The summary says "...as long as they can exchange encrypted messages over Gmail and AIM."
That's a pretty tall order if you are in the type of situation where you need to do that because of censorship. Even in the US (which I would call average good in regards to exchanging ideas freely there were efforts to block/slow down encrypted communications (DES, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Encryption_Standard). If you are somewhere where the protection of encryption for "legitimate" concerns (like discussing why your brother whom held up a sign disappeared), I am willing to bet use of crypto is not safe. It makes far more sense to put crypto messages into stenography such as this. I know I would if I was sending encrypted messages out of fear of the content of my conversation.
Right now, my Data is $25, my Voice $60, both unlimited.
But networks are actually using more data than voice, so the data only plan would be expected to be at least half that, if not more. I know I do.
180 * 60 seconds * 13 kbit/s * 30 = 500 MB, for 3 hours/day talk time, or 5400 minutes/month.
I generally go over 1 GB in data, and the voip isn't going to save them any, as it's still the same bitrate as the talk.
I doubt that many people use their phone three hours a day (I know I don't), the point was an extreme case. Consider this, max voice traffic possible is 4GB/month. They charge $40-$60 for unlimited voice, be ready to pay a lot for any reasonable amount of traffic, already the voice is essentially irrelevant, and probably wouldn't drop costs much at all.
I would think in true emergency settings being able to use the wrong tube could be good, but in other situations, where it is not a matter of seconds for life and death, people could have different colors for different plugs.
But maybe I misjudge how often seconds really matter.
Probably has something to do with the fact that at this point Cameron can put whatever he wants in the original cut, as he should be. With him I've never felt like I was watching hours and hours of OMG, this guy needs an editor.
I think he showed the world his ability to make a long movie people would watch with Titanic (not my cup of tea, but it was a whole lot of peoples). I would imagine that any issues you had with Avatar are more with the pointless part, than the length, an even chopped to 90 minutes you would simple feel "adding to an already pointless movie... doesn't add anything..."
I enjoyed Avatar, and felt it was a good throw away visual movie, and the length did not remove my enjoyment. This actually surprises me, as if someone said, "do you want to see an epic throw away movie?" I would think, "oh, God no, keep it to 90 minutes please.", but somehow the sentiment was avoided. I guess there is a reason he makes highest grossing films ever, without relying on it being a squeal/prequel even (I'm looking at you Lucas). I mean, Avatar unseated his other long movie as the number one box office gross. The guy is good at something, and I don't think it's just marketing, as I really thought Avatar would be barfingly unwatchable until I saw it.
I heard rumors of alien sex though, is that not in it now?
My ex-wife's research into the subject concludes that Zombie-ism was used to explain why there were slaves (by the Haitians). And slave rebellions were because someone either accidental or intentionally got salt into the plantations food, breaking the slaves out of their zombiehood.
They payed Mozilla $61 million in 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation) for 16% market share (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0&qptimeframe=Y&qpsp=2006&qpnp=1)
this means the value of 1% of market share for default search (homepage and search bar) is: 3.8 milling per %.
every 1% of market share from IE they take gets them $3.8 million plus some extra (if they pay Mozilla that much, more money is in it).
Every 1% they take from Mozilla is $3.8 million in savings.
at 6.5% market share now, that's a lot of money. maybe not huge relative to their size, but a lot.
Opera at 2.3% share is making a good chunk of money too
I should add, I don't think it is unreasonable to think we can simulate the brain in 10 years, but I don't think looking at DNA is the way to do it.
More likely would be actually reverse engineering the brain by looking at brains, and simulating neurons in software, or even hardware.
If it is done at first i would imagine static brains with limited learning ability (unable to create new neurons, only adjust connections in existing ones). Later then ones able to create new and restructure. Eventually I imagine a simulated brain will be able expand like a child's, but indefinitely.
None of this means necessarily we will have hardware that can keep up, and do the processing in real time with a software simulation.
Aside from the article, it would appear arbitrary to apply loss-less compression to the LOC.
Code must be very very compressible losslessly (I am betting like 90%, as plain text is often 80% when zipping). This would imply to me that one would need 10 times as many LOC as the (faulty) premise assumes.
The article itself points out that it is not just a matter of writing the code, but also simulating the machine. So yes, if we could accurately make a machine (real or virtual) that could compute the way that DNA computes perhaps we could then make a brain that functions in it with not too much code, but it does not follow that we can just a tersely describe it on a computer as we have them (Turing Machine?).
