Interesting again. I always though recycling aluminum was more energy intensive than refining bauxite. It's a good thing I'm still in school. Also a good thing I'm not stubborn enough to refuse information that disproves something I "knew," because now I have even more to feed my fire of increasing fuel efficiency of vehicles.
Just posted, and somehow I'm pretty sure my username got lost with the post. Or I'm that drunk. Either has a fair chance of plausibility.
Anyway, in case it was lost, I wanted to thank you for your links. Though they totally disagree with what I though, they provide insightful information to me. Information I'll use to reform opinions and thoughts on vehicle design/manufacture that I held (apparently) erroneously.
I still hate the Prius, I have other valid reasons for that (objective, supportable-by-fact reasons, such as actual fuel efficiency, though they are less meaningful with this new information).
Was it a quick Google search that yielded the PDF's you linked, or do you have some other source you get these from? I notice the one si apparently through the Way Back Machine.
Same as how buying a Prius is worse for the environment than buying a used (or even many new non-hybrid) cars due to the manufacturing process.
I totally agree with you, but am curious: do you have any credible sources? I know aluminum manufacturing is worse for the environment than steel due to it's high energy costs to both purify and recycle, but do you have any numbers that I could, say, share with my idiot democrat cousin who loves her Prius to prove that it isn't a good car for the environment?
I'm getting really tired of hearing that $technology or $application_of_technology may be "useful to criminals".
In a supposedly free country (yeah, I know, who am I kidding?), shouldn't we always err on the side of liberty instead of trying to "pre-regulate" criminal activity?
Nah, Minority Report gives the legislatures huge boners. So do the phrases "for the children" and "to prevent terrorism."
Yea, some of those leaked over here to the Tri-Cities. It's depressing, all this gray and rain. Will you take you clouds back? We don't like them over here.
In exchange, we'll gladly take that big yellow orb in the sky that frightens you so much whenever it sneaks into your area.
Awesome! So does that mean I get a monthly kickback on all the apartments I've helped build? Or the million gallon anaerobic treatment tank? Or the roads?
Since those were numerous years ago, I expect a nice fat check any day! Yippee!!!
If my friend sells a jar of honey to someone, do they have to pay him for every bite they share? Or how about if they use it in a recipe of their own and sell that? Where's his kickback? I mean, it's only fair if musicians can do it, right?
On a serious note, though; retirement is sort of exactly this...and by "sort of" I mean "could be used to argue the point by idiots."
These people are NOT Tech industry experts, they are posers and wannabe's that make crap up and then blog about it in hopes that under-educated CIO's will listen to them. See, for example, all the content in CIO magazine and how the existence of it makes any IT engineer cringe.
Oh, so Wired said this? It's safe to ignore, then.
I just changed my mailing address with the VA. The phone call took me over an hour (had to wait a half hour on hold only to make an appointment for them to call me back later). The man informed me to change my address for any medical benefits or education benefits, I'd have to call them (was a bit vague on who "they" were..) because it's three separate databases.
WTF?! It's all the Department of Veterans Affairs! Why do they have my data stored in THREE different databases?! And why can't this guy submit the request for it to be changed in all three?
Not to mention the thing that has most likely got MSFT worried which is that....NOBODY CARES, they really don't. This is one thing I have to give Moz credit for, because even though I no longer use their browser (I use a Chromium variant call Dragon) they were the ones that FINALLY got websites away from the "works best in IE" bullshit.
Now it doesn't really matter WHAT you use, its all the same. They all render the same pages, they all have roughly the same behavior, so the only ones that care about this little pissing contest is the corps themselves. as far as the users are concerned they honestly don't give a shit if what they are using is IE, Chrome, FF, dragon, QTWeb, Opera, whatever, it all "just works" and for that I say thank fucking God that it does.
Opera and Safari don't work for many of my school's intranet functions. Opera doesn't work for the FAFSA and a number of other scholarship applications (To be fair, the FAFSA works, but it isn't supported). They don't work for many job applications I've done. I think VONAPP through the VA doesn't render correctly. Hell, even my slashdot journal editing doesn't render correctly in Firefox, Chrome, or Opera (had to use IEx64 for it to render correctly).
A great majority of websites work independent of the browser, as they should, but some still don't, and unfortunately for me and every student in the country, many of these are from our school or the government.
That doesn't mean that I don't know anything. I've been building computers since before I was in high school. Taught myself C and C++. Went to Digipen Institute of Technology, worked for my school district as a network admin while still a student...that was all before the military.
