I've been using a pentium M laptop with a docking station at home for months now. Its been silent heaven. You do take a speed hit with keeping the chip in "battery performance mode" in order to keep the fans off 99.9% of the time, but to avoid the high pitch noise of my desktop, its sooooo worth it.
What is striking about such a setup is you can actually forget your computer is even there when watching a movie on TV or reading a book in the same room.
As far as I care, the ultimate sound test is turning off a monitor and seeing if you can tell a computer is on.
Thanks for pointing out GRASS. Although I was aware at efforts regarding free GIS data, I didn't know there was a free/open_source GIS program out there. I'll definitely give it a try.
there's very little created in closed source, that doesn't eventually become and open-source implimentation.
I'd have to disagree with that. What about:
1) device drivers
2) proprietary video/audio codecs
3) ArcGIS
4) AutoCAD
5) Statistica
6) many games
Numbers 1-2 stopped me from migrating my Dad to linux, while numbers 3-5 keep me locked into a Windows world.
I've found that some people believe that specialized software will remain proprietary. Others choose to live in a self-imposed "island of freedom", limiting what they can do on a computer. In any case, I don't think its accurate to say all types of software are headed to be open-source. Its a nice myth, but unfortunately not the case currently.
Hero has impression that someone needs help. Hero takes actions to provide help. These actions have side effects (cars destroyed, buildings knocked down). Hero is sued for these damages. Hero hires lawyers to defend self in court. Hero loses in court.
Now what is a hero to do? Defy the courts (assuming he/she loses the lawsuit) and become a "criminal" in the eyes of the law? Or pack-up and stop being a super hero.
Mr. Incredible quits. As do all the superheros in that world. Those are no superheros in my book. Justice does not end with a judge's decision. Judges decide over laws that we as a nation have enacted through our legislative representatives. If we don't like the way the law is interpreted, it is our duty as citizens to see that such laws are changed.
2001 I can understand, but what's special about Blade Runner? Was it ahead of its time for special effects? The story does not do anything for me. I watched it for the first time recently, and I don't understand what the hub-bub is about. Is it really a film that is timeless? Any insight appreciated.
Shameless self-promotion:
Google's #1 Link for "game music":
the Videogame Music Archive
I founded the site in December 1996.
Enjoy!
Super Mario Bros. Theme: Beep boop boop, boop boop boop boop, boop boop boop boop, boop boop, boooop, boop boop boom. The midi files are a lot more expressive.
A sensor web is an exciting prospect, but data accuracy remains important consideration, and "full-dimensional" coverage is doubtful to happen.
As an air pollution dispersion modeler, I frequently use meteorological data collected across the US by the National Weather Service and NCDC.
The current array of measurement sites provides an incomplete picture of micrometeorological events (small scale), and of course, the more sensors available the better, right?
Well, the biggest issue I have to deal with is data quality/accuracy. It doesn't seem that accuracy is addressed at all in the article. I guess if you have lots of sensors, you can cross-compare results from sensors not too far apart...
I object though to the claim that any sensor web will provide "full-dimensional" coverage of the earth. In the air, we only know about the upper atmosphere generally through the sparse, limited use of radiosondes (weather balloons that track back results via radio and can also be tracked from the ground with radar to figure out wind speed and direction). Unless we start seeing swarms of self-propelled flying sensors (a'la "Batteries Not Included"), I don't see "full-dimensional" coverage of let alone the atmosphere on the earth. Perhaps the author means "all variables of interest" but the term, "full-dimensional", but it still sounds like an exaggerated claim.
From what I've head, a space elevator is a bad idea in the sense that the atmosphere has a singificant EMF gradient between the surface of the earth and far up in the atmomsphere. Completion of such a device would case the world's largest lightning bolt ever. You'd be basically creating the largest "short" ever.:P
This system is not friendly to the blind, since you have to know which inkblot is displayed in order to enter the correct corresponding password. So its not a solution for everyone.
Are niches really big news? My site, the Videogame Music Archive has dominated its own niche: "game music" for years. Its a nice feeling to know that your site can be found at the nexus of two words of the english language on Google.:)
But on a more serious note, I think people need to get over the "get rich" and "fame" mentality and celebrate the topics they love.
No, I have no such proof. In fact, I suggest that I have proof (via logic itself) of the opposite: that such a "destroy-all" power cannot exist if there are infinite possibilities of universes.
