So now they will be on for the trip into town (at 7 AM), where before, they would be off.
No, that's simply not how it works. I'm getting tired of slamming my head against the wall trying to educate you.
You want to believe DST hurts you, despite the evidence, despite all the facts available, and nothing is going to convince you otherwise. Not much I can do in that case.
Natural gas is often used for peak generation, not oil.
Natural Gas, Coal, Oil, are all regularly used. Saying "not oil" is completely idiotic, as oil is commonly used.
I don't believe natural gas powerplant make up a significant percentage (anywhere in the USA) outside of CA.
Around here (Eastern WA) it's mostly hydropower, with one nuclear plant tossed in.
Neither of which are very useful for supplying peak demand, so no doubt there is some coal, oil, or *cough* natural gas power plants.
All these are things "wrong" with sex, no matter what your political/social/religous views. Depending on those views, there may or may not be MANY other things "wrong" with sex.
"there's nothing wrong with sex" is a pretty glib, and incorrect.
The thing that amuses me the most about this whole episode is that senators and other publicity hounds never noticed the game when it was just violence, madness and mayhem, but shock of shocks, a character "gets a cup of coffee" and skin friction ensues, and the next thing you know, this is the worst thing that could ever possibly have happened to our kids!
I'm so damn tired of hearing this bullshit over and over. Let's try an analogy, shall we...
First Senario. If you saw two 10 year-old kids playing 'cops and robbers' or 'cowboys and indians' would you have any problem/objection to that?
Second Senario. If you saw two 10 year-old kids in their underwear, dry-humping each other, or simulating oral sex, would you have any problem/objection to that?
Just like how everybody laughs at our school systems due to the fact that zero of the American school systems teach any foreign languages until high school
I was taught Spanish in school BEFORE 1st grade. That's right, kindergarten. Dual-language classrooms.
teach anywhere from 1 - 3 NEW and NOT FLUENTLY SPOKEN languages to their children
You're making the huge assumption that learning multiple different (useless) languages is somehow a good thing. I'd like to see some comprehensive studies before I even accept your predicate argument here.
I attended what is probably one of the crappiest school districts in the country, and had the option of two different foreign language classes as of 7th grade
They said it was for farmers, but that is ridicerous.
Who the hell is "They"? DST was never for farmers, nor did any intelligent person ever claim it was. Saying "They said" implies some authority figures used this as the rationale, which is patently ridiculous. I have no doubt the representatives who decided on DST understood the complex issue, and "farmers" never entered into it.
My solution? "Fall Back" a half hour one year, and just leave it there permanently. Right in the middle....
Proving conclusively that you have NO IDEA AT ALL what DST is for.
Having to turn the lights on the first hour of the day will exactly offset the advantage of leaving them off an hour later.
Which is WHY we have DST. It is rolled-back to regular time in winter, when the sun won't be up in the morning.
If you're in the far north of the country, in the shadow of a mountain, etc., you won't see the benefit, but most of the country will.
Also, residential lighting is not significantly powered by oil in the US.
Well, your car's headlights are, for one thing. Besides, though oil-burning doesn't make up a large chunk of the electric power you recieve, the electricity you recieve right after you get home from work is significantly more likely to come from burning oil than during other times of the day. Oil is commonly used for peak capacity electricity generation, so the odds are much higher that the electricity you are getting during that 1 hour (that DST affects) will be produced by oil.
It's probably a ploy by business to con people into shopping more.
I must compliment you... You really put the other tin-foil-hats to shame.
never mind that you aren't saving a damn bit of daylight in November, unless their laws affect the Earth's tilt
You have to be an idiot to think that DST actually changes the ammount of daylight. All it does is make sure people are awake earlier in the summer when the sun is up earlier, and make sure people get up later in the winter when the sun is up later.
There's no reason for this...
Well that's just blatantly untrue. You may not agree with the reasoning for it. You may not like the hassle of it. However, you can't possibly deny there is a reason for it.
I don't know who would profit from it. Once I do find out, I hope they're shot. A lot.
You are the one who profits from it. If the sun is up when you're driving to/from work, and if you get home earlier in the winter, you will be using significantly less oil/electricity for lighting, heating, etc.
Now then, I'll just be standing here for a while, waiting to see you to shoot yourself. A lot.