We did have technical staff (MOS code 06xx) to do such things, but every one I met knew less about computers and networks than I did. They guy that taught my UAV course knew less about flying the aircraft than I did (due in part to experience flying R/C airplanes, and an understanding of the fundamentals of aerodynamics). The guy that taught me the GBOSS system knew less about the system by the time he got there than I did (I took the time to investigate and figured the entire system out, there were some things I taught him).
Is my case unique? Most definitely. But the point is, the military's technical aptitude falls short. I group them all because I've used some Army systems as well and found them to be lacking obvious features.
Do you realize the technical ineptitude in the military?
Our Network guys didn't even know what a routing loop was, or how I could take down the network in this one relatively unguarded room (that happened to house the routers).
We were lining up a satellite for our network access and it had to point x degrees; my lieutenant (college grad, because all officers are required to have Bachelor's degree in {INSERT RANDOM FIELD HERE}) requested I ask the guy if this azimuth had to be shot from the base, and if so if it was along the side or from the center.
I was the only non-officer in my company that could keep a generator running; if it died, no one knew how to start it, despite the instructions being written fairly clearly.
A sergeant fulled said generator with oil until it was full (full being to the top of the fill-tube). Then we had a geyser of oil coming out of the exhaust. A Marine was moving our front end loader and rounded a left hand corner that had a bank sloping down to the right...with the bucket up. Of course it tipped over.
These are but a few examples I've seen. The Army's SOP (standard operating procedure) for the Raven B UAV system is to stall it at 100-150 feet (I think) and let it fall to the ground to land. We were taught that $1000 in damages for 5 flights was acceptable/expected. The Marine's SOP was to do the same but at 50-75 feet to minimize damage.
I was a Marine. I'm proud of my service, but I'm not proud of the Marine Corps. It's full of a bunch of coddled stupid pussies. But the military should NOT be in charge of their own control systems for technical devices, not without a lot more technical education for those serving in the technical fields, which isn't going to happen with 4 years of service then treating everyone like shit so the majority leave.
Not more industry shills, not business leaders. Leaders of people, leaders that know the industries. Let's put Richard Stallman in the FCC. He's certainly not an industry shrill.
Voting MAKES the difference. The electoral system is broken, certainly, but it isn't handled the way it was intended to. A simple majority popular vote in a state gets ALL the states electoral votes, that's not right.
I've talked to several people about net neutrality. Afterward, they all understand it well enough to decide for themselves (some even do opt against it, which I take to mean I keep bias out of the explanation). You must be doing something wrong when explaining it to them and here it is: "common carrier." Keep the technical terms to a minimum. Sure, "common carrier" isn't REALLY a technical term, but it sounds technical to them. You have to explain it in common terms.
Here's basically how I do it. Take the internet right now, that's all we want to keep (usually this is enough, don't change it AT ALL). Say you have Comcast as your provider. No what they want to push is a tiered system, where, say, Microsoft pays Comcast more than Google does, so your Google traffic is slowed down, but Bing is super fast, so you might switch to that; and since youTube is owned by Google, their traffic gets slowed down because Microsoft paid for the priority.
You have to use simple terms, and relate it to stuff they care about (youtube).
I view your post as you being defeated before you even try. Money controls politics, that's great, but voting controls who even gets into office, and who is into office determines whether money controls their politics.
I think about 7 pounds. To me, weight of a laptop has never been an issue, so I don't even consider it, and often forget that most people care about this a lot.
It was a good time, but I kept hard drive activity down, I had firefox open usually with several tabs, some documentation, my IDE of course (Visual Studio), winamp streaming from my home computer, all over wifi. If I turned my monitor brightness back up, I'd still get over 3 hours.
The article focuses on users' widespread use of specific and specialized apps to retrieve internet content and dramatizes the difference between “web” and “internet.” This latter distinction is, in my opinion, entirely incorrect, as the world wide web, though often now not being used by a browser, is still a world wide web in that it is a web of networks that covers the world; much like the internet is a larger network connecting smaller networks. There is no difference between “web” and “internet.”
The article makes a big deal out of the fact that most data transmitted over the internet is no longer “the web” which it declares as HTML and data seen in web browsers, but, typical of Wired, it takes a naive point of view and understanding of root concepts and technology (Example: first paragraph; almost all of those are NOT necessarily apps, but can in fact be checked from a web browser, and it does not indicate any sort of decline of the web). In my opinion, people don't generally understand technology and try to dramatize what is new in order to impress others with their cutting edge knowledge; Wired epitomizes this.
