the same problem. Since I didn't have time to identify which one of today's updates caused the problem, I removed them all and now my computer is back to normal.
Follow these steps:
1. Boot from your Windows XP CD or DVD and start the recovery console (see this Microsoft article for help with this step)
Once you are in the Repair Screen..
2. Type this command: CHDIR $NtUninstallKB978262$\spuninst
3. Type this command: BATCH spuninst.txt
4. Type this command: systemroot
5. Repeat steps 2 - 4 for each of the following updates provided by FindMeFollowMe:
* KB978262
* KB971468
* KB978037
* KB975713
* KB978251
* KB978706
* KB977165
* KB975560
* KB977914
6. When complete, type this command: exit
Your computer should restart and everything should be back to normal.
I have to agree. I have no interest in BNet. I would rather play with a few of my close friends (as in people I actually know and have met in person). I find most people in these online communities to be about as desirable as 'Anonymous' for personalities. They tend to be irresponsible, infantile, or just douche bags in general when the whim suits them.
I'm one of those that was very disappointed that I would even have to log into BNet just to play Diablo. What I find most amusing out of all of this is that the 'social aspect' that the younger crowd extols as being the be all end all of platforms, turns out more social misfits than I've seen in my life. Younger people are simply socially awkward in many aspects these days. They lack basic social skills. They get so used to hiding behind an IP address, that they just don't know how to interact very well when they are face to face with a real person.
"I also wouldn't list Apple's '1984' as a particularly good ad. It was expensive, confusing, and made absolutely no mention of the product being advertised."
Yet here we are, still talking about it years later. It is the definition of a good ad. It evokes curiosity, and people talked about it. They told two friends, and so on. The end of the ad basically said that Apple would be releasing the Mac. That was pretty much all that was needed.
No, it was used by Budd Tribble to describe the affect Steve Jobs had on the developers working on the Mac project.
"You forgot the mass-brainwash and Reality Distortion Field."
I'm amazed that we got down through what, about 10 posts before the trolls started showing up. Did you ever consider that perhaps the reality distortion field exists, but you happen to be the one that's in it? I don't consider the opinions of most geeks (including myself) to be mainstream when it comes to comparing geeks with 'joe user'. Reality cuts both ways my friend. Food for thought...
As to the App store, I've never thought it was that difficult of a concept. People (including myself) like the idea that an app has been certified. It leaves me with a certain confidence that it is safe. Oh, I'm not naive enough to think that no malware will ever get through. I seem to recall one that did (using unapproved API's to snoop user contacts), but it was immediately removed by Apple. I am fairly confident that I won't have an issue and that's key. I also have the leverage of Apple behind purchases I make. If something is bogus, or doesn't work, I have a method to recoup my cash which normally wouldn't be available to me.
App store is convenient, and honestly, even being a geek, I have no need for Skype on a cell phone. I don't use any 3rd party Google apps, other than the built in Maps and gmail. I don't find it restrictive in the slightest. In that respect, I expect I'm much more in tune with my non-nerd cousins.
As to the Red Hat Exchange, did it have enough visibility, or any benefits over just grabbing what you needed off of Google?
I've re-read this 3 times, and I'm still not sure. It seems the information can be passed instantaneously across a distance, but some other piece of this requires plain old speed of light. Is there an engineer in the house?
"The technique relies on the strange quantum phenomenon called entanglement, in which two particles share the same existence. This deep connection means that a measurement on one particle immediately influences the other, even though they are light-years apart. Bennett and company worked out how to exploit this to send information. (The influence between the particles may be immediate, but the process does not violate relativity because some informatiom has to be sent classically at the speed of light.) They called the technique teleportation. "
How long before something like this makes it's way into communications? Granted it's no 'beam me up Scotty', but it's getting pretty damn close, at least from an energy perspective. Is this instantaneous across a distance?
I never mentioned the 56k limit. I'm referring to the fact that the same signal is used but tweaked each generation to allow greater speeds in ways that weren't even considered. For instance, from 300 baud modems to 56K modems. Frequency shifts, phase shifting, duplexing, echo cancellation, QAM, etc. All of these pieces allowed more data to be sent over the same old twisted pair in ways they never thought possible.