The software runs on six Pentium M processors, which are Intel-made, low-power chips originally designed for the telecommunications industry.
Is this story written by an idiot? Or did he need to stick a few more words in there to make it longer? Or is this some sort of Intel sponsored text-based product-placement?
since it gives me a quite meaningful sense of compression efficiency today
What the heck are we talking about? HD-DVD and BluRay both use exactly the came video codecs, so the "compression efficiency" should be exactly the same with BOTH. If that's not what you meant, please explain.
If it's your government providing your service, not only can you not take your money elsewhere except by moving (which can have very high costs)
Actually, once upon a time, I heard tell of a way an individual could change what the government does. They called it something that rhymed with "boating". Coating? No. Goating? No. Oh, I remember, it was called Voting...
It's like paying your rent, electric, water, sewer, garbage, telephone, Internet, and cable bills all at once, with no idea how much goes to each.
That's interesting. Because, you know, I get an individual bill for each, even though most of the entities you've listed are local government agencies here. None of it coming out of tax dollars, nor from people who do not use those services. Is there some inherent reason a municipality couldn't do exactly the same with a fibre network?
penix1 already covered the fact that most internet companies are monopolies these days, or close to it.
The POINT of a horn is to funnel air through some sort of shaped device in order to produce lound sounds.
Of course it is. I was simply illustrating the fallacy in your argument. ie. "Quieter Air"
I didn't say to rip the fins off with pliers.
Actually, pliers would be a fine way to do it. However, the point remains. No matter how carefully you remove the fins, the spindle will then be unbalanced, and also spinning much faster than normal due to the decreased drag. Very noisy.
Also, I talked about sleeve bearing fans vs. ball bearing, which is solid evidence that the bearing (not the fins) makes up most of the noise people object to.
I've come across some particularly loud cooling designs, too. Usually it has to do with where the air goes after it's forced through the fan, and sometimes it has to do with a shitty fan.
I would swap that. It is almost always a noisy fan, and only occasionally the object it's blowing air across that makes the noise.
Sure, there's cheapo fans that have terrible blade designs,
Again, it's quite the opposite. Most have terrible blade designs, and only very few are good. Even more expensive ones can have poor and noisy designs.
but do you really think any NEW "innovation" will come from a fan, after nearly a century of fan design and production?
I don't just think something NEW will happen, I'm watching it happen. As computers become hotter, you can see the new fan designs comming out. Zallman, Thermaltake, Delta, Vanflo, Enermax, and more have come up with some radically different designs of fans over just the past couple years.
Fluid dynamic bearings were a big improvement for motors (technology which is necessarily older than electric fans) and FDB used in hard drives have begun to get use in fans as well.
Of course, to get you that $2 fan, it won't happen.
Enermax 80mm fans are only $3. I'm sure less in quantity to an OEM. And damn silent. Better than the expensive and noisy fans from Themaltake.
Maybe your hard drives are a few years old, or you got a crappy one.
Nope. Brand new, and some of the quietest units around.
A new drive from almost any manufacturer these days (SATA 7200RPM) are so quiet I can't hear them unless I put my ear next to them./blockquote Either your hearing is poor, or the fans in your system are so loud that they are covering up the noise of your hard drive. I had to carefully mount mine to eliminate the noise from vibrations, and it's acceptable now, but still audible over my (very quite, very cheap) $3 Enermax 80mm fans.
Why use a machine that is pulling 250Watts or so to do something a little box that pulls like 15 can do?
Because I've never seen a computer draw 250watts. 100watts is the most any of my computers have ever drawn. Older computers were significantly lower, and with some basic underclocking, you can get them right down to that 15 watt mark, without spending $100 on new hardware.
Besides that, my old underclocked PC acting as my router is doing far, far more than any Linksys box you've ever seen. Embedded systems like Soekris may be a different story, but they are expensive enough that it would take YEARS and YEARS of always-on for the electric bill to finally pay-back the purchase price.
"Space" is a non-issue for me. Maybe if I was in a tiny appartment in New York, it would matter. I could fit dozens and dozens of computers in any of the unused closets here...
In the past whenever something went direct to dvd/video, it meant that basically they had produced it on a shoestring budget,
That WAS TRUE when it was VHS. Now that the DVD sales generate MORE REVENUE THAN THEATRES it's definately not the case.
