I have to buy a new tube every time I have a new CPU, the old tube always disappears.
Personally, I've never lost a tube of thermal compound. Being disorganized has much more significant consequences than just a few dollars on thermal compound, so I recommend you work on that.
So..... instead of assuming that everyone knows the dangers, please educate me. That's an honest request actually.
You can ignore the conspiracy idiots.
The conspiracy theory centers around fluoride being an industrial waste product... so presumably somebody faked the bone/dental tests so that water companies would pay them to haul away their trash (fluoride).
"Fluoride poisoning" is a real condition, but you need far more than you would get in tap water. In fact "Water Intoxication" is a real condition too, but nobody would claim we don't need to drink water (but then again: http://dhmo.org/coverup.html).
Given that flea collars either do nothing or kill your pet, stores not carrying them is a great thing. Get a safe and effective flea prevention like Advantage/Advantix or Frontline instead.
Sounds like you bought those companies' bullshit marketing campaigns, hook, like, and sinker...
The EPA studied the large number of incidents and deaths associated with "Pet Spot-On Pesticides" in 2009, and discovered that:
"all products had some deaths and/or incidents clssified as major"
In fact flea collars are much safer, being a simpler, weaker and non medicinal, and not subject to ingestion which with drops causes severe medical problems. I happen to have owned dozens of cats and dogs in my life, with several flea infestations in that time, and can say with absolute certainty that flea collars do their jobs extremely well, and I've yet to see a single bad reaction.
Before digital I got about a dozen channels. After digital all of them pause and pixelate every dozen seconds making OTA unwatchable.
If you're that close to full-power stations, it sounds like multipath problems. You may need a new (indoor) antenna that is more directional than your old one. OTOH, you might just have a defective reciever.
I've lived all over southern california, and there isn't a city here where the reception hasn't gotten BETTER on digital. The broadcast radius has improved significantly, where out on the fringes analog was unwatchable, digital looks PERFECT.
I know there's a few people out there with similar stories to yours, but I can guarantee that for every one, there's 10 others that will say what a huge improvement digital HDTV conversion is.
Other sites handle MAP far more gracefully... puttingitems in order, but just not disclosing a price, replacing it with "see price in cart" or similar. The fact that Amazon does not, doesn't make this behavior any less frustrating, or any less directly their own fault.
Cable TV stations have dual sources of income, yes, but their quality has been falling dramatically, even while they have exploded in numbers. Dish Network has been playing hardball for years against them, and winning. You can get Dish Network for just $15/month with their welcome package, which has local channels plus a few of the most popular cable channels, but completely cutting the flood of cable channels off from ANY revenue.
But the real threat is HDTV. Now that broadcast TV is digital and highdef, the picture you get from an antenna is superior to any paid service, you can pick-up far more transmitters than before, and a proliferation of digital subchannels (THIS, AntennaTV, MeTV, etc) provides the kind of selection with OTA broadcast that most people signed-up for cable to get.
Most cable channels have always just been repeat airings of network TV shows. With more OTA channels, that syndication is happening on free TV instead of cable, and the proliferation of cheap DVRs has basically eliminated the need for cable, as you can record the original airing yourself, and rewatch it when it's most convenient for you.
The very few original shows on cable are more inexpensively and conveniently provided by a Netflix subscription, or hulu (free).
Services like hulu may, eventually become a threat to OTA, but the cost of getting OTA (an antenna) is so low that there's not much room for Hulu to improve upon broadcast, and the bandwidth requirements for full-quality streaming HDTV are a long way off for the bulk of the general public.
There's lots of reason to believe cable is going to experience a major crash in a short while, but OTA broadcast has no real competition at this point, and I expect it'll be able to compete extremely well when that ppotentially disruptive competitor does come along.
The only way to make money in this game is to piss off the users as you slap them in the face with the reality that they aren't customers.... they are the product. Yet the sole reason a social media site exists is because users want to be there,
Every criticism you offer about online / social web sites could be equally well applied to something like broadcast television... And yet, they've been operating and profitable for a half-century now, with no end in sight, and the future looks fairly bright for them after the switch to HDTV, with only minimal potential for 'disruptive technology' on the horizon that could upset the good-old business model.
Google is making money giving stuff away, anyone else?
