Oh, I know.... but assuming we're able to engineer a treadmill large enough for an airplane with a track speed of Mach 1, I'm going to put forward that we could also engineer a frictionless bearing (since that's about what'd be needed to keep the treadmill motor from burning out:P) You'd also have to take into account the heat from friction between the wheel and the track, which would probably be enough to cause a normal air-filled tire to explode.:)
It'd be interesting to see them try to engineer such a treadmill just for the sake of experiment, hehe.
The plane's forward momentum is provided by the prop or turbine, not the wheels. The wheels are free to turn at whatever rate, and whether a plane has enough lift to take off depends on the airspeed, not the groundspeed. You could put a plane on a treadmill moving at Mach 1, and a simple prop-driven fixed wing aircraft would still be able to take off (though it'd probably blow a tire at that speed).
They also don't make assertions about the theories of others, or try to disprove existing theories. Just because somebody doesn't publish doesn't make them "not a scientist." What makes them "not a scientist" is that they explicitly say they aren't scientists when asked.
They do still follow scientific method, and they do still submit their findings for review, just that they're doing things for entertainment value, not scientific merit/progress. When they start talking about scientific theory and basis behind what they're talking about/doing, they go out of their way to find an expert to give credible testimony on the show, at least for anything beyond a high school level.
not just you. left click works but is slow, and right click doesn't actually do anything unless all of the hidden/nested comments are expanded. (actually, it expands them. one-by-one. and then finally pops up the context menu once they're all open)
Most laptops have external display options as well... the netbook I'm typing this on has a tiny screen, yes, but it also has a D-Sub display out. My main laptop has a 16" screen (which is good balance between portability and useability, IMO), and also has D-Sub, HDMI, and DisplayPort output....
Others have suggested buying a small form factor system like a Mac Mini, or an all-in-one system. Good suggestions. But why not also consider getting a laptop for the portability and using an external display? My main laptop is driving 3 displays... the built-in 16" display (1920x1080), and two 24" displays (both also 1920x1080) using the DisplayPort. For added bonus, I'm also pushing audio through the DP, so it's essentially a docking station... I set the lappy on the desk, plug in the DP and the USB hub, and it's good to go. I can also unplug and take the laptop on the road with no trouble. It's quiet, and more than capable of doing the work that I need it to do. (and depending on the type of research your wife is diong, she may appreciate having a dual display setup too)
Actually, there's a theory in economics that, while it mostly talks about tax rate vs. revenue, can be applied to price versus profit. The short version is that Price v. Profit follows an inverted parabolic line. There's a sweet spot where revenues are maximized, and it most emphatically is not at the highest possible rate in the graph. The same applies to sales (and in fact, it was in that context that my HS Economics teacher presented it): as you raise the price beyond a butter zone, your profits actually drop because fewer people can afford to buy your product, and either buy the products from the competition or steal it.
There is a character in the extended Latin alphabet that expresses the sound... it gets used in Slavic, Baltic, and Finno-Ugric languages... it's a Z with a caron (hacek) on top of it. Unfortunately, Slashdot eats Unicode, so I can't copy it into this post, but if you go to Wiki and search for U+017E, the first link is the article about that particular character.:)
$0.05/message is nothing. Most carriers in Canada charge $0.15/message and some charge $0.40.
I do have a plan, but what concerns me is that there's international numbers in my cell phone. I don't pay for calling them, because I have a good plan with the phone, but I would pay between $0.50 and $2.50 to text them, depending on what country they're in....
(that said, I wouldn't install an app like that... if I need to send a text, I sit down to type it out, and don't really nneed to worry about walking into traffic... but still....)
Wouldn't work. If the hacker can gain control of B, the hacker has the ability to generate enough points of data for x and f(x) to figure out what the function is.
The way RSA does it is better. B doesn't send X, it sends a User ID, which is static. A then looks up in a secure hash what salt User ID corresponds to, and uses that along with system time to figure out what X is, so that it can return f(x) to B. (in other words, to figure out what your secure token is displaying) It's a much more secure way of doing things than what you propose... as long as f(x) remains secure, and as long as the hash table for user ID to key ID remains secure. (especially considering that the "salt" could be anything, from an offset to a transformation to a separate equation to run f(x) through before returning the result)
The big kerfluffle going on with the RSA hack is that RSA is not being forthcoming as to whether or not the hash tables have been compromised. If they have, then f(x) can be easily compromised and everybody who uses an RSA key fob needs to either get a new key fob, or switch to a different method of securing things. Particularly important when you consider the implications of who uses an RSA key fob to secure things: I work for Ma Bell, and one of the systems I can access in conjunction with my RSA key is the DMS. (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Digital_Multiplex_System for those who don't recognize the acronym). Think of the damage that could be caused if the wrong people got access to that system: they could crash the PSTN. (fortunately there is multi-layer security that I'm not really able to discuss, so that kind of breach is extremely unlikely... but this is a very serious breach of security just the same).
