ProteanOS BusyBox/Linux-libre operating system pre-installed directly in the SPI flash chip, alongside Libreboot. This will mean that the user has a full operating system available at all times (as part of the boot firmware) as a boot menu option for recovery or any other purpose such as updating libreboot, even if the HDD or SSD is removed from the machine. Those who order today will receive this as a software update when available, with installation instructions.
Not for $700+ for an obsolete laptop, there aren't.
I got one of their previous offerings - an X60 with 3GB ram and a 320GB hard drive which I promptly replaced with a TB one I already had - for IIRC £220, and after a bit over a year I've had to spend another £20 to put a bigger battery into it. I dont' know what that translates into in dollars, whichever dollar you're using.
Everything works properly, and without hassles.
In contrast I spent half as much again on a brand new piece of shit at about the same time for the stepdaughter after she fried her laptop video with static. That had some piece of shit called Windows 8 on it which has been and endless source of problems.
GlugLug seemed to struggle a bit with fulfilling orders after they last got a big write up in a UK-based Linux magazine. It took about 2_1/2 weeks from order to arrival.
Bigger screen than the current machine... hmmm, considering it.
Hmmm, if you're talking about retrofitting, then I'd look at fitting a small amount of a catalyst - platinised mineral wool or something like like that - into the routing from gas inlet to main body. Temperature sensor in the main chassis, if the flames don't cook the money automatically. Possibly route the flames out of the front of the ATM. At about crotch level.
The cost of the catalyst would be considerably lower than the cost of retrofitting anything.
The wife and I were watching that Ex Machina film at the weekend and she took exception to my comment that the first commercial android robotics product will be sex-bots.
She can disagree as much as she likes, but I think I'm right.
I wonder... how many 3d printers have had dildos as their first print?
then migrate to different media as technology improves.
Technology will change with time, true. Whether it gets significantly better is a different question.
Every new technology will have salemen puffing it up, and as we all know, salesmen are inveterate liars. You simply can't trust anything they say without investigating it yourself, in detail.
Use existing mature, run-of-the-mill technologies. Use multiple technologies and multiple locations. Swap technologies when new ones have gone through their initial high-failure rate and the cost has levelled out.
I remember the screaming and shouting about the world being overwhelmed by Blu-Ray (or was it high-def DVD?). I'm in the process of updating my domestic system's backup on HDD, which would take me between 20 and 40 blu-ray discs. (I haven't seen either a disc or a drive in the wild, so i'm pretty fuzzy on the sizes and I've no idea how long they'd take to write. At least I can set the HDD copying and leave it to run overnight without needing to worry about changing discs at 02:00.) So despite all the screaming and shouting, Blu-Ray is dead for backup - if it was ever alive.
When activated, Plan C would have brought the United States under martial law, rounded up over ten thousand individuals connected to 'subversive' organizations,
Interning "over ten thousand" [subversives] sounds unbelievably low to me. The number of "subversive organisations would probably be in the tens of thousands alone, with multiple targets per organisation. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of internees would sound more credible to me. The Ulster internment put away (temporarily) a bit less than 2000 people during it's operation from a population of a bit less than 2 million. If America under martial law were to be comparable, that would suggest 300000 detainees in America as a whole.
It's just that there's very little practical applications for such very low currents.
The Wikipedia article on Zamboni piles cites image intensifier tubes as being a past application. back in the days when you used photomultiplier tubes to amplify the electrons from each re-focussing of the image. Low current, high voltage.
Voltage per pair of discs is around 0.8V for silver-MnO2. So to get 2kV, you'd need around 2500 disc pairs.
I have a War Department Geiger counter that I'm trying to get back into commission ; it needs a 120V DC power supply that fits into a 5 x 5 x 10cm cavity. The original achieved this by stacking together 100-odd 1.5V Leclanche cells into a carrier. But they stopped being manufactured around 1971.
Summary says car bodies, so these are essentially kit cars.
As such they'd be registered here on a "Q" plate and be subject to additional checks during the annual mandatory Ministry Of Transport inspection. Because the design is a one-off, then there is no "type" which could have been approved, so before receiving a registration mark that would allow it to be driven on the public highway (and incidentally, to be taxed), it would need to be inspected by a government-approved inspector to determine if it is safe to e on the road. They look at things like brakes, body strength, engine emissions, lights and indicators to other road users. But they don't look at dynamic stability at 80 in a gusty cross-wind.