What is going to stop people and business from using the public Wi-Fi vs getting their own?
There's a pretty easy fix for this, actually... Rate-limit each user to, say, 400k. You'll still have an immensely snappy web browsing experience, and can do VoIP, and stream audio, as well as have plenty of bandwidth for fast downloads.... but...
But the important part is that you'll still need to buy a connection to stream video. 500k is hulu's minimum speed, and Netflix is far higher. Streaming video is a huge bandwidth gobbler... directly responsible for cell phone service providers capping customer data plans and the like. It's also why DSL / cable modem prices haven't dropped in years, as people use more bandwidth instead of just getting their browsing done faster.
And with services like Hulu now getting enough of a selection that it can replace cable / satellite TV service, and is on the virge of being capable enough to become the sole TV service for many people, this would be plenty of incentive for people to get their own terrestrial internet service.
But personally, I expect a wireless future... If AT&T can provide $12/month DSL, there's no reason they can't provide UNLIMITED wifi through their entire service area for $12/month or, probably, a bit less than that. Bandwith problems are easily solved by just installing more DSL lines and wifi APs in an area, and just lowering the transmit power on each to serve a smaller radius. Wifi autonegotiation, and seamless hand-off between APs is being worked-on by IEEE right now, too, so the last hurdle behind a horde of wifi APs becomming a replacement for cellular service, is soon to disappear.
Except you got all of that COMPLETELY BACKWARDS... Mail-order, and online shopping most efficiently meets the needs of low-volume, specialty items....
Bulk items are things like paper towels... You really don't care if you get the exact brand you want, exact thickness, exact packaging, so the local brick and mortar can have a truckload sent in, and everybody will pick one up on their way out the door... Shipping from Amazon would be a huge and unnecessary waste.
Contrast this with buying electronics... you don't want the lowest-common-denominator, basic model TV / stereo / computer / smart phone... Instead, you want the exact features you need, size, shape, color that you would prefer, and don't want to pay much extra money to get a bunch of features that you don't need.
Amazon will NEVER be good at bulk items, no matter how much money it sinks into it's "grocery" division. What it's good at is providing the huge selection of specialty items, over such a large market that the low percentage of people that want each one in an area, doesn't pose a warehousing or inventory problem.
And let's not forget that Sears & Roebuck STOPPED publishing their catalog a long time ago. As big box stores get bigger and bigger, they get more efficient, and the niche for online and catalog retailers gets smaller and smaller.
, they still completely dominate you in terms of convenience, selection, sheer operations efficiency and economies of scale. Only Walmart could really hold a candle to them.
I shop Amazon.com quite a bit, but honestly, the shopping experience sucks. I pretty much have to shop other websites to find the product I want, and then I might visit amazon.com and search for the exact product to look at reviews, and/or see if I can get it cheaper than elsewhere. If Google Product Search ceases to include amazon.com, I'll probably never buy anything there ever again, and be perfectly happy about it.
Trying to FIND what you want on amazon.com is a nightmare. A flood of irrelevant results, a "sort by" drop-box which just as often scrambles the results (try a big search, then sorting by price, and tell me you don't find several that are out-of-sequence), no connection between an item and related items or accessories, except for the few, fairly random "most people buy..." results on a page. etc., etc.
Walmart gives you a much easier website to navigate, with consistent and proper metadata on each and every item, proper categorization, related products, etc.
Walmart.com has a smaller selection, but that is actually a GOOD THING because you have less crap to wade through, and yet Walmart tries to serve everyone, so they always have at least one item from every possible product category.
What's more, walmart's physical location advantage is huge... For YEARS, I couldn't have any products shipped to me, because I was living alone, working the same hours they delivered and that their officese were open, not to mention their nearest center being a crazy distance away, in horrible traffic. When shipping just doesn't work, store-pickup is an acceptable option, that Amazon can't offer without B&M stores in every city. Even their lock-box idea isn't going to suit large items, or save them money on shipping.
