I'm thinking more about the cacophony. Can you imagine a cubicle farm of white-collar workers speaking in clear, distinct voices to their respective computers?
According to my wife, Avery Brooks played two characters on DS9. The first few seasons it was "Commander Cisco". Then Brooks shaved his head, grew a goatee, and played "Captain Hawk".
First, I spend a couple hours writing and testing a script, then I deploy that script out to our 300 or so computers in about 10 minutes. Then, the next time something comes up, they think it should only take me 20 minutes, soup to nuts, and by the way, it has to be done in half an hour. They forget the lead time it took me to come up with that 10 minute fix.
I do have to agree somewhat with management wanting vendor solutions. If an admin develops involved scripts to do everything and then changes jobs or gets hit by a bus there may be no one to support those scripts. It's even worse if an Admin uses some off the wall language.
"There is no reason to suggest that the sequence of low-magnitude tremors are a precursor to a major event," said the committee's deputy chair Franco Barberi, according to minutes of the meeting published by prosecutors. INGV President Enzo Boschi said "just because a small series of quakes has been observed" does not point to a large quake, which he described as "improbable, although not impossible".
It was a politician who proclaimed that there was no danger.
In a post-meeting press conference, however, Department of Civil Protection official Bernardo De Bernardinis, also a defendant, told citizens there was "no danger."
The failure here was one of communication and conclusions. Politicians want answers and will not tolerate "we don't know". The problem is, science is really short on answers and long on probability. That is doubly so with a science like seismology. Scientists like to be precise about all of the shades of nuance. So when the politicians ask, "will there be an earthquake" and the seismologists say "probably no", all the politicians hear is "no".
It may come as a surprise to you to hear this, but: Not everyone uses WiFi only for Internet access. The Internet is a network of networks, and my own network sees quite a lot of local traffic from time to time.
That's a fair point. But for the vast majority of people's home network activity wireless is not the bottleneck.
My contention is that channel bonding should have never been allowed on 802.11g. The 2.4GHz band is too congested and has too little bandwidth to go around. If you and your neighbors all enable channel bonding the interference between overlapping networks will mean that everyone's wireless networks will be crap. At work I only allow channel bonding on the 5GHz band because I need more democratic sharing an the 2.4GHz spectrum.
For anyone that needs higher bandwidth at home, some good 802.11a/g/n gear is ideal. The 5GHz band has something like 23 available, non-overlapping channels in the US. It also has the benefit of not operating in the same range as microwave ovens. And, because the 802.11a/g/n routers and access points have multiple radios, you can simultaneously run on both bands, increasing aggregate bandwidth and reducing. Besides that, all wireless sucks compared to gigabit Ethernet. If someone needs that kind of bandwidth at home, they should just plug in. They will drive themselves nuts trying to make the wireless perform like a wired network.
Channel bonding has a lot more to do with raw throughput than interference. It is required to reach past 150 Mb.
However, If you are in a crowded 2.4GHz neighborhood, be kind to your neighbors and do not enable channel bonding. Since the 2.4GHz band has only 3 non-overlapping channels, if you enable channel bonding your wireless will operate on 2 or 3 of these channels, causing more interference for your neighbors. Let's face it, unless you have better than a 150 Mb Internet connection, channel bonding will not make a lot of difference.
There are known chemical processes for converting coal to gasoline and diesel. If your aim is to convert coal the more direct chemical process is probably more efficient. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_fuel
Looking at the Wikipedia article, I'm guessing that they are using a similar process, except that they use electricity to make Syngas, and then the established processes to produce fuel. Sysgas is just Hydrogen and Corbon Monoxide. You can use water electrolysis to get the Hydrogen. There are catalysts that can break down Carbon Dioxide when heated, so you can generate Carbon Monoxide that way. (I'm having a hard time finding a reference, but I remember reading about it a few years ago).
This is a significant factor in keeping good people out of medicine. I fail to understand how the physical endurance to stay awake for 36 hours makes one a better doctor.
I seriously considered a medical career at one time, but I knew from experience that I physically can not stay awake that long. Once I hit around 22 to 26 hours of being awake I will simply pass out, but not before the hallucinations start.
The best I ever saw was a hard drive that caught fire spontaneously. I had a user complain about a burning smell in his room and he said that his video editing station would not start up. It was a home-built monstrosity that a predecessor had put together, and for some reason he had installed the hard drives upside-down. In retrospect, "installed" is too strong a word. They were just sitting loose in the drive bays. I took the side off the full tower case and reseated all the cables, and since I could not see anything wrong, I powered it up. Moments later, I saw a 1 inch flame spring up from one of the drives. As I recall it was a diode, judging from the symbol on the logic board where it left a scorch mark.