Commercial use of technology, in the scope of this article/assignment, is moving content to dedicated apps/services whereas in the past it used to be up to the user to find such things via a web browser. Services such as Netflix, games such as World of Warcraft, specific apps to check specific services such as Facebook and WSJ, media streaming via Flash or otherwise embedded formats are taking away from what the author considers to be the open web, and bringing specialized data to specialized apps that are specifically requested by users. This is in comparison to the “open web” where a user used a non-specific app (web browser) to find the content they sought. The only real difference is ease of use; if a user wants to only check Facebook (on a mobile device, the article often leaves this subtle yet significant distinction out), they need only to launch the Facebook app, which has much less overhead than a full web browser which allows it to launch quicker, saving them the time of the full web browser launch, and navigating to Facebok; Bam! It's already up. It's like having a different browser shortcut, each with it's own homepage to whichever service the user is seeking.
But it is still an open and free web. There are options that simplify the enormity of the web, and the largest example of this is Apple and the Walled Garden analogy: their iPhone/iPad model is that you have THEIR hardware using THEIR software or software THEY approve for YOUR web-browsing experience, limiting the openness and liberty of the world wide web in return for simplicity for the user. Will this trend continue? Yes. Is it the death of the internet, or web? Absolutely not. People still go home and check E-mail and research on the web using old-fashioned web browsers, not their iPhones or iPads. The web is not dead, it is simply more widespread and used in more and different ways than in years past.
We do. Voting.We got ourselves into this mess and we perpetuate it by voting for the same sort of morons over and over again. Purge the system. Vote every incumbent out. Never vote for politicians again, we don't need politicians in government, we need true leaders who understand industry.
You're part of the problem with that attitude, that helpless, infantile view of not being able to do anything about it. Unfortunately, most of America shares that point of view, which is only a problem because most of America shares that point of view, which is only a problem because most of America shares that point of view...
Do something. Write letters to your senators. To your congressman (and to be politically correct, to your congresswomen). Call them. Don't vote for the status quo. Let people know you are standing up for what is right. They just need to see someone doing something, because most of America is a flock of sheep. They don't know, nor care, about the issues plaguing their life because, like a poster said below, they can't be bothered, 'Dancing with the Stars' is on.
Do something, and be public about it. Perhaps I have a naive point of view of it, but it's better than rolling over and giving up. At THAT point, you have lost everything. When you've given up, then all hope is lost. America hasn't given up, not quite yet.
Caution: Anecdotal evidence follows.
I had a Dell Inspiron (forget the exact model number) back in 2004 with a 17.5" WUXGA monitor (1920x1200). Developing code in Visual Studio, playing music, the occasional websurfing (over wifi) on battery would last well over 5 hours. The only thing I tweaked was that since I was in a fluorescent lighted building, I turned my monitor brightness down a bit, and I used inverted colors in my IDE (black background). I don't know if the inverted colors made a difference in power consumption directly, but the contrast with the text was clear enough that I could turn down the overall brightness without sacrificing visual quality.
And most importantly:
4) Create a large, unsecured crowd, that would be ideal for a random bombing that would also effectively shut down an airport and possibly the nation (think O'Hare's security checkpoints bombed).
Done. They don't care. My Congressman voted FOR CISPA, when I wrote to him AGAINST SOPA and internet regulation. My Senator (Maria Cantwell) responded to my anti-CISPA letter with a letter that had absolutely no mention of CISPA at all.
Next step: vote them out. I will not vote for any incumbents. They're all part of the problem, they're politicians second, greedy people first, and willing to do something good for their country last with personal agendas in between.
After that, we need to get rid of this stupid party system. Party politics led to the Nazi's seizing power (I know I know, there's more to it, but it makes for a convenient argument)
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting again. I always though recycling aluminum was more energy intensive than refining bauxite. It's a good thing I'm still in school. Also a good thing I'm not stubborn enough to refuse information that disproves something I "knew," because now I have even more to feed my fire of increasing fuel efficiency of vehicles.
I thank you again.
Just posted, and somehow I'm pretty sure my username got lost with the post. Or I'm that drunk. Either has a fair chance of plausibility.
Anyway, in case it was lost, I wanted to thank you for your links. Though they totally disagree with what I though, they provide insightful information to me. Information I'll use to reform opinions and thoughts on vehicle design/manufacture that I held (apparently) erroneously.
I still hate the Prius, I have other valid reasons for that (objective, supportable-by-fact reasons, such as actual fuel efficiency, though they are less meaningful with this new information).