Don't think I'm endorsing walmart, I'm just using them as the example of the polar opposite of amazon, and pointing out where amazon's flaws become huge disadvantages... A few years ago, I wouldn't be caught dead in a Walmart store. But as other retailers have actually conceded the fight (Ever gone into a Target to find they don't have ANY men's shoes? Ever gone into a pet store to find they don't have ANY flea collars?), and are perfectly happy to REQUIRE their customers to shop at walmart because the margins on many items their customers will need just aren't big enough, or the merchandise doesn't sell quickly enough, I've found myself with no other choice, and have only begrudgingly made peace with buying from Walmart, and happily stop buying from many other B&M's who apparently don't care about their customers...
You can power them from satellites rather than ground based - you'll escape all the dust and much of the atmospheric crap, and your power will be free from the sun.
Satellite power isn't free... In fact it's EXTREMELY expensive. Satellite EoL is most commonly when solar panels have deteriorated enough that they can't provide the trickle of power most sats need.
Yes, you escape dust problems, but then you pick up the problem of hugely-increased distances from laser to drone.
And the biggest problem is targeting... Drones are small, subject to atmosphere turbulence and ground control, both of which can cause sudden location changes, and the satellite is going to need to handle this, in real-time, or else a massive laser beam suddenly shines down at the feet of the people who aren't supposed to know they're being spied on.
In fact, I now see ABC's Nightly World News has full episodes on Hulu... NBC news clips were better than nothing (or rather they would be if Hulu's interface was better and allow non-stop play of a sequence of clips) but a full news program every weeknight is infinitely better.
Hey, if a few former Fairchild Semiconductor employees can form Intel and go on to take over the world, I don't see any reason to doubt a bunch of former Nokia employees could have a big impact on the cell phone market. Of course the odds of any startup just avoiding liquidation are very slim, so I don't recomend sinking money into them, but this is a very fast moving, immature market, so there's huge potental there.
In other words, something has to overcome the temperature difference to push the heat outside. It's either the fridge or the fridge + A/C and in neither case are you going to see any savings.
This is nonsense. Your home A/C isn't 100% efficient, and the refrigerator's compressor motor generates its own waste heat (in addition to the heat it's pumping out) which can be vented to outside with no additional energy required.
In cases where the bank's security measures aren't to blame (the typical case will be when the user picked a weak password, or allowed his password to be stolen somehow, or lost it to keylogging software they installed along with a desktop weather widget) why place the loss on the bank? All they did was implement the security measures that they and their customer agreed upon.
The reason the bank should ALWAYS be liable is because "the customer" never gets a chance to "agree upon" the bank's security measures. I want two-factor authentication, I want one-time-use credit card numbers, I want cryptographically secure transactions... My bank doesn't care what I want.
Oh, and an important aside... Banks are REQUIRED BY LAW to provide two-factor authentication for their online banking services. Has your bank ever sent you an RSA key? No? That's because they got their lawyers to work out a loophole where those 'forgotten passwork"-type questions count as one factor, and your password the second. So EVERY BANK OUT THERE is actively circumventing the law, to provide insecure access to your account. Did they ever ask you? They sure didn't ask me.
" In this weather, are you kidding? I can "sleep" nude without sheets in front of a thirty-inch box fan set on high and not feel even remotely cold."
Some areas cool down significantly at night, others do not. This depends on altitude and humidity. When visiting death valley, in the middle of summer, you need to bring long sleeves with you, or risk hypothermia at night.
That said, you should look into opening more windows, directing natural airflow towards bedrooms, and putting said box fan in one of the windows, either blowing in outside air, or exhausting hot inside air. There are very few places where the nighttime outside temperatures aren't comfortable.
What "can kill you"? Are you suggesting that people might get TOO COLD when hiking through the desert in summer? If so, I'll have to laugh in your face, because you must not have any clue what high temperatures really are. The high winds in the desert are the only thing that make the 120F degree temperatures tolerable.
Cotton clothing is pretty terrible compared to technical fabrics
Spoken like someone who has never hiked for several miles in 120F degree weather.
I seriously hope nobody listens to your advice, or we may have some folks dying of heat-stroke.
Once the cotton fibers get soaked after the first 10 minutes it stays that way for a long time, canceling any benefits.
That doesn't "cancel the benefits", that's exactly how it is meant to work. Sweat is SUPPOSED to stay next to your skin, right up until it evaporates, cooling your body. Wicking it away from your skin ruins your body's only mechanism for cooling down. Wicking fabrics (whether wool or synthetics) is what you want in the winter, but it's horribly wrong in summer desert heat.