I'm still NEVER going to buy a DVD for $10 or more, when VHS was less than that new, and $5 after a few months. If it wasn't for Netflix, I wouldn't be watching any DVDs at all.
1. Give me infinitely small, ultra-cheap, limitless storage. 2. I want ultra-fast internet access, but I don't want to pay for it. 3. Mix "The Matrix" with "Windows 95" and get the "Blue Brain-Matter of Death" 4. Limitless power that can be pulled out of the air by a very cheap device. 5. There's no such thing as an "obvious" error.
It's the AIR the fan is pushing that makes the noise. So I guess he wants quiet air..
It's the AIR the car horn is pushing that makes the noise, so obviously the only way to make the horn quieter is quieter air...
(I'm trying very hard not to call you an idiot)
Pull the fins off your fan and see how much noise it makes. It won't make much.
Actually, it WILL make a lot. It will then be unbalanced, spinning at a much higher speed than it should, the bearings ratling around, etc. in fact, to prove my point, buy a ball-bearing fan, and a similarly spec'd sleeve-bearing fan, and compare them. Guess which one with be quieter (and one WILL be much quieter).
That said, removing the fins will cut down on noise somewhat, but not because moving air is inherently noisy. Removing fins reduces the noise because most fans have horribly designed fins which cut through the air in such a way that they make a lot of unnecessary noise, whether they move lots of air or not. I could take most noisy fans, put the fins for the well-designed fan on it, and make it damn near silent. So fans have a LOT of room for noise improvements.
I've come across lots of quiet fans that move huge ammounts of air, and lots of noisy fans that move a tiny ammount of air.
So, the "innovation" won't be in making quiet fans, it will be in making top of the line FAST chips that don't require them.
It's a combination of the two. Lower the power consumption of the chips, and you can get away with slower fans. However, there won't be solid-state computers in the foreseable future, so innovations on quieter fans are also very important.
To illustrate my point, even with the quietest new harddrives, they are still louder than the fans in any of my computers. $3 Enermax 80mm fans are great, though I wish the MTBF was longer. Meanwhile, ThermalTake's makes unusually noisy, high-pitched fans (SmartCase fan II) that are damn loud even at their lowest, "barely moving air" setting.
I have a nearly nine year old FreeBSD machine that is still running great as an email/web/ftp server. Its a Dual PIII, 1 gig of ram.
Either you added an extra "I" there, or your time-frame is completely off. The first PIIIs didn't even come out until 1999, which would be 6 years ago, not 9.
Why not just go and get a board and chip for $150, and build something, THEN put Windows 2000 on it.
Because then you are wasting $150 (probably more, actually). A slightly slower computer works just fine, thank you. People with a lot of money, to whom $400 for a new computer every couple years, won't see the point.
For those who are willing to wait a few more seconds for their application to start-up, using older computers is a very good option. Hell, I had my old 386 in service as a firewall until it died about a year ago.
My question for you is, why NOT use old hardware, when it continues to function just fine. Sure, you can't use 20 year-old hardware anymore, but unless you're doing video encoding, volume encryption, etc, a system up to 10 years old works just fine, even with Windows.
You are correct that there are many different ways, but your presupposition that those other ways are quicker is surely wrong.
Well, it's not a 1:1 comparison, since they can't be used in quite the same way.
Many are quicker in reality, though, because they can be used against large numbers of hosts simultaneously.
Besides that, the speed at which they find your machine doesn't really make any difference, does it? Changing the port may change the time it takes to find you from a milisecond to a few seconds. Changing your password to include non-alphanumeric characters can change it from taking a few minutes to run a dictionary attack, to taking decades upon decades to brute-force it. There's a big difference between the real security and the obscurity there.
If you happen to know a quicker method than TCP connect scans for use against mass amounts of randomly selected targets then please, let us all know.
Don't act like such an ass. Just because you don't happen to know how different port-scan methods can work doesn't imply that nobody does. That's called being arrogant. If you spend some time to look them up, I'm confident you'll find plenty of info on them.
It wasn't long ago I ran across a global warming nut on/. who used the same argument as you when I mentioned that there are other ways to cool the earth, other than cutting down on emissions. He was also making an ass of himself.