There is a known issue with the 320 series where if the drive looses power suddenly it may corrupt itself, loose all data, and report that it has only 8MB capacity. According to Intel, the only way to fix the drive is to do a secure erase, wiping all data. It happened to me once last spring when windows locked up and I had to force a reboot by holding down the power button. Incidentally, Intel's 4PC10362 that was supposed to fix the problem did not. My drive was running the updated firmware version when it corrupted. This is not considered a manufacturing defect either, so the drive is not replaceable under warranty.
My advice for everyone who asks is to avoid SSDs. If Intel's SSDs, which are widely regarded as the most reliable in the field, can't be relied on in the real world, then the technology is not ready.
I use FF 10 ESR personally and I install it on the work computers. In general I'm happy with it and my users are happy with the web browser interface not changing every month and a half, but I have run across one annoying issue. Many web developers have a policy of only supporting browsers 2 or 3 versions older than what is current. Developers in the know should certainly make an exception for Firefox ESR, but I have had a few web sites admonish me for running an outdated browser.
For what it's worth, according to Netmarketshare, http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=0, Chrome on the desktop has not been gaining ground since early 2012. It's hovering at around 19%. IE is holding steady as well at around 53-54%, with Firefox staying at about 20%. Judging by the trend lines, I'd say that for the desktop markets these shares are entrenched. I don't expect to see much change unless FF, IE, or Chrome does a major screw up to drive people off their platforms.
Netmarketshare's report on mobile devices is very different. http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=1 Opera mini, Blackberry, and Symbian have been falling with Safari Mobile and Android browsers picking up the slack. Interestingly enough, it doesn't look like the iPad2 back in April really affected the mobile browser shares at all.
It depends on the transmission's programming. I have driven some automatics where I really had to stomp on the accelerator before the computer figured out that I wanted to accelerate. This seems more and more common as cars are programmed for fuel efficiency over performance. The last few automatics I've driven have had an O/D off button, as in "overdrive" off, to be used when the driver wants better accelleration, but it's hard to explain the concept of overdrive to a person who doesn't know how how to drive a manual transmission.
I've been driving manuals since I was 16 and I just don't feel in control in an automatic. With my last car purchase, about 4 years ago, I was looking at a CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission) which should have real power and efficiency advantages, but for the model I was looking at the manufacturer had not worked out all of the bugs yet. The CVT version had less power and lower estimated MPG and cost about a grand more.
French people have about 2.5 less guns per capita compared with the US, they have comparable suicide rates (sometimes red wine is not enough), but only 10% ot the murder rate.
Nice stat, but it is not accurate. The index you sited only includes gun related homicides, not overall homicides. The overall US homicide rate is about 3.8 times what it is in France, according to Wikipedia. It's still an outrageous figure, but not nearly 10 times. Americans commit almost 99% of our murders with guns, while the French choose guns for only 40% of their murders.
Overall homicide rates:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homicide_rate
If you can't get into the meetings, you must get a data plan into the architectural drawings.
I've done this 3 times at work with new buildings or renovations and additions to new buildings. Each time I was only asked as an afterthought, and things got screwed up or left out without my knowledge. In no case did our architects give a moment's thought to data drop locations or cable paths, and if it's not printed on some layer of the drawings, it is not in the plans. It sucks to have to do 3x walk-throughs with the cable installers, scribbling on a copy of the plans, only to have to redo it every time the plans are revised. In the end the electricians will just put the wall boxes wherever they please because your scribbles never make it back to the printed plans, so your network installers will have to cut in their own boxes, raising your installation costs.
In one building that was constructed about 10 years ago, the server room was moved and the dedicated air conditioning disappeared in the process. That caused the email server crash and corrupted its storage one June weekend when the Buildings and Grounds Manager decided to turn off the AC to save power. Also in the change, the width of the server room shrank by 18 inches, making it impossible to fit a standard server cabinet. The first floor in this building is pretty easy to network, except for the fact that the in-floor conduit grid for the library was hacked out of the plans without my knowledge, but the second floor is a real trial. Wiring passing down the corridor has to pass through about 20' of an indoor soffit with no conduit and no access except from small hatches at each end. It just has J-hooks and a pull-string, and the pull-string broke.
In one building added onto about 10 years ago there is no network closet. The IDF is a cabinet perched above a slop sink. No disaster's yet, but I'm waiting for the day when someone splashes water into the power outlet.