The best desert clothing out there is traditional Bedouin thawb/tunic, made of several thin layers of cotton. No other clothing has ever surpassed it for staying cool in the desert, synthetic or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I've never lost a tube of thermal compound. Being disorganized has much more significant consequences than just a few dollars on thermal compound, so I recommend you work on that.
One alternative would be to just buy on-time use blister packs:
http://www.outletpc.com/c2003.html
You can ignore the conspiracy idiots.
The conspiracy theory centers around fluoride being an industrial waste product... so presumably somebody faked the bone/dental tests so that water companies would pay them to haul away their trash (fluoride).
"Fluoride poisoning" is a real condition, but you need far more than you would get in tap water. In fact "Water Intoxication" is a real condition too, but nobody would claim we don't need to drink water (but then again: http://dhmo.org/coverup.html).
Sounds like you bought those companies' bullshit marketing campaigns, hook, like, and sinker...
The EPA studied the large number of incidents and deaths associated with "Pet Spot-On Pesticides" in 2009, and discovered that:
"all products had some deaths and/or incidents clssified as major"
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/health/petproductseval.html
In fact flea collars are much safer, being a simpler, weaker and non medicinal, and not subject to ingestion which with drops causes severe medical problems. I happen to have owned dozens of cats and dogs in my life, with several flea infestations in that time, and can say with absolute certainty that flea collars do their jobs extremely well, and I've yet to see a single bad reaction.
What? You can buy it online and pick it up in-store for FREE. And they're constantly advertising 97cent shipping on just about every item.
And different prices online and in-store is par for the course for ANY B&M store with a website.
If you're that close to full-power stations, it sounds like multipath problems. You may need a new (indoor) antenna that is more directional than your old one. OTOH, you might just have a defective reciever.
I've lived all over southern california, and there isn't a city here where the reception hasn't gotten BETTER on digital. The broadcast radius has improved significantly, where out on the fringes analog was unwatchable, digital looks PERFECT.
I know there's a few people out there with similar stories to yours, but I can guarantee that for every one, there's 10 others that will say what a huge improvement digital HDTV conversion is.
Other sites handle MAP far more gracefully... puttingitems in order, but just not disclosing a price, replacing it with "see price in cart" or similar. The fact that Amazon does not, doesn't make this behavior any less frustrating, or any less directly their own fault.
Cable TV stations have dual sources of income, yes, but their quality has been falling dramatically, even while they have exploded in numbers. Dish Network has been playing hardball for years against them, and winning. You can get Dish Network for just $15/month with their welcome package, which has local channels plus a few of the most popular cable channels, but completely cutting the flood of cable channels off from ANY revenue.
But the real threat is HDTV. Now that broadcast TV is digital and highdef, the picture you get from an antenna is superior to any paid service, you can pick-up far more transmitters than before, and a proliferation of digital subchannels (THIS, AntennaTV, MeTV, etc) provides the kind of selection with OTA broadcast that most people signed-up for cable to get.
Most cable channels have always just been repeat airings of network TV shows. With more OTA channels, that syndication is happening on free TV instead of cable, and the proliferation of cheap DVRs has basically eliminated the need for cable, as you can record the original airing yourself, and rewatch it when it's most convenient for you.
The very few original shows on cable are more inexpensively and conveniently provided by a Netflix subscription, or hulu (free).
Services like hulu may, eventually become a threat to OTA, but the cost of getting OTA (an antenna) is so low that there's not much room for Hulu to improve upon broadcast, and the bandwidth requirements for full-quality streaming HDTV are a long way off for the bulk of the general public.
There's lots of reason to believe cable is going to experience a major crash in a short while, but OTA broadcast has no real competition at this point, and I expect it'll be able to compete extremely well when that ppotentially disruptive competitor does come along.
Every criticism you offer about online / social web sites could be equally well applied to something like broadcast television... And yet, they've been operating and profitable for a half-century now, with no end in sight, and the future looks fairly bright for them after the switch to HDTV, with only minimal potential for 'disruptive technology' on the horizon that could upset the good-old business model.
Yes: TV & Radio.
There's a pretty easy fix for this, actually... Rate-limit each user to, say, 400k. You'll still have an immensely snappy web browsing experience, and can do VoIP, and stream audio, as well as have plenty of bandwidth for fast downloads.... but...