Was it a quick Google search that yielded the PDF's you linked, or do you have some other source you get these from? I notice the one si apparently through the Way Back Machine.
Same as how buying a Prius is worse for the environment than buying a used (or even many new non-hybrid) cars due to the manufacturing process.
I totally agree with you, but am curious: do you have any credible sources? I know aluminum manufacturing is worse for the environment than steel due to it's high energy costs to both purify and recycle, but do you have any numbers that I could, say, share with my idiot democrat cousin who loves her Prius to prove that it isn't a good car for the environment?
I'm getting really tired of hearing that $technology or $application_of_technology may be "useful to criminals".
In a supposedly free country (yeah, I know, who am I kidding?), shouldn't we always err on the side of liberty instead of trying to "pre-regulate" criminal activity?
Nah, Minority Report gives the legislatures huge boners. So do the phrases "for the children" and "to prevent terrorism."
using xkcdpasswordmethod I get 97.49 centuries on the Massive Cracking Array Scenario.
Interestingly, MassiveCrackingArrayScenario yields 2.89 hundred million trillion trillion centuries
Yea, some of those leaked over here to the Tri-Cities. It's depressing, all this gray and rain. Will you take you clouds back? We don't like them over here.
In exchange, we'll gladly take that big yellow orb in the sky that frightens you so much whenever it sneaks into your area.
Thanks.
Awesome! So does that mean I get a monthly kickback on all the apartments I've helped build? Or the million gallon anaerobic treatment tank? Or the roads?
Since those were numerous years ago, I expect a nice fat check any day! Yippee!!!
If my friend sells a jar of honey to someone, do they have to pay him for every bite they share? Or how about if they use it in a recipe of their own and sell that? Where's his kickback? I mean, it's only fair if musicians can do it, right?
On a serious note, though; retirement is sort of exactly this...and by "sort of" I mean "could be used to argue the point by idiots."
The first tip off is....
"Tech industry experts are saying"
These people are NOT Tech industry experts, they are posers and wannabe's that make crap up and then blog about it in hopes that under-educated CIO's will listen to them. See, for example, all the content in CIO magazine and how the existence of it makes any IT engineer cringe.
Oh, so Wired said this? It's safe to ignore, then.
And the cost of purchasing legitimate copies goes up.
Which leads to more pirating.
Which leads to higher costs to combat the pirating.
Which leads to higher costs to the RIAA.
And the cost of purchasing legitimate copies goes up.
ad infinitum
I just changed my mailing address with the VA. The phone call took me over an hour (had to wait a half hour on hold only to make an appointment for them to call me back later). The man informed me to change my address for any medical benefits or education benefits, I'd have to call them (was a bit vague on who "they" were..) because it's three separate databases.
WTF?! It's all the Department of Veterans Affairs! Why do they have my data stored in THREE different databases?! And why can't this guy submit the request for it to be changed in all three?
...already covered this
Nice to see others have finally figured the same thing out.
Not to mention the thing that has most likely got MSFT worried which is that....NOBODY CARES, they really don't. This is one thing I have to give Moz credit for, because even though I no longer use their browser (I use a Chromium variant call Dragon) they were the ones that FINALLY got websites away from the "works best in IE" bullshit.
Now it doesn't really matter WHAT you use, its all the same. They all render the same pages, they all have roughly the same behavior, so the only ones that care about this little pissing contest is the corps themselves. as far as the users are concerned they honestly don't give a shit if what they are using is IE, Chrome, FF, dragon, QTWeb, Opera, whatever, it all "just works" and for that I say thank fucking God that it does.
Opera and Safari don't work for many of my school's intranet functions. Opera doesn't work for the FAFSA and a number of other scholarship applications (To be fair, the FAFSA works, but it isn't supported). They don't work for many job applications I've done. I think VONAPP through the VA doesn't render correctly. Hell, even my slashdot journal editing doesn't render correctly in Firefox, Chrome, or Opera (had to use IEx64 for it to render correctly). A great majority of websites work independent of the browser, as they should, but some still don't, and unfortunately for me and every student in the country, many of these are from our school or the government.
Have you checked out Horde? I think it does everything you're asking, except the desktop client.
The needing of a desktop client is, I think, your toughest requirement. If you can let that one go, it's easy.
There is no honor between the swarm of resent-their-mommies script kiddies and petty credit card thieves that call themselves "Anonymous".
Awww damn, now you upset them. They're going to take down slashdot...
I was an infantry machinegunner.