In another building offices on sides are separated by masonry walls floor to cieling (no drop ceiling) and a gymnasium and workout room. The only conduits connecting the 2 sides are 3, 1" underground runs from the data/sports equipment closet to a locker room in the far corner of the building, or a long, serpentine nest of conduits around the gym ceiling. The building was renovated about 4 years ago when the workout room and additional office was added. They could have added a simple 4" or so conduit through the workout room. Instead, I'm using the underground conduits, making the data runs about 100 feet longer than they need to be and a lot more trouble than they need to be. The underground cat 5e cables have not shorted out yet, but it's just
There is a difference. Zediva was acquiring all sorts of content at retail prices and rebroadcasting it without any kind of licensing agreements. Aereo is recording and streaming content broadcast on public airwaves and they are acting as an agent for their customers to maintain an antenna and a DVR. It that regard, they claim they are protected by the broadcasters' public performance licensing. They even require customers to be in New York City, so they aren't placeshifting. Aero is like an outsourced VCR service. The legality of VCRs was established in 1984 with Universal City Studios v. Sony Corp provided that it is not used to deprive the content owners of revenue. In this case, the service is making broadcast TV easier for New Yorkers to watch, and probably increasing viewership and revenues for the broadcasters. Because they maintain a separate antenna for each customer, Aereo is even less shady than the cable companies that record everything and let customers watch programming on demand.
Assassination is a killing of a prominent person for political or ideological reasons. Assassination dates back to the earliest forms of government, with the killing of Philip II of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great. Some of the more recent well-known assassinations include those of Abraham Lincoln, President John F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King.
There are various motivations for assassinations, including money, moral issues, political power, military purposes, and others. In the 20th century, the prevalence of assassins and their capabilities skyrocketed, and security measures such as armored cars or armored limousines and bulletproof vests came into popular use.
It is time to call a spade a spade. A terrorist organization, like al-Qa'ida, is a political military organization that acts to promote political and religious ideals. Yeah, their methods are totally fuckin' indefensible, but killing bin Laden in a midnight raid was an assassination, because you had better believe that Obama reaped political rewards for taking out that murderer. Obama went from arguing that terrorism is a law enforcement issue to dropping a bombs on buildings and crowds of civilians as a messy way to execute terrorist leaders. Attacks like these are defensible in a theater of war where we are engaged, like in Afghanistan and the tribal regions of Pakistan. But Obama's kill list has reached into Yemen, where we are not at war, and have assassinated terrorists, including two US citizens who were executed without trial, Anwar al-Awlaki and his son. (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/05/the-presidents-kill-list.html)
What's even more frightening is the memo that came out of Obama's justice department. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=7)
“The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel prepared a lengthy memo justifying that extraordinary step, asserting that while the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process applied, it could be satisfied by internal deliberations in the executive branch.”
By this doctrine, there is nowhere we could not strike to assassinate a terrorist leader if a local government was not willing to help us bring them to justice. Of course we would not strike inside countries with nukes, or in places like Saudi Arabia and China where we have vested economic interests. I doubt we would strike targets inside any Eastern European countries because they are too white and, as Carlin said, "we only bomb brown people". But Africa, most of the Middle East, South America, South-East Asia? All are fair game.
Of FFS, you really think if I copy a non-DRM.mp4 out of iTunes and give it to my kids Apple Ninjas are going to appear with Cease and Desist orders?
This isn't something anyone is going to get in any kind of legal trouble over, and Apple knew that when they decided to go DRM free. If you take your iTunes music collection and throw it up on PirateBay that might be different, but in a case like this no one is going to care.
What happens if you piss off the wrong cop and they just need an excuse for a warrant to search your computer or to simply get into your house? What if you have the wrong color skin for the neighbor hood you live in? What if your cousin is a real dipshit and gets involved with a terrorist organization? Criminalization of trivial actions is one step towards an effective police state.
Are we talking about the same Steve Jobs? The most famous ass in the entire world of tech and all-time champion of locked and proprietary software?
If anyone in the entire world would willingly lock down user's rights it would be Apple and Steve Jobs.
And you have any evidence for that? By evidence I mean things that don't get torn apart in a millisecond by anyone with a brain? MacOS X _still_ doesn't have any protection that prevents you from running copies on any number of Macs you want.
So, if I want to run OSX on a million Macs it's easy to copy, but I have to buy a millions Macs.... from Apple.
Unfortunately, that is not how it works. You don't own the copies of the music on your iPod. You own a personal use license that lets you download copies of purchased music to your iPod. You can have up to 10 devices concurrently associated with your iTunes account and download copies of your purchased content to those devices. That's why if your iPod gets smashed you can download your music again. http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/terms.html#SALE
That is not at all like owning a copy, like a CD. When you own a CD you do not have the explicit right to copy the music to your computer or iPod, but the right to make copies for personal use is implied under fair use. If your CD gets destroyed and you loose your backup copies, you do not have the right to call up the music label and get a replacement. On the other hand, because owning a CD is OWNING a CD, you have the right to transfer ownership to anyone at any time, provided that you do not retain any copies. This is the right that Bruce Willis and others are fighting for.