It wouldn't be too difficult to get this sort of vehicle registered as a "one off", but it would be a hassle. A common scheme people use is to register the vehicle as a "showman's vehicle," which implies the non-standard construction, lack of a "type" and unusual shapes. It also implies that every MOT inspection will be a detailed one. A hassle, but do-able : I have a friend from university days who used to live in and drive around in a bus, which he'd turned into a mobile home with a 10ft open-air verandah on the back. That was a "showman's vehicle". Currently he uses another home-made mobile home on a chassis and engine from a Ukrainian-built ICBM launcher ; "showman's vehicle" again. Do-able, but a hassle.
This "plus" thing - it's some sort of advertising annoyance that Google websites shove in your face from time to time? but I don't understand what this thing about "posting" on it is, and even less so why I'd want to do whatever that is.
I'm not even sure how (or why) I'd go about finding out if someone were on Google+ to read my post. It's all terribly amorphous.
Sure, like the stereotype of the southern white guy?
What? The closeted gay one who beats up poofs on a Friday night and then spends Saturday fondling the butt of his pistol and trying to stop thinking about his brother?
If the worst you can think of is being Goatse-d, then you do need to get out more. Or speak to someone who is allowed out without supervision by a particularly repressed adult.
(Incidentally, goatse.cx is a perfectly respectable mail service these days. I use it for my online courses.)
Nah leave it to the Free Market. there's nothing that the Free Market can't do. That's why no one has died of cancer or starvation since Adam Smith invented it in 1760.
There is a general dispute in taxonomy between "lumpers" and splitters" - people who say "this, this and this share these characteristics, and so I lump them together in one taxon" versus those who say "this, this and this differ in these characteristics, and so I split them into these taxa".
You're evidently a splitter. No disrespect about that - it's a defensible position (see above). But being a lumper is also a defensible position (see above).
The important things that you need for designing a taxonomy are to know what questions you want your taxonomy to address - if you're wanting answers to questions of surface gravity, then a taxonomy based on colour is unlikely to be helpful, for example.
Our current taxonomy for planets is based on the observational status of the planets in respect of their neighbours - the "cleared orbital region" criterion. In principle, that is an addressable question - observe the skies, plot the orbiting bodies down to a few percent of the size of the planets of interest, question answered.
Where things are getting confused is that many people project questions of the origin of the planets onto the orbital classification. Which may not be the most logical thing to do, when looked at in the context above. The two questions are not strictly related : Earth, Venus, Uranus and Pluto all appear to have suffered a giant impact in the late stage of their construction, but Pluto does not currently have a cleared orbit to make it a "planet" under the orbital classification. So our believed-to-be-correct models of origin processes do not (necessarily) align with current orbital status. But you can see from the length of my qualifications above that one taxonomy split is based on fairly long chains of cause and implication, and the other on simple Newtonian mechanics. So I can understand why the IAU decided to go with the relatively simple present-day orbital status criterion.
If I were to design a planet taxonomy, I'd use a criterion of sphericity (is the shape within X% of being a simple spheroid) to divide planets from "minor planets" (you can look at it as the interplay of material strength versus object mass, if you like), and at the upper boundary the presence of fusion (separating planets from stars, with a fudge area to deal with brown dwarfs). But that criterion shows my interest in body materials (I'm a geologist by trade), which differs from the interests of astronomers in general.
Just until the Saudis decide they've screwed the Iranians enough and cut their production again.
Iran isn't the target. They're in the same game as the Saudis.
The aim of this slump is to bankrupt the fracking industry. Once that has been done, production will be throttled back to bring the prices back up, but not to levels that would allow fracking to resume.
Some times it really is quicker to do the job in an analogue way than to figure out a way to do it electronically with what tools are available. Or, which tools are allowable according to a site's IT policies ; if I'm forbidden to use "portable" apps by the IT department on a particular job, then it doesn't matter if I've got an appropriate DTP or CAD or drawing application on a memory stick. Those sites are also likely to be the ones that take 3 weeks to process an application to have an application installed.
