Definitive Technology (Owings Mills, Md.) was chosen for the speakers that would give voice to the organ manuals. Massive subwoofers would be used in tandem with the Definitives -- the signal split by low-pass and high-pass filters-for the deep notes played from the organ pedals. Each speaker would be driven by its own Carver power amplifier -- a total of 15,000 watts.
1,800 watts/74 speakers = 24 watts each. Not realistic. 12,100 watts/10 computers = 1,210 watts each. I don't know of any servers that take this much juice. A 550 watt PS is a large one.
A pipe organ would take a huge amount of power to immitate accuratly, seeing as how it has massive range (from almost ultra-sonic to "was that an earthquake?") and massive power (can be heard about equally everywhere in a large building).
It's a unique experience to hear one played. The lower tones (below hearing, but you can _feel_ them) add a large amount of impact, properly done.
You think that the entire US government would support the coup? At LEAST half of the active duty forces would desert (taking their weapons with them). I'd guess most of the reserves/guard would too. Between that and an armed citizenship (they might not have the best toys, but they outnumber the military forces better than 100 to 1), coups don't have much chance. Europeans have a better chance of a coup occuring. Add in that the moment that occurs that all weapon laws are out the window, and those attempting the coup would be in deep trouble.
Tanks, artillery, air force are all only efficient against massed targets. They'll all eventually run out of ammo/fuel if they can't get resupply.
Who gave the USA absolute power over the rest of the world?
The USA did. We built the largest, most powerful military. But we don't have absolute power. If we ever pissed off enough countries, it'd be WWIII, and we'd go down in flames.
I prefer to do whatever I want, without fear of the USA.
I'd like to think that we're pretty easy to live with. Just don't attack us.
I am not saying that every nation in the world should have nukes, but neither should the USA have such capability.
MADD worked during the cold war. Like it or not, the genie is out of the bottle.
"Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace, prepare for war." -
Vegetius, Flavius Renatus
Osama bin Laden attacked us 9/11 because the previous administrations gave the impression that we'd roll over and capitulate. Bush has done many things to repudiate this.
The tiranny of a dictator is replaced by the tiranny of the president of the USA.
I've noticed a lack of news about Iraqies being fed feet-first through chippers under US administraion
Tyranny: A government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power.
Considering how Bush will be out of office in at most 5 years, he hardly has absolute power. Turning power over to an Iraqi government is ongoing, as well as training of police and military forces. Remember the Marshal plan?
Umm, you call the fastest ground war in history a problem? Or are you refering to the occupation? Ironically enough, we'd almost as good vs. Europe right now. Europe has 1. A disarmed population (Except for switzerland). 2. A climate that our weapon systems were designed for. 2a. We have many cold war scenarios for fighting the USSR in Europe, we have maps and know the area. 3. A bunch of pacifists in government there. 4. We've been proping up Europe's defense for decades. Imagine a plus changing into a minus.
Though I agree, war with Europe would be bad. I don't want WWIII.
Why? I have circuit breakers. If I blow the fuse in the plug, I have to have a replacement. This can be a real annoyance. Though I will admit, as isolated as a plug-fuse would be, it should only trip if something goes wrong with the device.
True, harddrives are better shielded, but if the guy keeps his incriminating stuff on floppies, and has house current running through the wires, it might work. I'd test it first though.
1 hour to get to the airport: Varies. I'm only about 5 minutes to our airport (but not on the approach paths, so I don't hear the planes)
1.5 hour check-in: More easily reduced with smaller planes. If you're only boarding, say, 200 people, it's going to take less time than boarding 600 people.
2 hours flight time: You might only save 1/2 hour here (with the smaller, faster plane). Makes more difference on longer flights, of course. Coast to Coast and international. But I see them being served by the jumbos.
30 minutes baggage: That's all? I waited over an HOUR recently waiting for my bags. It was one of todays super-jumbos, and a heavily loaded international flight. With the 600+ passanger super-duper jumbos, boarding & baggage will take even longer. Yuck.
60 minutes customs&immigration? Never really had more than the 5 minute walk through the area.
Simple, because microwaves operate at this frequency (and other reasons), the FCC declared this an 'unregulated' frequency. As long as you stay within certain rules, you can broadcast however you like in this range. Other frequency ranges sell for (lots of) money. Also, the way bandwidth is regulated, it would have been difficult and expensive to make inter-operable products in a different range. There is another range in the 5GHz area, but I think that's more expensive to produce (why it took longer).