No, not at all. The image is pretty trivial to make, whereas fitting a large quantity of data on a (relatively) cheap media is the interesting part.
I can make-up an image format for a 100TB disc if you want, and start releasing images for it (to be recorded to disc when it comes out in 50 years).
Which would you rather have? A disc image of a good DVD, or a DVD-ROM of a bad AVI?
This really makes no sense at all. The content is the same either way. Whether you've converted the video to DVD-Video or an MPEG file on a DVD-ROM, makes no difference to me. It is trivial to convert one to the other.
Data trumps the physical layer.
Sure, but how does that (in your mind) somehow give HD-DVD any advantage at all over BluRay? The physical layer is the interesting part, because the data is (almost exactly) the same either way.
Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of early HD titles wind up on DVD-9 medium, since it'll be a little cheaper, and will also be playable in lots of computers as well as new players.
Actually, that's the case right now. Besides Terminator 2, there's also a lot of IMAX movies that come on a DVD-9 in HD-WMV. If not for the dammed DRM, I would buy a few.
I've already seen plenty of HD material available for download. Star Wars Episode 2 and Terminator 3 in 720p. They're about 4GBs each and look quite good. It's just a shame there aren't any GOOD movies available in HD yet (without loads of DRM).
Slashdot Mirror
No, that's simply not how it works. I'm getting tired of slamming my head against the wall trying to educate you.
You want to believe DST hurts you, despite the evidence, despite all the facts available, and nothing is going to convince you otherwise. Not much I can do in that case.
Natural Gas, Coal, Oil, are all regularly used. Saying "not oil" is completely idiotic, as oil is commonly used.
I don't believe natural gas powerplant make up a significant percentage (anywhere in the USA) outside of CA.
Neither of which are very useful for supplying peak demand, so no doubt there is some coal, oil, or *cough* natural gas power plants.
Sexually transmitted disease.
Unwanted pregnancy.
Life-threatening STDs (HIV, Syphilis, etc)
The psychological effects
All these are things "wrong" with sex, no matter what your political/social/religous views. Depending on those views, there may or may not be MANY other things "wrong" with sex.
"there's nothing wrong with sex" is a pretty glib, and incorrect.
I'm so damn tired of hearing this bullshit over and over. Let's try an analogy, shall we...
First Senario. If you saw two 10 year-old kids playing 'cops and robbers' or 'cowboys and indians' would you have any problem/objection to that?
Second Senario. If you saw two 10 year-old kids in their underwear, dry-humping each other, or simulating oral sex, would you have any problem/objection to that?
I've explained the issue in detail before, but I'm tired of typing the same thing repeatedly, and this post summaries the issue well enough: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=156502&cid=13
I was taught Spanish in school BEFORE 1st grade. That's right, kindergarten. Dual-language classrooms.
You're making the huge assumption that learning multiple different (useless) languages is somehow a good thing. I'd like to see some comprehensive studies before I even accept your predicate argument here.
I attended what is probably one of the crappiest school districts in the country, and had the option of two different foreign language classes as of 7th grade
Who the hell is "They"? DST was never for farmers, nor did any intelligent person ever claim it was. Saying "They said" implies some authority figures used this as the rationale, which is patently ridiculous. I have no doubt the representatives who decided on DST understood the complex issue, and "farmers" never entered into it.
Proving conclusively that you have NO IDEA AT ALL what DST is for.
Which is WHY we have DST. It is rolled-back to regular time in winter, when the sun won't be up in the morning.
If you're in the far north of the country, in the shadow of a mountain, etc., you won't see the benefit, but most of the country will.
Well, your car's headlights are, for one thing. Besides, though oil-burning doesn't make up a large chunk of the electric power you recieve, the electricity you recieve right after you get home from work is significantly more likely to come from burning oil than during other times of the day. Oil is commonly used for peak capacity electricity generation, so the odds are much higher that the electricity you are getting during that 1 hour (that DST affects) will be produced by oil.
I must compliment you... You really put the other tin-foil-hats to shame.
You have to be an idiot to think that DST actually changes the ammount of daylight. All it does is make sure people are awake earlier in the summer when the sun is up earlier, and make sure people get up later in the winter when the sun is up later.
Well that's just blatantly untrue. You may not agree with the reasoning for it. You may not like the hassle of it. However, you can't possibly deny there is a reason for it.