Right... because an alien race capable of surviving without blowing itself up, and then advancing their science to the point that they're capable of building ships that can travel the vast distances between stars or galaxies within the lifespan of an individual has nothing better to do with their spare time than practice fetishism on hicks who've spent one too many cold nights cuddling up to the cows.
If we're going to get on a grammar nazi binge, then it's worth pointing out that one of the definitions of Irony is actually exactly what the GP described... (merriam webster's exact words are "the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of their literal meaning".) He may not have expressed it properly, but I do think that was the meaning he was trying to get at.
Though interestingly enough, yet another definition of Irony is an incongruency between an expected result and an actual result... so in other words, MySQL's website being hacked with an SQL injection attack *is* ironic, because one would expect the makers of MySQL to have some idea of how to secure it properly. (it's not even that hard to lock down, which makes it even more humorous).
Though I must say... correcting somebody's already correct use of the word irony? Absolutely classic....
The public financing laws in Canada are responsible for this, not the politicians. Any donation over $20 is a matter of public record (and can't be anonymous), politicians are not allowed to accept more than the personal contribution limit ($1184 last time I checked), and it's illegal for a corporate entity to make a campaign contribution.
So... you think that the party which has a record for lying in parliament and falsifying public records is the best option? You think that the party that's run by an autocrat with a penchant for firing anybody that speaks out against him is the best option? You think that the party which fired a top scientist at the AECL for having the gall to say that the Chalk River plant needed to be shut down for repairs... 3 months before an emergency shutdown forced it offline for over 6 months causing a global medical isotope shortage that we're just now recovering from... would be the best option? You think that the party which brought in a lawyer who had previously been disbarred for fraud to write their "transparency" and "accountability" legislation would be the best choice? (said lawyer is now under investigation by the RCMP for influence peddling and illegal lobbying... that's illegal under the terms of the accountability legislation that he wrote) You think that the party which told the country a project that would actually cost close to $100 billion would come in with a price tag of about 1/5 that when trying to get it passed would be the best option? You think that the party which twice suspended parliament to avoid prior non-confidence votes would be the best option? You think the party that's taking credit for our economic situation is the best choice, even though the first thing they tried doing after taking office was to remove the laws that had been established by the previous government, and which are actually responsible for our banking sector not collapsing (and thus, our continued economic stability)? (in other words, had they gotten their way when they took office, our economy *would* have planted just as badly as the US economy did)
When they scuttle a ship, they usually pick an area that's completely devoid of life. Having dived multiple such sites in various stages of their evolution, I can tell you that it's actually a pretty effective way to build an artificial reef. In parts of the carribbean, you can dive down, and see a completely empty and devoid plane of nothing but sand on the floor of the sea, save for a ship rising up out of the mud, which is home to crustaceans, corals, anemones, fish, and other forms of life that just aren't seen anywhere else in the area.
When a ship sinks by accident, however, they don't have that kind of control.
You know, people said that about EverQuest, when WoW came out. That the idea of WoW beating EQ was simply absurd because there were so many people playing EQ who wouldn't want to simply switch.
Of course, GuildWars doesn't have to sink WoW to win. It just has to have a large enough player base to succeed financially. And that's going to depend on the quality of the content and gameplay. And if it's good enough, then it will slowly win out over WoW... those social connections that you mention? They're WoW's achilles heel as well. Lots of people cancel their WoW account because the game's not fun any more, but stay in touch with their WoW friends through social media. I cancelled my account a while ago, but I still have friends I met through WoW on various friends lists... I was talking to three of them within the last 24 hours on MSN, even. Word of mouth will spread, and as more people get frustrated with WoW, more people will try it out, and some of those people will cancel their WoW account and sign up to play GuildWars. 7 degrees, and all.:)
It's a ripple effect. No game is going to kill WoW overnight. But sooner or later, a game will come along that brings WoW down. Not with a bang, but with a whimper.
My doctor learned to stop using the "rate your pain" scale on me when he found out I'd been walking on a broken foot for 3 weeks before I decided it shouldn't still be hurting and went to go see him to see if it was sprained badly. In that particular case, my left 5th metatarsal was in 3 pieces. During those 3 weeks I continued to run on a daily basis (though I'd cut my usual quarter marathon by 3 miles), and was continuing to train at Jiu Jitsu.