1) Just not true. Provable by the fact that they aren't dieing in a year or two
2) Duh, but irrelevant to lifespan
3) if the charging and discharging is with the same efficiency more frequent shorter charges should not effect mileage at all. Charging for half the time to half the maximum capacity twice will be the same as charging to full capacity once. As long as the battery can store enough energy to accelerate once, and can charge itself before needing to do so the next time, it should not impact mileage much at all.
4) my sig used to be a statement to that effect actually.
I've been in and driven a prius, and it doesn't feel anything better than an econobox to me (a fully loaded one, but still not like sitting in or driving an actual luxury, or even mid range midsize car).
I do wish that in the US we valued hatch-backs, as it really is wasteful to have a sedan instead (My SO has a full sized car, with barely more trunk space than my focus), but I would hardly work it into a car price comparison, yes different models have different perks, and I for example would buy a Yaris over a Corolla because of it.
Remote start, keyless entry, and bluetooth are all available for the Corolla (most even below the XLS), and touch screen controls over knobs are a definite preference, not feature.
A hybrids battery is not of the same tech as a laptop battery.
I could just as easily use the example of a 5 year warranty of a car battery as a starting point.
Additionally, a laptop battery that loses max capacity is a bigger problem than a non plug-in hybrid battery doing the same (assuming charging efficiency is not lost). The hybrid's battery only needs to provide power for a short bit to add significant efficiency to the driving, and only should need to capture the output of one stop.
Slashdot Mirror
The link was stronger evidence anyway.
The summary says "...as long as they can exchange encrypted messages over Gmail and AIM."
That's a pretty tall order if you are in the type of situation where you need to do that because of censorship. Even in the US (which I would call average good in regards to exchanging ideas freely there were efforts to block/slow down encrypted communications (DES, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Encryption_Standard). If you are somewhere where the protection of encryption for "legitimate" concerns (like discussing why your brother whom held up a sign disappeared), I am willing to bet use of crypto is not safe. It makes far more sense to put crypto messages into stenography such as this. I know I would if I was sending encrypted messages out of fear of the content of my conversation.
Be ready for expensive data only plans though.
Right now, my Data is $25, my Voice $60, both unlimited.
But networks are actually using more data than voice, so the data only plan would be expected to be at least half that, if not more. I know I do.
180 * 60 seconds * 13 kbit/s * 30 = 500 MB, for 3 hours/day talk time, or 5400 minutes/month.
I generally go over 1 GB in data, and the voip isn't going to save them any, as it's still the same bitrate as the talk.
I doubt that many people use their phone three hours a day (I know I don't), the point was an extreme case. Consider this, max voice traffic possible is 4GB/month. They charge $40-$60 for unlimited voice, be ready to pay a lot for any reasonable amount of traffic, already the voice is essentially irrelevant, and probably wouldn't drop costs much at all.
I think just color coding.
I would think in true emergency settings being able to use the wrong tube could be good, but in other situations, where it is not a matter of seconds for life and death, people could have different colors for different plugs.
But maybe I misjudge how often seconds really matter.
I just wanna say, your last sentence is one of the fufunniest things I've read on the Internet in a while.
Probably has something to do with the fact that at this point Cameron can put whatever he wants in the original cut, as he should be. With him I've never felt like I was watching hours and hours of OMG, this guy needs an editor.
I think he showed the world his ability to make a long movie people would watch with Titanic (not my cup of tea, but it was a whole lot of peoples). I would imagine that any issues you had with Avatar are more with the pointless part, than the length, an even chopped to 90 minutes you would simple feel "adding to an already pointless movie ... doesn't add anything..."
I enjoyed Avatar, and felt it was a good throw away visual movie, and the length did not remove my enjoyment. This actually surprises me, as if someone said, "do you want to see an epic throw away movie?" I would think, "oh, God no, keep it to 90 minutes please.", but somehow the sentiment was avoided. I guess there is a reason he makes highest grossing films ever, without relying on it being a squeal/prequel even (I'm looking at you Lucas). I mean, Avatar unseated his other long movie as the number one box office gross. The guy is good at something, and I don't think it's just marketing, as I really thought Avatar would be barfingly unwatchable until I saw it.
I heard rumors of alien sex though, is that not in it now?
My ex-wife's research into the subject concludes that Zombie-ism was used to explain why there were slaves (by the Haitians). And slave rebellions were because someone either accidental or intentionally got salt into the plantations food, breaking the slaves out of their zombiehood.
The audio in his NAS?
Or so strong that it alters the audio in the computer several meters away?