But the important part is that you'll still need to buy a connection to stream video. 500k is hulu's minimum speed, and Netflix is far higher. Streaming video is a huge bandwidth gobbler... directly responsible for cell phone service providers capping customer data plans and the like. It's also why DSL / cable modem prices haven't dropped in years, as people use more bandwidth instead of just getting their browsing done faster.
And with services like Hulu now getting enough of a selection that it can replace cable / satellite TV service, and is on the virge of being capable enough to become the sole TV service for many people, this would be plenty of incentive for people to get their own terrestrial internet service.
But personally, I expect a wireless future... If AT&T can provide $12/month DSL, there's no reason they can't provide UNLIMITED wifi through their entire service area for $12/month or, probably, a bit less than that. Bandwith problems are easily solved by just installing more DSL lines and wifi APs in an area, and just lowering the transmit power on each to serve a smaller radius. Wifi autonegotiation, and seamless hand-off between APs is being worked-on by IEEE right now, too, so the last hurdle behind a horde of wifi APs becomming a replacement for cellular service, is soon to disappear.
Except you got all of that COMPLETELY BACKWARDS... Mail-order, and online shopping most efficiently meets the needs of low-volume, specialty items....
Bulk items are things like paper towels... You really don't care if you get the exact brand you want, exact thickness, exact packaging, so the local brick and mortar can have a truckload sent in, and everybody will pick one up on their way out the door... Shipping from Amazon would be a huge and unnecessary waste.
Contrast this with buying electronics... you don't want the lowest-common-denominator, basic model TV / stereo / computer / smart phone... Instead, you want the exact features you need, size, shape, color that you would prefer, and don't want to pay much extra money to get a bunch of features that you don't need.
Amazon will NEVER be good at bulk items, no matter how much money it sinks into it's "grocery" division. What it's good at is providing the huge selection of specialty items, over such a large market that the low percentage of people that want each one in an area, doesn't pose a warehousing or inventory problem.
And let's not forget that Sears & Roebuck STOPPED publishing their catalog a long time ago. As big box stores get bigger and bigger, they get more efficient, and the niche for online and catalog retailers gets smaller and smaller.
I shop Amazon.com quite a bit, but honestly, the shopping experience sucks. I pretty much have to shop other websites to find the product I want, and then I might visit amazon.com and search for the exact product to look at reviews, and/or see if I can get it cheaper than elsewhere. If Google Product Search ceases to include amazon.com, I'll probably never buy anything there ever again, and be perfectly happy about it.
Trying to FIND what you want on amazon.com is a nightmare. A flood of irrelevant results, a "sort by" drop-box which just as often scrambles the results (try a big search, then sorting by price, and tell me you don't find several that are out-of-sequence), no connection between an item and related items or accessories, except for the few, fairly random "most people buy..." results on a page. etc., etc.
Walmart gives you a much easier website to navigate, with consistent and proper metadata on each and every item, proper categorization, related products, etc.
Walmart.com has a smaller selection, but that is actually a GOOD THING because you have less crap to wade through, and yet Walmart tries to serve everyone, so they always have at least one item from every possible product category.
What's more, walmart's physical location advantage is huge... For YEARS, I couldn't have any products shipped to me, because I was living alone, working the same hours they delivered and that their officese were open, not to mention their nearest center being a crazy distance away, in horrible traffic. When shipping just doesn't work, store-pickup is an acceptable option, that Amazon can't offer without B&M stores in every city. Even their lock-box idea isn't going to suit large items, or save them money on shipping.
Don't think I'm endorsing walmart, I'm just using them as the example of the polar opposite of amazon, and pointing out where amazon's flaws become huge disadvantages... A few years ago, I wouldn't be caught dead in a Walmart store. But as other retailers have actually conceded the fight (Ever gone into a Target to find they don't have ANY men's shoes? Ever gone into a pet store to find they don't have ANY flea collars?), and are perfectly happy to REQUIRE their customers to shop at walmart because the margins on many items their customers will need just aren't big enough, or the merchandise doesn't sell quickly enough, I've found myself with no other choice, and have only begrudgingly made peace with buying from Walmart, and happily stop buying from many other B&M's who apparently don't care about their customers...