Some people simply have exceedingly high pain thresholds in general, and many others have very high thresholds when it comes to certain types of injury. I know people who can't feel a burn, for example, but have no tolerance at all for something that breaks the skin or a broken bone.
And at the risk of talking in circles, it's for exactly that reason that a system as described is an incredibly bad idea. But I'd add one more consideration that nobody seems to have mentionned: shock. A person who's in shock may seem completely and utterly calm, outwardly. Their voice can be level, not shaky at all, and they can seem very stable, but they could still be in a state of shock. The system could easily garner a false negative because of that, and deprioritize sending an ambulance for a situation where somebody's life is at serious risk.
It is a feedback loop. Pretty much any form of unrest has the risk of becoming a runaway feedback loop (just look at what's happening in Libya).
A large part of the problems behind the unrest in Africa is due to colonialism, though. It's not just food shortages... they're a symptom of a deeper problem, which is that there's large parts of Africa that haven't had a stable government of the people for more than a century. There's countries where there's despots who've been in power for 30-50 years who just don't care, not to mention private militias and armies that have been major contributors to the unrest.
That's not to say the whole continent is one giant cluserfuck. Far from it. There's parts of Africa that are very progressive, who have very responsible and responsive governments, and who take very good care of their people. But a conservative estimate would put hundreds of millions of people living under despots who just don't give a shit about their well being, or about establishing a safe place for the people to live and work.
Farming in North America isn't a problem. Farming in Europe or Australia or Russia aren't problems. Production in those areas is more than adequate for the population. The problem is that there's a significant portion of the world's population living in an area where they have prime farmland, and where farm production is significantly reduced because of the civil unrest: it's too dangerous to farm in large swaths of Africa. You have any idea how much underused or unused prime farmland there is in Africa that's laying fallow because the farmers are afraid of getting shot at?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I know.... but assuming we're able to engineer a treadmill large enough for an airplane with a track speed of Mach 1, I'm going to put forward that we could also engineer a frictionless bearing (since that's about what'd be needed to keep the treadmill motor from burning out :P) You'd also have to take into account the heat from friction between the wheel and the track, which would probably be enough to cause a normal air-filled tire to explode. :)
It'd be interesting to see them try to engineer such a treadmill just for the sake of experiment, hehe.
The plane's forward momentum is provided by the prop or turbine, not the wheels. The wheels are free to turn at whatever rate, and whether a plane has enough lift to take off depends on the airspeed, not the groundspeed. You could put a plane on a treadmill moving at Mach 1, and a simple prop-driven fixed wing aircraft would still be able to take off (though it'd probably blow a tire at that speed).
Not OK here. FF4 on Win7 x32 (my netbook) or FF3 on Win7 x64 (my laptop). Doesn't work on either.
For shits and giggles, I tried it on IE on Win7 x64. It worked perfectly. I think it's time to abandon Slashdot.
They also don't make assertions about the theories of others, or try to disprove existing theories. Just because somebody doesn't publish doesn't make them "not a scientist." What makes them "not a scientist" is that they explicitly say they aren't scientists when asked.
They do still follow scientific method, and they do still submit their findings for review, just that they're doing things for entertainment value, not scientific merit/progress. When they start talking about scientific theory and basis behind what they're talking about/doing, they go out of their way to find an expert to give credible testimony on the show, at least for anything beyond a high school level.
not just you. left click works but is slow, and right click doesn't actually do anything unless all of the hidden/nested comments are expanded. (actually, it expands them. one-by-one. and then finally pops up the context menu once they're all open)
Most laptops have external display options as well... the netbook I'm typing this on has a tiny screen, yes, but it also has a D-Sub display out. My main laptop has a 16" screen (which is good balance between portability and useability, IMO), and also has D-Sub, HDMI, and DisplayPort output....
Others have suggested buying a small form factor system like a Mac Mini, or an all-in-one system. Good suggestions. But why not also consider getting a laptop for the portability and using an external display? My main laptop is driving 3 displays... the built-in 16" display (1920x1080), and two 24" displays (both also 1920x1080) using the DisplayPort. For added bonus, I'm also pushing audio through the DP, so it's essentially a docking station... I set the lappy on the desk, plug in the DP and the USB hub, and it's good to go. I can also unplug and take the laptop on the road with no trouble. It's quiet, and more than capable of doing the work that I need it to do. (and depending on the type of research your wife is diong, she may appreciate having a dual display setup too)
When faced with two opposing theories that explain your observations, choose the one that predicts the most, as it'll be easier to disprove.