All of those advances were evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and they benefited all sorts of communication mediums in use today. Had we just stumbled on the next big thing without taking that path, we would have lost the benefits of struggling at the limits of that particular technology.
But there is a limit, no mistake about it. Look at modems. They went through this same limit/new limit methodology for years before they were replaced outright. I think this definitely puts silicon in it's death throws, but I expect some last minute breakthroughs that will push it a bit farther than previously though possible. This is a good thing, in that it forces us to optimize current technologies in ways that we didn't previously consider (like compression did for modems) that in turn was applied to all sorts of communication technologies, and arguably to other technologies outside of communications.
I just see this as a necessary step before pushing off into the next big thing.
Irrelevant for this issue, as it appears to affect all versions of IE with Win 2000, XP, and Server 2003 affected. From TFA:
"The IE vulnerability disclosed on Wednesday, which is caused by incorrectly rendering local files in the browser, affects several versions, including Internet Explorer 5.01 and IE 6 on Windows 2000; IE 6 on Windows 2000 Service Pack 4; and IE6, IE 7, and IE 8 on Windows XP and Windows Server 2003, Microsoft said."
Unless someone is running Vista, or Win 7, they are at risk.
Don't children who have not been vaccinated also develop autism? Didn't it exist long before vaccines?
A site that sells antivirus software claiming there are a lot of dangerous viruses? But wait, there's more! Your PC is infected! Click here for your free virus scan! Act before it's too late! ;)
A good read of computer history on Wikipedia if anyone is interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_virus
No, they state that they are more secure. I don't think I've ever seen someone claim they are invulnerable. That would be foolish. That said, the issue here seems to be with Verisign issuing a certificate for Apple Computer, not with the phone OS itself. At some point you have to trust your root certificate credentials.
Why did they hand out a certificate like this?
For this specific post, yes, it's harmless. Now assume you have a presidential nominee, who supports the most important anti-drm agenda since DRM's inception. Now assume that some corporation like the RIAA, didn't like this, and started throwing out thousands of hired AstroTurfers to politically assassinate the nominee in the public opinion arena by spreading FUD.
We've already seen directly what the power of FUD can do and everyone on /. should be familiar with it's dangers, having either spread it, or been exposed to it at some point. Now take your experience in the electronic world, your Google skills, and your general common sense and toss those out, and give the same information to some frightened voter who doesn't have access to any of those things.
You bring up a good point. How will they separate the two? Would this legislation require all foreign visitors to register on a site in any case just to verify that it didn't need their registration? ;)
I don't think they've thought this entirely (I find that funny as you pointed out a major flaw in it within a few minutes of it being posted). Has anyone familiar with legalese read through the actual bill who can comment?
I know that you're joking but your post is a good example in general of the danger of anonymous (granted it's not a political post..lol). It clouds issues about important matters when anyone can simply post any information as fact, without anything to back it up. If it's convincing it doesn't need fact in too many people's minds. I makes finding the truth difficult at best and flames ignorance on a subject at it's worst.
I know being a geek that I'm supposed to be all pro-electronic freedom and such, but I actually like some aspects of this. Certainly not all but some aspects in any case. I'm so tired of reading statements posted by anonymous people stating this person did this, and that person did that, and this one is the anti-christ, and that one is a pedophile, etc, etc, ad-nauseum. I suspect all of those 'bold' claims will disappear if people are forced to put their names behind their statements unless they have facts to back up their statements. The rhetoric is so thick now, I get disgusted just glancing at anything regarding politics on the net.
That said, I think whistle blowing is a critical right of free speech, and I don't see any protections for that in this legislation. If anything, it is worded so broadly that it will undoubtedly be abused by those in power, and no politician should be trusted to do the right thing.
Squirrel!
I think in that case, the hardware vendors simply released a product that wasn't ready for prime time. Possibly to try to recoup R&D costs. I can't imagine that they weren't aware of the performance issue with invalid page data.
Larger capacities made possible by this 25nm technology should help to alleviate the issue somewhat, or at least extend the time before it becomes noticeable. That plus support for the TRIM command should go a long way towards deflecting the issue.
This is sorely needed to bring down costs for SSD's. The price and capacities available are coming down at a disappointingly slow pace.