I guess we should just write off places where the standard of living sucks then, because it's an insult to call them developing when they start to crawl out of it.... That or we can just lie about the past to make everybody feel better; after all, the knowledge of poor conditions in the past isn't helpful in any way in the present. There's probably a few other options, but for everbodys sake, we should avoid the truth at all costs!
Rockstar has lots of recognition. With the exception of Vice City (Which they bought mostly complete), everybody I know agrees that all their games suck.
Again, excluding Vice City, name a single game they've published that wasn't either buggy crap, or a sequel (read: patch) to buggy crap?
It's got to be the manufacturing costs. Nintendo like to make a profit on their hardware, and I'd bet that the LCD display on the GBA-SP is far more expensive a part than the optical drive... LiIon Batteries aren't cheap either.
It's nice to think of this as practical from the perspective of cleaning up space debris, but the real point of this is almost certainly for India to show that they have the ability to take out sattelites they don't like, much like the early Soviet and American sub-orbital flights and sattelite launches were demonstrations that we could drop explosive devices on each other from halfway around the world. Don't assume that something this complex and costly is being done out of the kindness of the Indian government's heard, or for the good of humanity when there's an obvious military benefit; especially considering their current cold war with Pakistan, and the technological escilation in China.
You only have to worry about condensation if you manage to get your hardware cooler than the ambiant outdoor temperature. Clearly, your board and chips will be warmer than the air for outside that you are using to cool, so if any water was going to condence out of said air, it would have done so already, outside.
For the same reason, you can still operate your system on a hot humid summer day indoors.
The only way the security-paranoid TSA will let this slide would be if it was non-flamable, or in such small quantities it would be harmless. Unfortunately, that would also make the technology useless.
GAH!
1. Read 2. Think 3. Post
It's very simple.
It's right in the story. 20% solution. Non-flamable. In fact the device *can't work* with pure methanol. It needs a 3-6% solution. I'd hardly call making it non-flamable the same as making it useless. Making it non-flamable is the *only way* to make it useful.
Last I checked, they served 80 proof alcoholic beverages on airplanes. These things use a 20% methanol solution. They're way safer than a nip from the bar cart.
There is zero chance of one catching fire in your pocket too. You can't say that about the LiIon cell in your Tungsten T3.
These things are going to explode way less often than current battery packs. You'll have a hard time igniting a 20% methanol solution.... and that's only when it's fully charged.. It get's diluted down to as low as 3% by the time the cell is fully discharged. It's practically water.
The fuel cell industry needs to work on it's terminology to stop the misguided myth generation.
sufficient fuel to power a handheld device for six to eight hours.
That's meaningless! Give me some hard data! What's the voltage, the peak and average current ratings, the amp-hours? Can it blink a handheld LED for 6 hours, or run a 400Mhz ARM core with a backlit color display for 6 hours? Is the power density higher than an LiIon battery of the same size? How much does it cost? Can it be refilled in place without turning off the device?
Seems to me that if this was actually signifigant progress, they'd be telling us all this.
Although maybe it's possible that he just really, *really* hates Mustangs.
On the contrary, I would take that to mean that he really likes his mustang, and he would resent anybody else who managed to get one because it would reduce the amount of attention he recived from his own conspicuous consumption. Clearly he has a low self opinion, and a dispicably hateful and selfish attitude.
Typically offsite backup solutions only transmit changes to the data. The important number is how much data is created/changed per unit time, not the total you store.
The DirecTiVo records at highest quality only and gets just over an hour to the gigabyte. An 80 hour standard TiVo has capacity listed at the lowest (intolerable) quality setting.
DirecTV is cheaper than cable almost everywhere unless you have more than 3 TVs, and you can get the equipment for free. If you don't have cable or satelite, you're not going to be filling 80 hours with stuff you want to watch anytime soon.
It's simple in it's complexity. Few terminal packages these days will get out of your way and let you have control over the connection. Kermit can assist you as much or as little as you'd like, which is great when you have an odd physical connection to deal with for some reason, or (horrors) don't have a modem attached to your serial port, or the other end can't tolerate a BREAK, etc...
It's the only program out there where you can tell it what you want to do, and will know for a fact that it will do no more, and no less.