Although on second thought, I'm confusing the issue of infinite quantity versus infinite possibilities. My argument does make the point that there are constraints on how different worlds can be (i.e. there can't be a world that has the power to destory all others), but even if "we" all play by the same laws of physics, there can still be inifite universes if we all have different "initial conditions". Ugh, back to reality.:)
1) If there are an infinite number of worlds, then out of the possibilites there is a world that has the power to destroy all worlds already. 2) This world is still here. 3) Therefore, there are NOT an infinite number of worlds.
Corollary:
1) If there are an infinite number of worlds, there is a world where someone doesn't want you to ever exist. 2) You exist. 3) Therefore, there are NOT an infinite number of worlds.
> Is it legal for you to ring your neighbours' doorbell? Technically it is trespassing. So when is trespassing not trespassing eh?
In the spirit of what the author of the article wrote: pressing the doorbell is sending a command to a computer (the doorbell mechanism) which then executes the command successfully (makes a noise). Such an action is exercising "access". This kind of access is authorized since the person ringing the doorbell does not deal with a restriction really of any kind (like a password... that's what the lock on your door is for). If a homeowner doesn't want to deal with doorbell pushing, he/she must put up a restriction to deny user access rights. For example, you have a gate on your property to stop trespassing, or you put a throttle on your doorbell to prevent it from rining more than once in 30 seconds, or better yet you have a timer on your doorbell so someone can't wake you in the middle of the night. Don't forget finger recognition software built in the button, or attack dogs that only allow friends close enough to the button.
Overall, ringing a doorbell is not a criminal action if you as a home owner leave it wide open to be used.
If you have a lazy imagination like I do, listen to the Final Fantasy 3 Victory Fanfare on the SNES page (search text for "Victory Fanfare") of the Videogame Music Archive.
I've known of the following that has worked since Oct 2002:
Login: loginssuck Password: loginssuck
Its easier to remember.:)
Federal Register could use some updating
on
NARA Goes Online
·
· Score: 1
That's nice and all, but it would be nice if they massively improved access to the Federal Register. As an environmental engineer dealing with air quality issues, I have to look up regs all the time for changes, so I can atest it is terribly slow. So slow, EPA took all the effort to put the environmental portion of the Federal Register on their own website.
The Pioneer and calculator examples suggest "technology that has long surpassed its expected life time (durability)", while the main question asks about items that have exceeded their original expect uses (functionality).
I'm not too impressed with durability claims when it only involves a sample size of one. Do you know anyone else who owns the same model of your calculator?
That is close to what I call the Newman Test (which I must admit comes from my last name, but also has an ironic twist in its title):
A computer program must be able to adequately describe ASCII art images. A pseudo-ink blot test of sorts. See my article about one chat bot failing to pass this test as admisitered by another chat bot.
I was at the barbershop this morning when a mother walked in to pick up her kid and said the "Challenger" blew up and I thought the lady was crazy for obvious reasons. We then turned on the TV there.
I use a database of MD5 hashes to match my hard drive's files against backups. I tried to make a Sourceforge project out of it, but lost interest because of the trouble with polymorphic files, and especially the trouble of matching all files in non-standard installation archives (damn setup.exe files).
I named the project Filepedia originally though because I thought it would be nice to have an online encyclopedia that could tell you information about a file based on its MD5. Still doable...
I already did this
on
ALICE vs. ALICE
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
ALICE vs ALICE seems pretty redundant. Its like asking you to talk to your clone. I previously did LeknorChat vs SmarterChild, where two differently developed chat bots talked to each other.
My purpose of doing this was to see if two such scripts would ever stop talking to each other, or would be a never ending conversation? They stopped, but please read to see why.
Also, interpreting ASCII art is the ultimate turning test. Also discussed on my page.
Implementing US Federal law against spam does little to solve an international problem.
The state laws are even worse (more laughable). For example, the state I live in, Connecticut, has an anti-spam law. One problem: it only applies to spam sent from an e-mail account based in Connecticut to
another e-mail account based in Connecticut. My webserver/e-mail server is in Texas, so the law can't help me.
Remember, spam is pollution, and just because one nation/state outlaws it doesn't mean our mailboxes won't be flooded by others. The law won't help us in this case. What we need is a technological or economic solution, not a legal one.