Actually, there's a theory in economics that, while it mostly talks about tax rate vs. revenue, can be applied to price versus profit. The short version is that Price v. Profit follows an inverted parabolic line. There's a sweet spot where revenues are maximized, and it most emphatically is not at the highest possible rate in the graph. The same applies to sales (and in fact, it was in that context that my HS Economics teacher presented it): as you raise the price beyond a butter zone, your profits actually drop because fewer people can afford to buy your product, and either buy the products from the competition or steal it.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Laffer_curve is a good starting point, though that's the theory as it applies specifically to taxation.
There is a character in the extended Latin alphabet that expresses the sound... it gets used in Slavic, Baltic, and Finno-Ugric languages... it's a Z with a caron (hacek) on top of it. Unfortunately, Slashdot eats Unicode, so I can't copy it into this post, but if you go to Wiki and search for U+017E, the first link is the article about that particular character. :)
Let's see if this works...
$0.05/message is nothing. Most carriers in Canada charge $0.15/message and some charge $0.40.
I do have a plan, but what concerns me is that there's international numbers in my cell phone. I don't pay for calling them, because I have a good plan with the phone, but I would pay between $0.50 and $2.50 to text them, depending on what country they're in....
(that said, I wouldn't install an app like that... if I need to send a text, I sit down to type it out, and don't really nneed to worry about walking into traffic... but still....)
Wouldn't work. If the hacker can gain control of B, the hacker has the ability to generate enough points of data for x and f(x) to figure out what the function is.
The way RSA does it is better. B doesn't send X, it sends a User ID, which is static. A then looks up in a secure hash what salt User ID corresponds to, and uses that along with system time to figure out what X is, so that it can return f(x) to B. (in other words, to figure out what your secure token is displaying) It's a much more secure way of doing things than what you propose... as long as f(x) remains secure, and as long as the hash table for user ID to key ID remains secure. (especially considering that the "salt" could be anything, from an offset to a transformation to a separate equation to run f(x) through before returning the result)
The big kerfluffle going on with the RSA hack is that RSA is not being forthcoming as to whether or not the hash tables have been compromised. If they have, then f(x) can be easily compromised and everybody who uses an RSA key fob needs to either get a new key fob, or switch to a different method of securing things. Particularly important when you consider the implications of who uses an RSA key fob to secure things: I work for Ma Bell, and one of the systems I can access in conjunction with my RSA key is the DMS. (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Digital_Multiplex_System for those who don't recognize the acronym). Think of the damage that could be caused if the wrong people got access to that system: they could crash the PSTN. (fortunately there is multi-layer security that I'm not really able to discuss, so that kind of breach is extremely unlikely... but this is a very serious breach of security just the same).
Right... because an alien race capable of surviving without blowing itself up, and then advancing their science to the point that they're capable of building ships that can travel the vast distances between stars or galaxies within the lifespan of an individual has nothing better to do with their spare time than practice fetishism on hicks who've spent one too many cold nights cuddling up to the cows.
Nuh uh! I just filed a patent on a method for stifling innovation by strategically filing patents with no intention to develop!
hehe... wish I hadn't replied... that is a good one. :) mind if I... um... "borrow" it next chance I get?
If we're going to get on a grammar nazi binge, then it's worth pointing out that one of the definitions of Irony is actually exactly what the GP described... (merriam webster's exact words are "the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of their literal meaning".) He may not have expressed it properly, but I do think that was the meaning he was trying to get at.
Though interestingly enough, yet another definition of Irony is an incongruency between an expected result and an actual result... so in other words, MySQL's website being hacked with an SQL injection attack *is* ironic, because one would expect the makers of MySQL to have some idea of how to secure it properly. (it's not even that hard to lock down, which makes it even more humorous).
Though I must say... correcting somebody's already correct use of the word irony? Absolutely classic....
The public financing laws in Canada are responsible for this, not the politicians. Any donation over $20 is a matter of public record (and can't be anonymous), politicians are not allowed to accept more than the personal contribution limit ($1184 last time I checked), and it's illegal for a corporate entity to make a campaign contribution.
The US could really benefit from rules like that.
So... you think that the party which has a record for lying in parliament and falsifying public records is the best option?
You think that the party that's run by an autocrat with a penchant for firing anybody that speaks out against him is the best option?
You think that the party which fired a top scientist at the AECL for having the gall to say that the Chalk River plant needed to be shut down for repairs... 3 months before an emergency shutdown forced it offline for over 6 months causing a global medical isotope shortage that we're just now recovering from... would be the best option?
You think that the party which brought in a lawyer who had previously been disbarred for fraud to write their "transparency" and "accountability" legislation would be the best choice? (said lawyer is now under investigation by the RCMP for influence peddling and illegal lobbying... that's illegal under the terms of the accountability legislation that he wrote)
You think that the party which told the country a project that would actually cost close to $100 billion would come in with a price tag of about 1/5 that when trying to get it passed would be the best option?