Cut, paste, and dot over the edges with correcting fluid still works just as well, and can be effective. A couple of tips : if you have the opportunity, do your compositing at double-size if you can, then in the final copy down to correct scale your errors will halve ; if you have reasonably heavy paper, tearing rather than cutting will produce a more feathered edge that shows up less.
Slashdot Mirror
I suspect that you're not the target audience for this system.
I have an 18-wheler truck for sale. Would that be good for your daily commute to the building with the underground par park?
OK, I'll put that idea on hold for a bit then.
I got one of their previous offerings - an X60 with 3GB ram and a 320GB hard drive which I promptly replaced with a TB one I already had - for IIRC £220, and after a bit over a year I've had to spend another £20 to put a bigger battery into it. I dont' know what that translates into in dollars, whichever dollar you're using.
Everything works properly, and without hassles.
In contrast I spent half as much again on a brand new piece of shit at about the same time for the stepdaughter after she fried her laptop video with static. That had some piece of shit called Windows 8 on it which has been and endless source of problems.
GlugLug seemed to struggle a bit with fulfilling orders after they last got a big write up in a UK-based Linux magazine. It took about 2_1/2 weeks from order to arrival.
Bigger screen than the current machine ... hmmm, considering it.
The cost of the catalyst would be considerably lower than the cost of retrofitting anything.
Errr, you do realise that it's the Saudis who are primarily behind the current drop in oil prices?
She can disagree as much as she likes, but I think I'm right.
I wonder ... how many 3d printers have had dildos as their first print?
If it doesn't then there is your entry point into the market.
Technology will change with time, true. Whether it gets significantly better is a different question.
Every new technology will have salemen puffing it up, and as we all know, salesmen are inveterate liars. You simply can't trust anything they say without investigating it yourself, in detail.
Use existing mature, run-of-the-mill technologies. Use multiple technologies and multiple locations. Swap technologies when new ones have gone through their initial high-failure rate and the cost has levelled out.
I remember the screaming and shouting about the world being overwhelmed by Blu-Ray (or was it high-def DVD?). I'm in the process of updating my domestic system's backup on HDD, which would take me between 20 and 40 blu-ray discs. (I haven't seen either a disc or a drive in the wild, so i'm pretty fuzzy on the sizes and I've no idea how long they'd take to write. At least I can set the HDD copying and leave it to run overnight without needing to worry about changing discs at 02:00.) So despite all the screaming and shouting, Blu-Ray is dead for backup - if it was ever alive.
Some of us use windows for work, so haven't seen any of this shit, and are unlikely to.
It's hardly a novel sentiment. Juvenal was more poetic about it about 100AD :
Interning "over ten thousand" [subversives] sounds unbelievably low to me. The number of "subversive organisations would probably be in the tens of thousands alone, with multiple targets per organisation. Hundreds of thousands if not millions of internees would sound more credible to me. The Ulster internment put away (temporarily) a bit less than 2000 people during it's operation from a population of a bit less than 2 million. If America under martial law were to be comparable, that would suggest 300000 detainees in America as a whole.
Oh, hang on - do you live in America? If so, then yes, you do live in a peculiar universe.
But yes, the OP is getting confused.
Feel free to use long words if you're worried about the rednecks understanding when they're being insulted to their faces.
The Wikipedia article on Zamboni piles cites image intensifier tubes as being a past application. back in the days when you used photomultiplier tubes to amplify the electrons from each re-focussing of the image. Low current, high voltage.
I have a War Department Geiger counter that I'm trying to get back into commission ; it needs a 120V DC power supply that fits into a 5 x 5 x 10cm cavity. The original achieved this by stacking together 100-odd 1.5V Leclanche cells into a carrier. But they stopped being manufactured around 1971.
I'm going to have to be creative.
As such they'd be registered here on a "Q" plate and be subject to additional checks during the annual mandatory Ministry Of Transport inspection. Because the design is a one-off, then there is no "type" which could have been approved, so before receiving a registration mark that would allow it to be driven on the public highway (and incidentally, to be taxed), it would need to be inspected by a government-approved inspector to determine if it is safe to e on the road. They look at things like brakes, body strength, engine emissions, lights and indicators to other road users. But they don't look at dynamic stability at 80 in a gusty cross-wind.