That doesn't mean that I don't know anything. I've been building computers since before I was in high school. Taught myself C and C++. Went to Digipen Institute of Technology, worked for my school district as a network admin while still a student...that was all before the military.
We did have technical staff (MOS code 06xx) to do such things, but every one I met knew less about computers and networks than I did. They guy that taught my UAV course knew less about flying the aircraft than I did (due in part to experience flying R/C airplanes, and an understanding of the fundamentals of aerodynamics). The guy that taught me the GBOSS system knew less about the system by the time he got there than I did (I took the time to investigate and figured the entire system out, there were some things I taught him).
Is my case unique? Most definitely. But the point is, the military's technical aptitude falls short. I group them all because I've used some Army systems as well and found them to be lacking obvious features.
I haven't laughed that hard in a long time!
Do you realize the technical ineptitude in the military?
Our Network guys didn't even know what a routing loop was, or how I could take down the network in this one relatively unguarded room (that happened to house the routers).
We were lining up a satellite for our network access and it had to point x degrees; my lieutenant (college grad, because all officers are required to have Bachelor's degree in {INSERT RANDOM FIELD HERE}) requested I ask the guy if this azimuth had to be shot from the base, and if so if it was along the side or from the center.
I was the only non-officer in my company that could keep a generator running; if it died, no one knew how to start it, despite the instructions being written fairly clearly.
A sergeant fulled said generator with oil until it was full (full being to the top of the fill-tube). Then we had a geyser of oil coming out of the exhaust. A Marine was moving our front end loader and rounded a left hand corner that had a bank sloping down to the right...with the bucket up. Of course it tipped over.
These are but a few examples I've seen. The Army's SOP (standard operating procedure) for the Raven B UAV system is to stall it at 100-150 feet (I think) and let it fall to the ground to land. We were taught that $1000 in damages for 5 flights was acceptable/expected. The Marine's SOP was to do the same but at 50-75 feet to minimize damage.
I was a Marine. I'm proud of my service, but I'm not proud of the Marine Corps. It's full of a bunch of coddled stupid pussies. But the military should NOT be in charge of their own control systems for technical devices, not without a lot more technical education for those serving in the technical fields, which isn't going to happen with 4 years of service then treating everyone like shit so the majority leave.
Not more industry shills, not business leaders. Leaders of people, leaders that know the industries. Let's put Richard Stallman in the FCC. He's certainly not an industry shrill.
Voting MAKES the difference. The electoral system is broken, certainly, but it isn't handled the way it was intended to. A simple majority popular vote in a state gets ALL the states electoral votes, that's not right.
I've talked to several people about net neutrality. Afterward, they all understand it well enough to decide for themselves (some even do opt against it, which I take to mean I keep bias out of the explanation). You must be doing something wrong when explaining it to them and here it is: "common carrier." Keep the technical terms to a minimum. Sure, "common carrier" isn't REALLY a technical term, but it sounds technical to them. You have to explain it in common terms.
Here's basically how I do it. Take the internet right now, that's all we want to keep (usually this is enough, don't change it AT ALL). Say you have Comcast as your provider. No what they want to push is a tiered system, where, say, Microsoft pays Comcast more than Google does, so your Google traffic is slowed down, but Bing is super fast, so you might switch to that; and since youTube is owned by Google, their traffic gets slowed down because Microsoft paid for the priority.
You have to use simple terms, and relate it to stuff they care about (youtube).
I view your post as you being defeated before you even try. Money controls politics, that's great, but voting controls who even gets into office, and who is into office determines whether money controls their politics.
I think about 7 pounds. To me, weight of a laptop has never been an issue, so I don't even consider it, and often forget that most people care about this a lot.
It was a good time, but I kept hard drive activity down, I had firefox open usually with several tabs, some documentation, my IDE of course (Visual Studio), winamp streaming from my home computer, all over wifi. If I turned my monitor brightness back up, I'd still get over 3 hours.
I like it. I wrote this for a college assignment. Probably inaccurate, but I wanted to see what I could get away with in the course:
Assignment: 1. The death of the web http://www.onthemedia.org/2010/aug/20/the-death-of-the-web/ Summarize the directions that commercial use of technology is moving to provide content, away from the open, free web.
I followed the link to http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/08/ff_webrip/
The article focuses on users' widespread use of specific and specialized apps to retrieve internet content and dramatizes the difference between “web” and “internet.” This latter distinction is, in my opinion, entirely incorrect, as the world wide web, though often now not being used by a browser, is still a world wide web in that it is a web of networks that covers the world; much like the internet is a larger network connecting smaller networks. There is no difference between “web” and “internet.”