Slashdot Mirror
I've been using a pentium M laptop with a docking station at home for months now. Its been silent heaven. You do take a speed hit with keeping the chip in "battery performance mode" in order to keep the fans off 99.9% of the time, but to avoid the high pitch noise of my desktop, its sooooo worth it.
What is striking about such a setup is you can actually forget your computer is even there when watching a movie on TV or reading a book in the same room.
As far as I care, the ultimate sound test is turning off a monitor and seeing if you can tell a computer is on.
Silence is golden.
Thanks for pointing out GRASS. Although I was aware at efforts regarding free GIS data, I didn't know there was a free/open_source GIS program out there. I'll definitely give it a try.
I'd have to disagree with that. What about:
1) device drivers
2) proprietary video/audio codecs
3) ArcGIS
4) AutoCAD
5) Statistica
6) many games
Numbers 1-2 stopped me from migrating my Dad to linux, while numbers 3-5 keep me locked into a Windows world.
I've found that some people believe that specialized software will remain proprietary. Others choose to live in a self-imposed "island of freedom", limiting what they can do on a computer. In any case, I don't think its accurate to say all types of software are headed to be open-source. Its a nice myth, but unfortunately not the case currently.
The dilemma:
:)
Hero has impression that someone needs help.
Hero takes actions to provide help.
These actions have side effects (cars destroyed, buildings knocked down).
Hero is sued for these damages.
Hero hires lawyers to defend self in court.
Hero loses in court.
Now what is a hero to do?
Defy the courts (assuming he/she loses the lawsuit) and become a "criminal" in the eyes of the law?
Or pack-up and stop being a super hero.
Mr. Incredible quits. As do all the superheros in that world. Those are no superheros in my book. Justice does not end with a judge's decision. Judges decide over laws that we as a nation have enacted through our legislative representatives. If we don't like the way the law is interpreted, it is our duty as citizens to see that such laws are changed.
Anyway, I enjoyed the movie. Go see it.
You're approaching the problem from the wrong direction. Hire employees who can't smell.
Mod-up the Gattaca comment. :-)
Shameless self-promotion:
Google's #1 Link for "game music": the Videogame Music Archive
I founded the site in December 1996. Enjoy!
Super Mario Bros. Theme: Beep boop boop, boop boop boop boop, boop boop boop boop, boop boop, boooop, boop boop boom. The midi files are a lot more expressive.
A sensor web is an exciting prospect, but data accuracy remains important consideration, and "full-dimensional" coverage is doubtful to happen.
As an air pollution dispersion modeler, I frequently use meteorological data collected across the US by the National Weather Service and NCDC. The current array of measurement sites provides an incomplete picture of micrometeorological events (small scale), and of course, the more sensors available the better, right?
Well, the biggest issue I have to deal with is data quality/accuracy. It doesn't seem that accuracy is addressed at all in the article. I guess if you have lots of sensors, you can cross-compare results from sensors not too far apart...
I object though to the claim that any sensor web will provide "full-dimensional" coverage of the earth. In the air, we only know about the upper atmosphere generally through the sparse, limited use of radiosondes (weather balloons that track back results via radio and can also be tracked from the ground with radar to figure out wind speed and direction). Unless we start seeing swarms of self-propelled flying sensors (a'la "Batteries Not Included"), I don't see "full-dimensional" coverage of let alone the atmosphere on the earth. Perhaps the author means "all variables of interest" but the term, "full-dimensional", but it still sounds like an exaggerated claim.
From what I've head, a space elevator is a bad idea in the sense that the atmosphere has a singificant EMF gradient between the surface of the earth and far up in the atmomsphere. Completion of such a device would case the world's largest lightning bolt ever. You'd be basically creating the largest "short" ever. :P
This system is not friendly to the blind, since you have to know which inkblot is displayed in order to enter the correct corresponding password. So its not a solution for everyone.
Are niches really big news? My site, the Videogame Music Archive has dominated its own niche: "game music" for years. Its a nice feeling to know that your site can be found at the nexus of two words of the english language on Google. :)
But on a more serious note, I think people need to get over the "get rich" and "fame" mentality and celebrate the topics they love.
Signal-to-noise rawoisethasetseoahitsoth
No, I have no such proof. In fact, I suggest that I have proof (via logic itself) of the opposite: that such a "destroy-all" power cannot exist if there are infinite possibilities of universes.