You are the one who profits from it. If the sun is up when you're driving to/from work, and if you get home earlier in the winter, you will be using significantly less oil/electricity for lighting, heating, etc.
Now then, I'll just be standing here for a while, waiting to see you to shoot yourself. A lot.
It's a change of ONE HOUR. I fail to see how that qualifies as "much harder". The kids will be getting up just one single hour earlier.
Is this story written by an idiot? Or did he need to stick a few more words in there to make it longer? Or is this some sort of Intel sponsored text-based product-placement?
Considering that most posts on
No, none. Sorry.
What the heck are we talking about? HD-DVD and BluRay both use exactly the came video codecs, so the "compression efficiency" should be exactly the same with BOTH. If that's not what you meant, please explain.
Good argument.
It's just a shame you got modded-up in the first place, with no idea what you're talking about.
Actually, once upon a time, I heard tell of a way an individual could change what the government does. They called it something that rhymed with "boating". Coating? No. Goating? No. Oh, I remember, it was called Voting...
That's interesting. Because, you know, I get an individual bill for each, even though most of the entities you've listed are local government agencies here. None of it coming out of tax dollars, nor from people who do not use those services. Is there some inherent reason a municipality couldn't do exactly the same with a fibre network?
penix1 already covered the fact that most internet companies are monopolies these days, or close to it.
Of course it is. I was simply illustrating the fallacy in your argument. ie. "Quieter Air"
Actually, pliers would be a fine way to do it. However, the point remains. No matter how carefully you remove the fins, the spindle will then be unbalanced, and also spinning much faster than normal due to the decreased drag. Very noisy.
Also, I talked about sleeve bearing fans vs. ball bearing, which is solid evidence that the bearing (not the fins) makes up most of the noise people object to.
I would swap that. It is almost always a noisy fan, and only occasionally the object it's blowing air across that makes the noise.
Again, it's quite the opposite. Most have terrible blade designs, and only very few are good. Even more expensive ones can have poor and noisy designs.
I don't just think something NEW will happen, I'm watching it happen. As computers become hotter, you can see the new fan designs comming out. Zallman, Thermaltake, Delta, Vanflo, Enermax, and more have come up with some radically different designs of fans over just the past couple years.
Fluid dynamic bearings were a big improvement for motors (technology which is necessarily older than electric fans) and FDB used in hard drives have begun to get use in fans as well.
Enermax 80mm fans are only $3. I'm sure less in quantity to an OEM. And damn silent. Better than the expensive and noisy fans from Themaltake.
Nope. Brand new, and some of the quietest units around.
Because I've never seen a computer draw 250watts. 100watts is the most any of my computers have ever drawn. Older computers were significantly lower, and with some basic underclocking, you can get them right down to that 15 watt mark, without spending $100 on new hardware.
Besides that, my old underclocked PC acting as my router is doing far, far more than any Linksys box you've ever seen. Embedded systems like Soekris may be a different story, but they are expensive enough that it would take YEARS and YEARS of always-on for the electric bill to finally pay-back the purchase price.
"Space" is a non-issue for me. Maybe if I was in a tiny appartment in New York, it would matter. I could fit dozens and dozens of computers in any of the unused closets here...
That WAS TRUE when it was VHS. Now that the DVD sales generate MORE REVENUE THAN THEATRES it's definately not the case.
I'm still NEVER going to buy a DVD for $10 or more, when VHS was less than that new, and $5 after a few months. If it wasn't for Netflix, I wouldn't be watching any DVDs at all.
Jurassic Bark
A Taste Of Freedom
The Sting
Bend Her
Obsoletely Fabulous (Robot 1-X)
Leela's Homeworld
Kif Gets Knocked Up A Notch
Crimes of the Hot
The ones that were good weren't all that good, and the ones that were bad (the majority) were absolutely horrible.
Fast fans can be very quite, and slow fans can make ungodly ammounts of noise.
T.M.D. fans that you mentioned are a GIMMICK, not a solution to anything.
1. Give me infinitely small, ultra-cheap, limitless storage.
2. I want ultra-fast internet access, but I don't want to pay for it.
3. Mix "The Matrix" with "Windows 95" and get the "Blue Brain-Matter of Death"
4. Limitless power that can be pulled out of the air by a very cheap device.
5. There's no such thing as an "obvious" error.
It's the AIR the car horn is pushing that makes the noise, so obviously the only way to make the horn quieter is quieter air...