The article makes a big deal out of the fact that most data transmitted over the internet is no longer “the web” which it declares as HTML and data seen in web browsers, but, typical of Wired, it takes a naive point of view and understanding of root concepts and technology (Example: first paragraph; almost all of those are NOT necessarily apps, but can in fact be checked from a web browser, and it does not indicate any sort of decline of the web). In my opinion, people don't generally understand technology and try to dramatize what is new in order to impress others with their cutting edge knowledge; Wired epitomizes this.
Commercial use of technology, in the scope of this article/assignment, is moving content to dedicated apps/services whereas in the past it used to be up to the user to find such things via a web browser. Services such as Netflix, games such as World of Warcraft, specific apps to check specific services such as Facebook and WSJ, media streaming via Flash or otherwise embedded formats are taking away from what the author considers to be the open web, and bringing specialized data to specialized apps that are specifically requested by users. This is in comparison to the “open web” where a user used a non-specific app (web browser) to find the content they sought. The only real difference is ease of use; if a user wants to only check Facebook (on a mobile device, the article often leaves this subtle yet significant distinction out), they need only to launch the Facebook app, which has much less overhead than a full web browser which allows it to launch quicker, saving them the time of the full web browser launch, and navigating to Facebok; Bam! It's already up. It's like having a different browser shortcut, each with it's own homepage to whichever service the user is seeking.
But it is still an open and free web. There are options that simplify the enormity of the web, and the largest example of this is Apple and the Walled Garden analogy: their iPhone/iPad model is that you have THEIR hardware using THEIR software or software THEY approve for YOUR web-browsing experience, limiting the openness and liberty of the world wide web in return for simplicity for the user. Will this trend continue? Yes. Is it the death of the internet, or web? Absolutely not. People still go home and check E-mail and research on the web using old-fashioned web browsers, not their iPhones or iPads. The web is not dead, it is simply more widespread and used in more and different ways than in years past.
You act like We have a say. Wake up.
We do. Voting.We got ourselves into this mess and we perpetuate it by voting for the same sort of morons over and over again. Purge the system. Vote every incumbent out. Never vote for politicians again, we don't need politicians in government, we need true leaders who understand industry.
You're part of the problem with that attitude, that helpless, infantile view of not being able to do anything about it. Unfortunately, most of America shares that point of view, which is only a problem because most of America shares that point of view, which is only a problem because most of America shares that point of view...
Do something. Write letters to your senators. To your congressman (and to be politically correct, to your congresswomen). Call them. Don't vote for the status quo. Let people know you are standing up for what is right. They just need to see someone doing something, because most of America is a flock of sheep. They don't know, nor care, about the issues plaguing their life because, like a poster said below, they can't be bothered, 'Dancing with the Stars' is on.
Do something, and be public about it. Perhaps I have a naive point of view of it, but it's better than rolling over and giving up. At THAT point, you have lost everything. When you've given up, then all hope is lost. America hasn't given up, not quite yet.
Caution: Anecdotal evidence follows. I had a Dell Inspiron (forget the exact model number) back in 2004 with a 17.5" WUXGA monitor (1920x1200). Developing code in Visual Studio, playing music, the occasional websurfing (over wifi) on battery would last well over 5 hours. The only thing I tweaked was that since I was in a fluorescent lighted building, I turned my monitor brightness down a bit, and I used inverted colors in my IDE (black background). I don't know if the inverted colors made a difference in power consumption directly, but the contrast with the text was clear enough that I could turn down the overall brightness without sacrificing visual quality.
And most importantly: 4) Create a large, unsecured crowd, that would be ideal for a random bombing that would also effectively shut down an airport and possibly the nation (think O'Hare's security checkpoints bombed).
They've already won. The usage of the word has changed, the language evolved.
Hackers are bad, nefarious people. Accept it, it's a lost cause.
Done. They don't care. My Congressman voted FOR CISPA, when I wrote to him AGAINST SOPA and internet regulation. My Senator (Maria Cantwell) responded to my anti-CISPA letter with a letter that had absolutely no mention of CISPA at all.
Next step: vote them out. I will not vote for any incumbents. They're all part of the problem, they're politicians second, greedy people first, and willing to do something good for their country last with personal agendas in between.
After that, we need to get rid of this stupid party system. Party politics led to the Nazi's seizing power (I know I know, there's more to it, but it makes for a convenient argument)
Good to know. Thanks. I don't always think everything through all the way. Hence scarred intellect.