Reality check: The bell is the warning for the degaussing routine. Heard one story where the person in question actually wired a degausser into his doorframe.
roads/freeways are (should) mostly paid through the gas tax. Public education is property taxes, police are a combination of property/local income. 911 is paid for through taxes on phone lines.
(Federal) Income taxes pay for the military, FBI, DEA, and those agencies. But many people object to the overreaching of the federal government, such as welfare, the education programs that amount to states getting back 'federal' money if they follow the federal requirements (like the push for 21 min drinking age by tieing highway funding to it).
RTFT (Read the f**king thread). The parent was talking about how the sahara desert receives more than enough solar energy each year to power the earth. The next post was a comment about the problems transmitting that power.
As far as solar goes, we're very inefficient with it. The pebble bed reactor would be much cheaper to build than the number of motorized mirrors you'd need to produce the heat for the steam cycle. (Direct electricity panels cost more energy to build than they produce in their lifetime).
But how secure are face to face meetings? And it's difficult for a mole to meet with the higher ups, as they might be under surveillance. A secure means of communication would be of great benefit to the terrorists. It'd help with combined seperated actions w/last minute changes. Most militaries already have this, if in a more expensive per unit way(at least for the US military).
Spamcop doesn't block domains. That's the area of the RBL type services. Except for their filtered boxes (subscription), they're an automatecd complaint system.
Now if the administrator has sub-users who are spamming, his box might indead be filling up with complaints...
Both movies had references to how hot it was when the predators came. Remember the woman talking about how the killings would start when it was unusually hot. And right in the start of the second movie you hear the radio DJ talking about record heat levels. They wouldn't necessarily like turning up the heat in their clothing. It'd make them more visible. It's kinda like us wearing 'hunter orange' during hunting season. Even though deer allegedly don't see the orange, people still like to use their own eyesight to judge the cameo.
Correctly processed and stored, they do have quite a shelf life. The US still has stocks of chemical agents from WW2 that are still potent. Biological agents are in the form of spores, which can last for decades. Enough biological agent to wipe out New York can be stored in a small refridgerator. We've found all sorts of evidence of a ongoing weapons program, as well as many efforts to conceal things. But even research into these weapons were banned after the first gulf war.
But a kerosene (or similar) fueled rocket is smaller and cheaper to build for it's power. The DENSITY of hydrogen is poor for it's energy. It requires extra cooling (the boil-off for a shuttle launch is in the double digits for percentage of hydrogen that boils off before launch, wasted), incredably tight storage containters (myler vs. rubber balloons), and production is ineffecient (most is made from breaking down natural gas, electrolysis is only about 40% energy efficient).
and I contend that plutonium is less dangerous than you say. And plutonium isn't a major product of nuclear waste (other than military). Power plants have uranium, which isn't water soluble. This limits it's toxicity, but that's no worse than lead, and we still use that.
A common sense approach (but not politically correct) would be to grind up the material and spread it around thin (maybe in coal ash!). We're naturally exposed to radiation, and if you spread it out enough, it wouldn't be a hazard.
And the fact that you'd need to take it out of service, have a crane (to lift a still large & heavy object 70 meters), and do alot of dissassembly work wouldn't slow you down?
Then it's waste not pollution. It's only pollution if it gets into the enviroment. Like the exhast and ash from coal plants. Though some people say nuclear plants produce pollution. It's heat dumped into the water. In many areas, this heat can be used to increase biomass levels downstream from the plant. Great spots for fishing.
Once more, from the top. The more radioactive something is, the quicker it becomes LESS radioactive. Something with a half-life of 5 minutes would be very dangerous, but if you wait a day, it's going to be orders of magnitude less radioactive. So all you need is some time. Compare that with expensive waste treatment that isn't practical when you're dealing with the amount of waste a coal plant produces. And the orders of magnitude LESS waste nuclear power produces makes it easy to contain, unlike coal waste(pollution).
I assert that your 'efficient' fossil-based powerplant does NOT reduce CO2 emissions by anything near 90%. You're lucky if you get a 1% reduction. Why? Because CO2 is the byproduct of THE most efficient combustion method. The only real way to cut CO2 emissions is to 1) reduce power usage 2) use a non-combustion method of power generation.
Um, most accidents aren't on the freeways, where speed limits are around 70 anyways. Some statistics show that higher speed limits on the highway systems have actually reduced the accident rate. One possibility being that more people get to their destination before becoming exhasted, and others are getting a motel anyways.