Satellite power isn't free... In fact it's EXTREMELY expensive. Satellite EoL is most commonly when solar panels have deteriorated enough that they can't provide the trickle of power most sats need.
Yes, you escape dust problems, but then you pick up the problem of hugely-increased distances from laser to drone.
And the biggest problem is targeting... Drones are small, subject to atmosphere turbulence and ground control, both of which can cause sudden location changes, and the satellite is going to need to handle this, in real-time, or else a massive laser beam suddenly shines down at the feet of the people who aren't supposed to know they're being spied on.
Until you can be bothered to run the numbers on your scheme, you are just an ignorant loud-mouth that likes to argue.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/07/prweb537332.htm
The numbers say that 96% of banks are out of compliance. Giving me the option of using just 4% of all banks is no choice at all.
In fact, I now see ABC's Nightly World News has full episodes on Hulu... NBC news clips were better than nothing (or rather they would be if Hulu's interface was better and allow non-stop play of a sequence of clips) but a full news program every weeknight is infinitely better.
Hey, if a few former Fairchild Semiconductor employees can form Intel and go on to take over the world, I don't see any reason to doubt a bunch of former Nokia employees could have a big impact on the cell phone market. Of course the odds of any startup just avoiding liquidation are very slim, so I don't recomend sinking money into them, but this is a very fast moving, immature market, so there's huge potental there.
This is nonsense. Your home A/C isn't 100% efficient, and the refrigerator's compressor motor generates its own waste heat (in addition to the heat it's pumping out) which can be vented to outside with no additional energy required.
1) 3-letter acronyms are much less clear and more easily mixed-up than 4-letter acronyms.
2) It's only YOU assuming that the F stands for something profane. I refer you to Jimmy Kimmel's "best of unnecessary censorship" series...
The reason the bank should ALWAYS be liable is because "the customer" never gets a chance to "agree upon" the bank's security measures. I want two-factor authentication, I want one-time-use credit card numbers, I want cryptographically secure transactions... My bank doesn't care what I want.
Oh, and an important aside... Banks are REQUIRED BY LAW to provide two-factor authentication for their online banking services. Has your bank ever sent you an RSA key? No? That's because they got their lawyers to work out a loophole where those 'forgotten passwork"-type questions count as one factor, and your password the second. So EVERY BANK OUT THERE is actively circumventing the law, to provide insecure access to your account. Did they ever ask you? They sure didn't ask me.
" In this weather, are you kidding? I can "sleep" nude without sheets in front of a thirty-inch box fan set on high and not feel even remotely cold."
Some areas cool down significantly at night, others do not. This depends on altitude and humidity. When visiting death valley, in the middle of summer, you need to bring long sleeves with you, or risk hypothermia at night.
That said, you should look into opening more windows, directing natural airflow towards bedrooms, and putting said box fan in one of the windows, either blowing in outside air, or exhausting hot inside air. There are very few places where the nighttime outside temperatures aren't comfortable.
What "can kill you"? Are you suggesting that people might get TOO COLD when hiking through the desert in summer? If so, I'll have to laugh in your face, because you must not have any clue what high temperatures really are. The high winds in the desert are the only thing that make the 120F degree temperatures tolerable.
Spoken like someone who has never hiked for several miles in 120F degree weather.
I seriously hope nobody listens to your advice, or we may have some folks dying of heat-stroke.
That doesn't "cancel the benefits", that's exactly how it is meant to work. Sweat is SUPPOSED to stay next to your skin, right up until it evaporates, cooling your body. Wicking it away from your skin ruins your body's only mechanism for cooling down. Wicking fabrics (whether wool or synthetics) is what you want in the winter, but it's horribly wrong in summer desert heat.
The best desert clothing out there is traditional Bedouin thawb/tunic, made of several thin layers of cotton. No other clothing has ever surpassed it for staying cool in the desert, synthetic or not.
Nonsense... The editors comprised this story exartly!
An image is much more educational:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9f/Solarmap.png/800px-Solarmap.png
1/3rd to 1/2 HP is most common. If your home needs more than that, it's usually better to have two separate swamp coolers rather than one huge one.
In industrial settings though, (eg. warehouses), vastly larger evaporate coolers are very common.