(I'm trying very hard not to call you an idiot)
Actually, it WILL make a lot. It will then be unbalanced, spinning at a much higher speed than it should, the bearings ratling around, etc. in fact, to prove my point, buy a ball-bearing fan, and a similarly spec'd sleeve-bearing fan, and compare them. Guess which one with be quieter (and one WILL be much quieter).
That said, removing the fins will cut down on noise somewhat, but not because moving air is inherently noisy. Removing fins reduces the noise because most fans have horribly designed fins which cut through the air in such a way that they make a lot of unnecessary noise, whether they move lots of air or not. I could take most noisy fans, put the fins for the well-designed fan on it, and make it damn near silent. So fans have a LOT of room for noise improvements.
I've come across lots of quiet fans that move huge ammounts of air, and lots of noisy fans that move a tiny ammount of air.
It's a combination of the two. Lower the power consumption of the chips, and you can get away with slower fans. However, there won't be solid-state computers in the foreseable future, so innovations on quieter fans are also very important.
To illustrate my point, even with the quietest new harddrives, they are still louder than the fans in any of my computers. $3 Enermax 80mm fans are great, though I wish the MTBF was longer. Meanwhile, ThermalTake's makes unusually noisy, high-pitched fans (SmartCase fan II) that are damn loud even at their lowest, "barely moving air" setting.
Well, you're half right...
You can install and run just about any software on Linux without Root access.
However, it doesn't get installed system-wide, and potentinally destroy the system, so it certainly does cut down on support costs.
Either you added an extra "I" there, or your time-frame is completely off. The first PIIIs didn't even come out until 1999, which would be 6 years ago, not 9.
Because then you are wasting $150 (probably more, actually). A slightly slower computer works just fine, thank you. People with a lot of money, to whom $400 for a new computer every couple years, won't see the point.
For those who are willing to wait a few more seconds for their application to start-up, using older computers is a very good option. Hell, I had my old 386 in service as a firewall until it died about a year ago.
My question for you is, why NOT use old hardware, when it continues to function just fine. Sure, you can't use 20 year-old hardware anymore, but unless you're doing video encoding, volume encryption, etc, a system up to 10 years old works just fine, even with Windows.
Looking through those early scripts, I'm very, very surprised that Star Wars eventually turned-out to be a good movie.
Perhaps this is really a case where the notes from the studio, and test audiences, can do good things for a movie.
Well, it's not a 1:1 comparison, since they can't be used in quite the same way.
Many are quicker in reality, though, because they can be used against large numbers of hosts simultaneously.
Besides that, the speed at which they find your machine doesn't really make any difference, does it? Changing the port may change the time it takes to find you from a milisecond to a few seconds. Changing your password to include non-alphanumeric characters can change it from taking a few minutes to run a dictionary attack, to taking decades upon decades to brute-force it. There's a big difference between the real security and the obscurity there.
Don't act like such an ass. Just because you don't happen to know how different port-scan methods can work doesn't imply that nobody does. That's called being arrogant. If you spend some time to look them up, I'm confident you'll find plenty of info on them.
It wasn't long ago I ran across a global warming nut on
No, not at all. The image is pretty trivial to make, whereas fitting a large quantity of data on a (relatively) cheap media is the interesting part.
I can make-up an image format for a 100TB disc if you want, and start releasing images for it (to be recorded to disc when it comes out in 50 years).
This really makes no sense at all. The content is the same either way. Whether you've converted the video to DVD-Video or an MPEG file on a DVD-ROM, makes no difference to me. It is trivial to convert one to the other.
Sure, but how does that (in your mind) somehow give HD-DVD any advantage at all over BluRay? The physical layer is the interesting part, because the data is (almost exactly) the same either way.
Actually, that's the case right now. Besides Terminator 2, there's also a lot of IMAX movies that come on a DVD-9 in HD-WMV. If not for the dammed DRM, I would buy a few.
I've already seen plenty of HD material available for download. Star Wars Episode 2 and Terminator 3 in 720p. They're about 4GBs each and look quite good. It's just a shame there aren't any GOOD movies available in HD yet (without loads of DRM).