Tougher enforcement for bad driving might help.
As for the progressive tax, many of these people will do the same thing they do with their excess gas usage, complain and pay. They do have disposable income, remember.
Slashdot Mirror
1,800 watts/74 speakers = 24 watts each. Not realistic.
12,100 watts/10 computers = 1,210 watts each. I don't know of any servers that take this much juice. A 550 watt PS is a large one.
A pipe organ would take a huge amount of power to immitate accuratly, seeing as how it has massive range (from almost ultra-sonic to "was that an earthquake?") and massive power (can be heard about equally everywhere in a large building).
It's a unique experience to hear one played. The lower tones (below hearing, but you can _feel_ them) add a large amount of impact, properly done.
You think that the entire US government would support the coup? At LEAST half of the active duty forces would desert (taking their weapons with them). I'd guess most of the reserves/guard would too. Between that and an armed citizenship (they might not have the best toys, but they outnumber the military forces better than 100 to 1), coups don't have much chance. Europeans have a better chance of a coup occuring. Add in that the moment that occurs that all weapon laws are out the window, and those attempting the coup would be in deep trouble.
Tanks, artillery, air force are all only efficient against massed targets. They'll all eventually run out of ammo/fuel if they can't get resupply.
The USA did. We built the largest, most powerful military. But we don't have absolute power. If we ever pissed off enough countries, it'd be WWIII, and we'd go down in flames.
I'd like to think that we're pretty easy to live with. Just don't attack us.
MADD worked during the cold war. Like it or not, the genie is out of the bottle.
Osama bin Laden attacked us 9/11 because the previous administrations gave the impression that we'd roll over and capitulate. Bush has done many things to repudiate this.
I've noticed a lack of news about Iraqies being fed feet-first through chippers under US administraion
Considering how Bush will be out of office in at most 5 years, he hardly has absolute power. Turning power over to an Iraqi government is ongoing, as well as training of police and military forces. Remember the Marshal plan?
Umm, you call the fastest ground war in history a problem? Or are you refering to the occupation? Ironically enough, we'd almost as good vs. Europe right now.
Europe has
1. A disarmed population (Except for switzerland).
2. A climate that our weapon systems were designed for.
2a. We have many cold war scenarios for fighting the USSR in Europe, we have maps and know the area.
3. A bunch of pacifists in government there.
4. We've been proping up Europe's defense for decades. Imagine a plus changing into a minus.
Though I agree, war with Europe would be bad. I don't want WWIII.
Why? I have circuit breakers. If I blow the fuse in the plug, I have to have a replacement. This can be a real annoyance. Though I will admit, as isolated as a plug-fuse would be, it should only trip if something goes wrong with the device.
True, harddrives are better shielded, but if the guy keeps his incriminating stuff on floppies, and has house current running through the wires, it might work. I'd test it first though.
1 hour to get to the airport: Varies. I'm only about 5 minutes to our airport (but not on the approach paths, so I don't hear the planes)
1.5 hour check-in: More easily reduced with smaller planes. If you're only boarding, say, 200 people, it's going to take less time than boarding 600 people.
2 hours flight time: You might only save 1/2 hour here (with the smaller, faster plane). Makes more difference on longer flights, of course. Coast to Coast and international. But I see them being served by the jumbos.
30 minutes baggage: That's all? I waited over an HOUR recently waiting for my bags. It was one of todays super-jumbos, and a heavily loaded international flight. With the 600+ passanger super-duper jumbos, boarding & baggage will take even longer. Yuck.
60 minutes customs&immigration? Never really had more than the 5 minute walk through the area.
Simple enough:
Microwave:400+ watts (700-1000 is average)
Cordless phone: 1 watt emitted
Simple, because microwaves operate at this frequency (and other reasons), the FCC declared this an 'unregulated' frequency. As long as you stay within certain rules, you can broadcast however you like in this range. Other frequency ranges sell for (lots of) money. Also, the way bandwidth is regulated, it would have been difficult and expensive to make inter-operable products in a different range. There is another range in the 5GHz area, but I think that's more expensive to produce (why it took longer).
Reality check: The bell is the warning for the degaussing routine. Heard one story where the person in question actually wired a degausser into his doorframe.
roads/freeways are (should) mostly paid through the gas tax. Public education is property taxes, police are a combination of property/local income. 911 is paid for through taxes on phone lines.