You think that the party which twice suspended parliament to avoid prior non-confidence votes would be the best option?
You think the party that's taking credit for our economic situation is the best choice, even though the first thing they tried doing after taking office was to remove the laws that had been established by the previous government, and which are actually responsible for our banking sector not collapsing (and thus, our continued economic stability)? (in other words, had they gotten their way when they took office, our economy *would* have planted just as badly as the US economy did)
What the hell rock have you been living under?
When they scuttle a ship, they usually pick an area that's completely devoid of life. Having dived multiple such sites in various stages of their evolution, I can tell you that it's actually a pretty effective way to build an artificial reef. In parts of the carribbean, you can dive down, and see a completely empty and devoid plane of nothing but sand on the floor of the sea, save for a ship rising up out of the mud, which is home to crustaceans, corals, anemones, fish, and other forms of life that just aren't seen anywhere else in the area.
When a ship sinks by accident, however, they don't have that kind of control.
You know, people said that about EverQuest, when WoW came out. That the idea of WoW beating EQ was simply absurd because there were so many people playing EQ who wouldn't want to simply switch.
Of course, GuildWars doesn't have to sink WoW to win. It just has to have a large enough player base to succeed financially. And that's going to depend on the quality of the content and gameplay. And if it's good enough, then it will slowly win out over WoW... those social connections that you mention? They're WoW's achilles heel as well. Lots of people cancel their WoW account because the game's not fun any more, but stay in touch with their WoW friends through social media. I cancelled my account a while ago, but I still have friends I met through WoW on various friends lists... I was talking to three of them within the last 24 hours on MSN, even. Word of mouth will spread, and as more people get frustrated with WoW, more people will try it out, and some of those people will cancel their WoW account and sign up to play GuildWars. 7 degrees, and all. :)
It's a ripple effect. No game is going to kill WoW overnight. But sooner or later, a game will come along that brings WoW down. Not with a bang, but with a whimper.
My doctor learned to stop using the "rate your pain" scale on me when he found out I'd been walking on a broken foot for 3 weeks before I decided it shouldn't still be hurting and went to go see him to see if it was sprained badly. In that particular case, my left 5th metatarsal was in 3 pieces. During those 3 weeks I continued to run on a daily basis (though I'd cut my usual quarter marathon by 3 miles), and was continuing to train at Jiu Jitsu.
Some people simply have exceedingly high pain thresholds in general, and many others have very high thresholds when it comes to certain types of injury. I know people who can't feel a burn, for example, but have no tolerance at all for something that breaks the skin or a broken bone.
And at the risk of talking in circles, it's for exactly that reason that a system as described is an incredibly bad idea. But I'd add one more consideration that nobody seems to have mentionned: shock. A person who's in shock may seem completely and utterly calm, outwardly. Their voice can be level, not shaky at all, and they can seem very stable, but they could still be in a state of shock. The system could easily garner a false negative because of that, and deprioritize sending an ambulance for a situation where somebody's life is at serious risk.
Tanzania, then. But I used Kenya because it's a major agricultural exporter, which is rather apt considering the current topic of discussion, no?
Kenya.
I'd name others, but you only asked for one, and I wouldn't want to risk a pedant telling me I'd failed for giving you more than you asked for. :)
It is a feedback loop. Pretty much any form of unrest has the risk of becoming a runaway feedback loop (just look at what's happening in Libya).
A large part of the problems behind the unrest in Africa is due to colonialism, though. It's not just food shortages... they're a symptom of a deeper problem, which is that there's large parts of Africa that haven't had a stable government of the people for more than a century. There's countries where there's despots who've been in power for 30-50 years who just don't care, not to mention private militias and armies that have been major contributors to the unrest.
That's not to say the whole continent is one giant cluserfuck. Far from it. There's parts of Africa that are very progressive, who have very responsible and responsive governments, and who take very good care of their people. But a conservative estimate would put hundreds of millions of people living under despots who just don't give a shit about their well being, or about establishing a safe place for the people to live and work.
A better solution....
It's not exactly a new problem. :)
Farming in North America isn't a problem. Farming in Europe or Australia or Russia aren't problems. Production in those areas is more than adequate for the population. The problem is that there's a significant portion of the world's population living in an area where they have prime farmland, and where farm production is significantly reduced because of the civil unrest: it's too dangerous to farm in large swaths of Africa. You have any idea how much underused or unused prime farmland there is in Africa that's laying fallow because the farmers are afraid of getting shot at?