:)
Although on second thought, I'm confusing the issue of infinite quantity versus infinite possibilities. My argument does make the point that there are constraints on how different worlds can be (i.e. there can't be a world that has the power to destory all others), but even if "we" all play by the same laws of physics, there can still be inifite universes if we all have different "initial conditions". Ugh, back to reality.
I like this argument I came up with a while ago:
Main Argument:
1) If there are an infinite number of worlds, then out of the possibilites there is a world that has the power to destroy all worlds already.
2) This world is still here.
3) Therefore, there are NOT an infinite number of worlds.
Corollary:
1) If there are an infinite number of worlds, there is a world where someone doesn't want you to ever exist.
2) You exist.
3) Therefore, there are NOT an infinite number of worlds.
This big of logic brought to you by the people who gave us: If A, then B. Not B. Therefore, not A.
We are all experience machines...
> Is it legal for you to ring your neighbours' doorbell? Technically it is trespassing. So when is trespassing not trespassing eh?
In the spirit of what the author of the article wrote: pressing the doorbell is sending a command to a computer (the doorbell mechanism) which then executes the command successfully (makes a noise). Such an action is exercising "access". This kind of access is authorized since the person ringing the doorbell does not deal with a restriction really of any kind (like a password ... that's what the lock on your door is for). If a homeowner doesn't want to deal with doorbell pushing, he/she must put up a restriction to deny user access rights. For example, you have a gate on your property to stop trespassing, or you put a throttle on your doorbell to prevent it from rining more than once in 30 seconds, or better yet you have a timer on your doorbell so someone can't wake you in the middle of the night. Don't forget finger recognition software built in the button, or attack dogs that only allow friends close enough to the button.
Overall, ringing a doorbell is not a criminal action if you as a home owner leave it wide open to be used.
If you have a lazy imagination like I do, listen to the Final Fantasy 3 Victory Fanfare on the SNES page (search text for "Victory Fanfare") of the Videogame Music Archive.
I've known of the following that has worked since Oct 2002:
:)
Login: loginssuck
Password: loginssuck
Its easier to remember.
That's nice and all, but it would be nice if they massively improved access to the Federal Register. As an environmental engineer dealing with air quality issues, I have to look up regs all the time for changes, so I can atest it is terribly slow. So slow, EPA took all the effort to put the environmental portion of the Federal Register on their own website.
The Pioneer and calculator examples suggest "technology that has long surpassed its expected life time (durability)", while the main question asks about items that have exceeded their original expect uses (functionality).
I'm not too impressed with durability claims when it only involves a sample size of one. Do you know anyone else who owns the same model of your calculator?
That is close to what I call the Newman Test (which I must admit comes from my last name, but also has an ironic twist in its title): A computer program must be able to adequately describe ASCII art images. A pseudo-ink blot test of sorts. See my article about one chat bot failing to pass this test as admisitered by another chat bot.
I was at the barbershop this morning when a mother walked in to pick up her kid and said the "Challenger" blew up and I thought the lady was crazy for obvious reasons. We then turned on the TV there.
From my understanding, the use of image recognition in the captcha test would make it nearly impossible for blind people to pass the test.
I've already shown that chat bots fail when asked to describe ascii art. It will be a while until they can pass this test reliably.
I use a database of MD5 hashes to match my hard drive's files against backups. I tried to make a Sourceforge project out of it, but lost interest because of the trouble with polymorphic files, and especially the trouble of matching all files in non-standard installation archives (damn setup.exe files).
I named the project Filepedia originally though because I thought it would be nice to have an online encyclopedia that could tell you information about a file based on its MD5. Still doable...
ALICE vs ALICE seems pretty redundant. Its like asking you to talk to your clone. I previously did LeknorChat vs SmarterChild, where two differently developed chat bots talked to each other.
My purpose of doing this was to see if two such scripts would ever stop talking to each other, or would be a never ending conversation? They stopped, but please read to see why.
Also, interpreting ASCII art is the ultimate turning test. Also discussed on my page.
Implementing US Federal law against spam does little to solve an international problem.
The state laws are even worse (more laughable). For example, the state I live in, Connecticut, has an anti-spam law. One problem: it only applies to spam sent from an e-mail account based in Connecticut to another e-mail account based in Connecticut. My webserver/e-mail server is in Texas, so the law can't help me.
Remember, spam is pollution, and just because one nation/state outlaws it doesn't mean our mailboxes won't be flooded by others. The law won't help us in this case. What we need is a technological or economic solution, not a legal one.
I hate spam