(Federal) Income taxes pay for the military, FBI, DEA, and those agencies. But many people object to the overreaching of the federal government, such as welfare, the education programs that amount to states getting back 'federal' money if they follow the federal requirements (like the push for 21 min drinking age by tieing highway funding to it).
Of course, this is what all the pork amounts too.
RTFT (Read the f**king thread). The parent was talking about how the sahara desert receives more than enough solar energy each year to power the earth. The next post was a comment about the problems transmitting that power.
As far as solar goes, we're very inefficient with it. The pebble bed reactor would be much cheaper to build than the number of motorized mirrors you'd need to produce the heat for the steam cycle. (Direct electricity panels cost more energy to build than they produce in their lifetime).
But how secure are face to face meetings? And it's difficult for a mole to meet with the higher ups, as they might be under surveillance. A secure means of communication would be of great benefit to the terrorists. It'd help with combined seperated actions w/last minute changes. Most militaries already have this, if in a more expensive per unit way(at least for the US military).
Spamcop doesn't block domains. That's the area of the RBL type services. Except for their filtered boxes (subscription), they're an automatecd complaint system.
Now if the administrator has sub-users who are spamming, his box might indead be filling up with complaints...
Emergency Pants!
Both movies had references to how hot it was when the predators came. Remember the woman talking about how the killings would start when it was unusually hot. And right in the start of the second movie you hear the radio DJ talking about record heat levels.
They wouldn't necessarily like turning up the heat in their clothing. It'd make them more visible. It's kinda like us wearing 'hunter orange' during hunting season. Even though deer allegedly don't see the orange, people still like to use their own eyesight to judge the cameo.
Correctly processed and stored, they do have quite a shelf life. The US still has stocks of chemical agents from WW2 that are still potent. Biological agents are in the form of spores, which can last for decades. Enough biological agent to wipe out New York can be stored in a small refridgerator. We've found all sorts of evidence of a ongoing weapons program, as well as many efforts to conceal things. But even research into these weapons were banned after the first gulf war.
But a kerosene (or similar) fueled rocket is smaller and cheaper to build for it's power. The DENSITY of hydrogen is poor for it's energy. It requires extra cooling (the boil-off for a shuttle launch is in the double digits for percentage of hydrogen that boils off before launch, wasted), incredably tight storage containters (myler vs. rubber balloons), and production is ineffecient (most is made from breaking down natural gas, electrolysis is only about 40% energy efficient).
and I contend that plutonium is less dangerous than you say. And plutonium isn't a major product of nuclear waste (other than military). Power plants have uranium, which isn't water soluble. This limits it's toxicity, but that's no worse than lead, and we still use that.
A common sense approach (but not politically correct) would be to grind up the material and spread it around thin (maybe in coal ash!). We're naturally exposed to radiation, and if you spread it out enough, it wouldn't be a hazard.
And the fact that you'd need to take it out of service, have a crane (to lift a still large & heavy object 70 meters), and do alot of dissassembly work wouldn't slow you down?
So you need 3-4 meters of concrete to stop neutron radiation? So what? Concrete's cheap.
Then it's waste not pollution. It's only pollution if it gets into the enviroment. Like the exhast and ash from coal plants. Though some people say nuclear plants produce pollution. It's heat dumped into the water. In many areas, this heat can be used to increase biomass levels downstream from the plant. Great spots for fishing.
Once more, from the top.
The more radioactive something is, the quicker it becomes LESS radioactive. Something with a half-life of 5 minutes would be very dangerous, but if you wait a day, it's going to be orders of magnitude less radioactive. So all you need is some time. Compare that with expensive waste treatment that isn't practical when you're dealing with the amount of waste a coal plant produces. And the orders of magnitude LESS waste nuclear power produces makes it easy to contain, unlike coal waste(pollution).
I assert that your 'efficient' fossil-based powerplant does NOT reduce CO2 emissions by anything near 90%. You're lucky if you get a 1% reduction. Why? Because CO2 is the byproduct of THE most efficient combustion method. The only real way to cut CO2 emissions is to 1) reduce power usage 2) use a non-combustion method of power generation.
Um, most accidents aren't on the freeways, where speed limits are around 70 anyways. Some statistics show that higher speed limits on the highway systems have actually reduced the accident rate. One possibility being that more people get to their destination before becoming exhasted, and others are getting a motel anyways.
Tougher enforcement for bad driving might help.
As for the progressive tax, many of these people will do the same thing they do with their excess gas usage, complain and pay. They do have disposable income, remember.