Hmm.. I skip commercials on my DirecTiVo. I've never gotten a legal threat for hacking and extending my unit (yes, I've modified it, which I consider control), I don't have any desire to burn throwaway shows to DVD-R, and if I did I'd get a DVD recorder and hook it up to my TiVo, and there's no way you're getting a digital stream to a hard drive in a viewable manner without DRM right now, with software that is free or commercially available. You aren't going to get anywhere close to the picture quality on a home built unit compared to a DirecTiVo, because you have to decode and reencode the signal; Plus, you still have the DRM in your reciever anyway.
Most of all, none of this addresses the fact that the only reason this guy said he wanted to build his own was price.... And that's what I was talking about. You're not going to get a cable or sattelite company to subsidise your hardware if you build it yourself. He's probably paying for cable anyway, so why turn down free money?
Though I don't know why you would buy lifetime service instead of paying the $4/month for service through DirecTV. You're probably going to upgrade in less than 6 years.
$1299 is cheap? Since when? Is it 1998 again? This thing is practically bare-bones! Call me when they're $699. Until then I'll keep drooling over a G5 (which is only a few hundred dollars more, with TONS more stuff).
"They" happen to be the people that create the environment in which you get to enjoy the ability to live to the age of 75 or 80. Oh, and this getting poorer of which you speak.... It's only relative to the wealth of those above you. If you speak in those terms, any linear gains in creation of wealth will cause this discrepancy. The only way around it would be to have a progressive tax with 100% taxation of income over a certain level. If you think that's a good ideay, you must like bullets... in an intimate sense I mean. Wars have been faught over less.
Lets say we could brush aside all the problems and solve this "rich get richer, poor get poorer" "problem". Would you actually be any happier. You would have a virtual guarantee that you really couldn't improve your position in life signifigantly in exchange for the knowledge that everybody else was in the same boat. If you ask me, it's better to let a portion of society be obscenely wealthy and have the potential to become so yourself than to be guaranteed mediocrity. It's the potential to better your situation that motivates most of us, and drives improvements in quality of life. Even if you have no vision, and can't convince yourself to hope for self betterment, you benefit from the current system in countless ways that can't be expressed by the number at the bottom of you bank statement.
The vast majority of poeple in the market are hoping that their investments will accrue enough so that they can retire at 75 or 80 now that Congress has given the money they paid into Social Security to the people in Mr Farrell's circle of friends in the form of tax cuts.
People pay into Social Security through taxes. This money goes to "fund" the retirements of people who are retired *now*. At the same time, people lives are getting longer and more people are entering the system. More people for more years is an exponential drain on the system that has a linear increase of invested funds (in an ideal situation). At some point those lines must cross. There is no way Social Security can continue without either increasing the age at which you are eligable to collect, or reducing the number of people who are elegible to collect. The former is the only of those options that is remotely fair. What the hell did you do to deserve to be retired for twice as long as your parents anyway? Get off your lazy ass and do some work. You're physically capable, so you should be a productive member of society.
My guess would be that there were four moderations, two up and two down, and that the math in slashcode is broken (obviously). There is no way to tell for sure how many moderations there were...
People mod things as overrated because they want to reduce the score of things that go against their opinions. The overrated moderation choice is not subject to meta-moderation, so they use that one because they know they are unfairly down-modding a comment that is truly insightful and don't want to loose moderation privlidges through unfair meta-mods. It happens in political threads, discussions about game systems, threads that defend microsoft... It's just broken.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess we should just write off places where the standard of living sucks then, because it's an insult to call them developing when they start to crawl out of it.... That or we can just lie about the past to make everybody feel better; after all, the knowledge of poor conditions in the past isn't helpful in any way in the present. There's probably a few other options, but for everbodys sake, we should avoid the truth at all costs!
Last I checked, India's population was roughly eight times that of Russia... Makes that 2x GDP figure a little less impressive, huh?
From the pages you linked, per-capita GDP:
India: $2,540
Russia: $9,300
Sorry to rain on your parade.
There's no shame in being called "developing". It means that progress is being made.
Rockstar has lots of recognition. With the exception of Vice City (Which they bought mostly complete), everybody I know agrees that all their games suck.