Most French I know drink table wine.
Agreed.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html#axzz0x49jf8Th
They ARE making money.
They payed Mozilla $61 million in 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Foundation)
for 16% market share (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0&qptimeframe=Y&qpsp=2006&qpnp=1)
this means the value of 1% of market share for default search (homepage and search bar) is:
3.8 milling per %.
every 1% of market share from IE they take gets them $3.8 million plus some extra (if they pay Mozilla that much, more money is in it).
Every 1% they take from Mozilla is $3.8 million in savings.
at 6.5% market share now, that's a lot of money. maybe not huge relative to their size, but a lot.
Opera at 2.3% share is making a good chunk of money too
current share from:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0&qptimeframe=Y
Or maybe people that didn't buy an iPad as they felt it was too big would be happy with a 7 inch one.
I know I would be if it had the same resolution (in dpi) as the iPhone 4.
I should add, I don't think it is unreasonable to think we can simulate the brain in 10 years, but I don't think looking at DNA is the way to do it.
More likely would be actually reverse engineering the brain by looking at brains, and simulating neurons in software, or even hardware.
If it is done at first i would imagine static brains with limited learning ability (unable to create new neurons, only adjust connections in existing ones). Later then ones able to create new and restructure. Eventually I imagine a simulated brain will be able expand like a child's, but indefinitely.
None of this means necessarily we will have hardware that can keep up, and do the processing in real time with a software simulation.
Aside from the article, it would appear arbitrary to apply loss-less compression to the LOC.
Code must be very very compressible losslessly (I am betting like 90%, as plain text is often 80% when zipping). This would imply to me that one would need 10 times as many LOC as the (faulty) premise assumes.
The article itself points out that it is not just a matter of writing the code, but also simulating the machine. So yes, if we could accurately make a machine (real or virtual) that could compute the way that DNA computes perhaps we could then make a brain that functions in it with not too much code, but it does not follow that we can just a tersely describe it on a computer as we have them (Turing Machine?).
I would say that the quality of the bed (or TV, or venue) matters less if you are enjoying the sex (or move, or concert).
I'm most curious about point 3.
How is the ICE firing up more often (for shorter periods of time) going to decrease mileage?
It was very easy for me to route an application to my bluetooth with pulse too.
Allegedly that was the purpose of Phonom, but I couldn't get KDE to recognize my headset.
1) Just not true. Provable by the fact that they aren't dieing in a year or two
2) Duh, but irrelevant to lifespan
3) if the charging and discharging is with the same efficiency more frequent shorter charges should not effect mileage at all. Charging for half the time to half the maximum capacity twice will be the same as charging to full capacity once. As long as the battery can store enough energy to accelerate once, and can charge itself before needing to do so the next time, it should not impact mileage much at all.
4) my sig used to be a statement to that effect actually.
Wouldn't lots of driving push the savings up on a hybrid? especially were it city (which yours I assume is not).
XLE with added accessories?
I've been in and driven a prius, and it doesn't feel anything better than an econobox to me (a fully loaded one, but still not like sitting in or driving an actual luxury, or even mid range midsize car).
I do wish that in the US we valued hatch-backs, as it really is wasteful to have a sedan instead (My SO has a full sized car, with barely more trunk space than my focus), but I would hardly work it into a car price comparison, yes different models have different perks, and I for example would buy a Yaris over a Corolla because of it.
Remote start, keyless entry, and bluetooth are all available for the Corolla (most even below the XLS), and touch screen controls over knobs are a definite preference, not feature.
At least there is some vague competition in wireless.
In my location there is ONE broadband provider (comcast), and ONE sort-of broadband provider (verizon DSL, which is less than 1/4 the speed)
There is FiOS in some areas close by, but they appear to have given up expanding.
there are in my area 4 wireless carriers (T-mobile, Verizon, Sprint, AT&T).
4 is not many, but it is something.
A hybrids battery is not of the same tech as a laptop battery.
I could just as easily use the example of a 5 year warranty of a car battery as a starting point.
Additionally, a laptop battery that loses max capacity is a bigger problem than a non plug-in hybrid battery doing the same (assuming charging efficiency is not lost). The hybrid's battery only needs to provide power for a short bit to add significant efficiency to the driving, and only should need to capture the output of one stop.
I would use a corolla to compare it myself.
I bet that would fix my biggest problem with wave too.
The focus on real time made it suck I think.
The threaded discussion under a topic is all I really wanted.
That and searching gmail should have found my waves too.
Is everyone RTFA?