It wouldn't be too difficult to get this sort of vehicle registered as a "one off", but it would be a hassle. A common scheme people use is to register the vehicle as a "showman's vehicle," which implies the non-standard construction, lack of a "type" and unusual shapes. It also implies that every MOT inspection will be a detailed one. A hassle, but do-able : I have a friend from university days who used to live in and drive around in a bus, which he'd turned into a mobile home with a 10ft open-air verandah on the back. That was a "showman's vehicle". Currently he uses another home-made mobile home on a chassis and engine from a Ukrainian-built ICBM launcher ; "showman's vehicle" again. Do-able, but a hassle.
This "plus" thing - it's some sort of advertising annoyance that Google websites shove in your face from time to time? but I don't understand what this thing about "posting" on it is, and even less so why I'd want to do whatever that is. I'm not even sure how (or why) I'd go about finding out if someone were on Google+ to read my post. It's all terribly amorphous.
What? The closeted gay one who beats up poofs on a Friday night and then spends Saturday fondling the butt of his pistol and trying to stop thinking about his brother?
That stereotype?
"A real-time fast radio burst: polarization detection and multiwavelength follow-up"
It's also on Research Gate.
(Incidentally, goatse.cx is a perfectly respectable mail service these days. I use it for my online courses.)
Nah leave it to the Free Market. there's nothing that the Free Market can't do. That's why no one has died of cancer or starvation since Adam Smith invented it in 1760.
You're evidently a splitter. No disrespect about that - it's a defensible position (see above). But being a lumper is also a defensible position (see above).
The important things that you need for designing a taxonomy are to know what questions you want your taxonomy to address - if you're wanting answers to questions of surface gravity, then a taxonomy based on colour is unlikely to be helpful, for example.
Our current taxonomy for planets is based on the observational status of the planets in respect of their neighbours - the "cleared orbital region" criterion. In principle, that is an addressable question - observe the skies, plot the orbiting bodies down to a few percent of the size of the planets of interest, question answered.
Where things are getting confused is that many people project questions of the origin of the planets onto the orbital classification. Which may not be the most logical thing to do, when looked at in the context above. The two questions are not strictly related : Earth, Venus, Uranus and Pluto all appear to have suffered a giant impact in the late stage of their construction, but Pluto does not currently have a cleared orbit to make it a "planet" under the orbital classification. So our believed-to-be-correct models of origin processes do not (necessarily) align with current orbital status. But you can see from the length of my qualifications above that one taxonomy split is based on fairly long chains of cause and implication, and the other on simple Newtonian mechanics. So I can understand why the IAU decided to go with the relatively simple present-day orbital status criterion.
If I were to design a planet taxonomy, I'd use a criterion of sphericity (is the shape within X% of being a simple spheroid) to divide planets from "minor planets" (you can look at it as the interplay of material strength versus object mass, if you like), and at the upper boundary the presence of fusion (separating planets from stars, with a fudge area to deal with brown dwarfs). But that criterion shows my interest in body materials (I'm a geologist by trade), which differs from the interests of astronomers in general.
Iran isn't the target. They're in the same game as the Saudis.
The aim of this slump is to bankrupt the fracking industry. Once that has been done, production will be throttled back to bring the prices back up, but not to levels that would allow fracking to resume.
Not true.
Some times it really is quicker to do the job in an analogue way than to figure out a way to do it electronically with what tools are available. Or, which tools are allowable according to a site's IT policies ; if I'm forbidden to use "portable" apps by the IT department on a particular job, then it doesn't matter if I've got an appropriate DTP or CAD or drawing application on a memory stick. Those sites are also likely to be the ones that take 3 weeks to process an application to have an application installed.
Cut, paste, and dot over the edges with correcting fluid still works just as well, and can be effective. A couple of tips : if you have the opportunity, do your compositing at double-size if you can, then in the final copy down to correct scale your errors will halve ; if you have reasonably heavy paper, tearing rather than cutting will produce a more feathered edge that shows up less.