Again, excluding Vice City, name a single game they've published that wasn't either buggy crap, or a sequel (read: patch) to buggy crap?
It's got to be the manufacturing costs. Nintendo like to make a profit on their hardware, and I'd bet that the LCD display on the GBA-SP is far more expensive a part than the optical drive... LiIon Batteries aren't cheap either.
It's nice to think of this as practical from the perspective of cleaning up space debris, but the real point of this is almost certainly for India to show that they have the ability to take out sattelites they don't like, much like the early Soviet and American sub-orbital flights and sattelite launches were demonstrations that we could drop explosive devices on each other from halfway around the world. Don't assume that something this complex and costly is being done out of the kindness of the Indian government's heard, or for the good of humanity when there's an obvious military benefit; especially considering their current cold war with Pakistan, and the technological escilation in China.
You only have to worry about condensation if you manage to get your hardware cooler than the ambiant outdoor temperature. Clearly, your board and chips will be warmer than the air for outside that you are using to cool, so if any water was going to condence out of said air, it would have done so already, outside.
For the same reason, you can still operate your system on a hot humid summer day indoors.
You cloak you commenr with sarcasm and exageration, but it's true. What good is an advancement in knowledge if it dies with you?
Think these devices will be allowed on Airplanes?
Yes.
The fuel is non-flamable. It's 80% water.
it doesn't change the fact that conventional batteries will probably still be safer.
You are wrong. These are safer in every way. The real question is wether they hold enough power to be better than what we already use.
The only way the security-paranoid TSA will let this slide would be if it was non-flamable, or in such small quantities it would be harmless. Unfortunately, that would also make the technology useless.
GAH!
1. Read
2. Think
3. Post
It's very simple.
It's right in the story. 20% solution. Non-flamable. In fact the device *can't work* with pure methanol. It needs a 3-6% solution. I'd hardly call making it non-flamable the same as making it useless. Making it non-flamable is the *only way* to make it useful.
It's clear from all the mindless paranoia that we should just ban airlines.
Or we could all start thinking rationally.... Which one of those is more likely?
Last I checked, they served 80 proof alcoholic beverages on airplanes. These things use a 20% methanol solution. They're way safer than a nip from the bar cart.
There is zero chance of one catching fire in your pocket too. You can't say that about the LiIon cell in your Tungsten T3.
These things are going to explode way less often than current battery packs. You'll have a hard time igniting a 20% methanol solution.... and that's only when it's fully charged.. It get's diluted down to as low as 3% by the time the cell is fully discharged. It's practically water.
The fuel cell industry needs to work on it's terminology to stop the misguided myth generation.
sufficient fuel to power a handheld device for six to eight hours.
That's meaningless! Give me some hard data! What's the voltage, the peak and average current ratings, the amp-hours? Can it blink a handheld LED for 6 hours, or run a 400Mhz ARM core with a backlit color display for 6 hours? Is the power density higher than an LiIon battery of the same size? How much does it cost? Can it be refilled in place without turning off the device?
Seems to me that if this was actually signifigant progress, they'd be telling us all this.
Although maybe it's possible that he just really, *really* hates Mustangs.
On the contrary, I would take that to mean that he really likes his mustang, and he would resent anybody else who managed to get one because it would reduce the amount of attention he recived from his own conspicuous consumption. Clearly he has a low self opinion, and a dispicably hateful and selfish attitude.
He's probably not a very happy person.
Typically offsite backup solutions only transmit changes to the data. The important number is how much data is created/changed per unit time, not the total you store.
Nope. You don't have to be a new subscriber. Just bought one two weeks ago. It extends your contract by a year, but you can be an existing customer.
The DirecTiVo records at highest quality only and gets just over an hour to the gigabyte. An 80 hour standard TiVo has capacity listed at the lowest (intolerable) quality setting.
DirecTV is cheaper than cable almost everywhere unless you have more than 3 TVs, and you can get the equipment for free. If you don't have cable or satelite, you're not going to be filling 80 hours with stuff you want to watch anytime soon.
It's simple in it's complexity. Few terminal packages these days will get out of your way and let you have control over the connection. Kermit can assist you as much or as little as you'd like, which is great when you have an odd physical connection to deal with for some reason, or (horrors) don't have a modem attached to your serial port, or the other end can't tolerate a BREAK, etc...
It's the only program out there where you can tell it what you want to do, and will know for a fact that it will do no more, and no less.
Hmm.. I skip commercials on my DirecTiVo. I've never gotten a legal threat for hacking and extending my unit (yes, I've modified it, which I consider control), I don't have any desire to burn throwaway shows to DVD-R, and if I did I'd get a DVD recorder and hook it up to my TiVo, and there's no way you're getting a digital stream to a hard drive in a viewable manner without DRM right now, with software that is free or commercially available. You aren't going to get anywhere close to the picture quality on a home built unit compared to a DirecTiVo, because you have to decode and reencode the signal; Plus, you still have the DRM in your reciever anyway.
Most of all, none of this addresses the fact that the only reason this guy said he wanted to build his own was price.... And that's what I was talking about. You're not going to get a cable or sattelite company to subsidise your hardware if you build it yourself. He's probably paying for cable anyway, so why turn down free money?
TiVo software upgrades are free. Hardware upgrades are what you pay for.
Also, don't expect a hard drive that's constantly writing to last forever.
40 Hour TiVo w/DirecTV reciever. Brand new $99
Lifetime TiVo service $299
Total $398... And you don't have to do any work.
Though I don't know why you would buy lifetime service instead of paying the $4/month for service through DirecTV. You're probably going to upgrade in less than 6 years.
$1299 is cheap? Since when? Is it 1998 again? This thing is practically bare-bones! Call me when they're $699. Until then I'll keep drooling over a G5 (which is only a few hundred dollars more, with TONS more stuff).
"They" happen to be the people that create the environment in which you get to enjoy the ability to live to the age of 75 or 80. Oh, and this getting poorer of which you speak.... It's only relative to the wealth of those above you. If you speak in those terms, any linear gains in creation of wealth will cause this discrepancy. The only way around it would be to have a progressive tax with 100% taxation of income over a certain level. If you think that's a good ideay, you must like bullets... in an intimate sense I mean. Wars have been faught over less.
Lets say we could brush aside all the problems and solve this "rich get richer, poor get poorer" "problem". Would you actually be any happier. You would have a virtual guarantee that you really couldn't improve your position in life signifigantly in exchange for the knowledge that everybody else was in the same boat. If you ask me, it's better to let a portion of society be obscenely wealthy and have the potential to become so yourself than to be guaranteed mediocrity. It's the potential to better your situation that motivates most of us, and drives improvements in quality of life. Even if you have no vision, and can't convince yourself to hope for self betterment, you benefit from the current system in countless ways that can't be expressed by the number at the bottom of you bank statement.
The vast majority of poeple in the market are hoping that their investments will accrue enough so that they can retire at 75 or 80 now that Congress has given the money they paid into Social Security to the people in Mr Farrell's circle of friends in the form of tax cuts.
People pay into Social Security through taxes. This money goes to "fund" the retirements of people who are retired *now*. At the same time, people lives are getting longer and more people are entering the system. More people for more years is an exponential drain on the system that has a linear increase of invested funds (in an ideal situation). At some point those lines must cross. There is no way Social Security can continue without either increasing the age at which you are eligable to collect, or reducing the number of people who are elegible to collect. The former is the only of those options that is remotely fair. What the hell did you do to deserve to be retired for twice as long as your parents anyway? Get off your lazy ass and do some work. You're physically capable, so you should be a productive member of society.
My guess would be that there were four moderations, two up and two down, and that the math in slashcode is broken (obviously). There is no way to tell for sure how many moderations there were...
People mod things as overrated because they want to reduce the score of things that go against their opinions. The overrated moderation choice is not subject to meta-moderation, so they use that one because they know they are unfairly down-modding a comment that is truly insightful and don't want to loose moderation privlidges through unfair meta-mods. It happens in political threads, discussions about game systems, threads that defend microsoft... It's just broken.
It's amusing that engaged blather gets modded up, and comments that contain actual, well referenced, substance get modded down as overrated.
I think it's time that the "Overrated" option become subject to meta-moderation like the rest of them.