I remember when the mice study came out. "Mice live 50% longer! You might live to 150!" and the guy, bald IIRC, started himself on a lo-cal diet.
Mice lived 3 years instead of 2. Did it greatly extend their lives, or did it just add a year?
This is my hypothesis on the findings: Short-lived animals, like nematodes and lab mice, tend to produce lots of free radicals as they metabolize calories. Long-lived animals tend to have metabolisms that release far fewer free radicals. Free radicals damage DNA and promote cancer. Most lab mice are bred for a high propensity towards developing cancer because that makes them better test subjects for testing anti-cancer drugs and for finding cancer causing agents. I have been told by friends in the biological sciences that all lab rodents, who don't otherwise meet an untimely end, will die of cancer. So, it makes sense that by cutting a lab mouse's calories dramatically you would also dramatically reduce the level of free radicals in its system and, consequently, how quickly it develops terminal cancer. Higher primates, who are much better at controlling free-radical production, seem unlikely to see the same positive results from a calorie-restricting diet.
I can see there being benefits for human health, but the +50% lifespan projections always seemed ridiculous to me. The other question science has yet to answer here is how much calorie reduction is too much? Presumably, there is a range of caloric intake where you wouldn't exactly be starving, but your body would not have enough calories to function correctly, and that would likely have a negative effect on lifespan and long-term health. I'm not going to jump on the extreme low-calorie diet bandwagon until we know better where the right balance lies.
Physicists don't think that mathematics and physics are the same thing.
When I was a physics undergrad in the mid-90's I was advised against going into the Mathematical Physics program by one of my PHD physics professors. He told me, and I'm paraphrasing, that mathematical physicists rarely make groundbreaking discoveries. He claimed the field is hampered by trying to get the math right, and that there are equations that, while being technically incorrect, are useful in general even though they fall apart in edge cases, and that many mathematical physicists find using such equations distasteful. I dropped out of physics a long time ago so I don't have my own opinion on the quality of mathematical physicists as researchers.
According to the FBI's Uniform crime reports, http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/, and comparing that to the Texas A&M study http://econweb.tamu.edu/mhoekstra/castle_doctrine.pdf murder rates per capita have gone down in most of the states that have enacted Stand your Ground type laws. I'm afraid that my stats knowledge is not strong enough to go delving in the full study report, but it seems their best argument is that Stand your Ground states have not seen murder rates fall as fast as other states. That is a pretty hard position to argue.
My own feeling is that it probably does not affect violent crime rates at all, it just means fewer people go to jail for defensive shootings. In Ohio, if I shoot someone in self defense (there is an exception if I am in my home or my car), whether I am a murderer or not depends on if I tried to run away or not. If I did not try to run, I'm a murderer. If I did try to run, or if I claimed I was unable to run, then the cops and the courts would have to do some work to decide if I am guilty or not. Before Ohio passed a Castle Doctrine law, if someone broke down my door and started shooting, I could not legally return fire until I had retreated to another room and been pursued. Granted, the odds of a stranger trying to force their way into my house while I am home is small, but I know of a few cases in the surrounding cites where men went to jail for murder simply because they defended their homes.
Incidentally, Florida's Stand Your Ground law does not apply in the Zimmerman case because he claims to have been retreating to his car when the fight started and that he was on the ground with Martin crouched over him and reaching for the gun when he fired. Even without a Stand Your Ground type of law, that is a defensible case. It's going to come down to if the jury believes Martin or Zimmerman was the aggressor.
There are many studies that show that gun ownership is dangerous. Some do so by including suicides in the statistics. None of them include (as far as I have seen) defensive uses of firearms when no one is killed. On the other hand, gun ownership rates are higher than ever in the US and murder rates continue to drop.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm thinking more about the cacophony. Can you imagine a cubicle farm of white-collar workers speaking in clear, distinct voices to their respective computers?
According to my wife, Avery Brooks played two characters on DS9. The first few seasons it was "Commander Cisco". Then Brooks shaved his head, grew a goatee, and played "Captain Hawk".
Here's the problem I have with management.
First, I spend a couple hours writing and testing a script, then I deploy that script out to our 300 or so computers in about 10 minutes. Then, the next time something comes up, they think it should only take me 20 minutes, soup to nuts, and by the way, it has to be done in half an hour. They forget the lead time it took me to come up with that 10 minute fix.
I do have to agree somewhat with management wanting vendor solutions. If an admin develops involved scripts to do everything and then changes jobs or gets hit by a bus there may be no one to support those scripts. It's even worse if an Admin uses some off the wall language.
They should have just told the truth: That they didn't have enough data to predict anything.
That is exactly what they did say, but the politicians didn't understand them.
http://www.lagazzettadelmezzogiorno.it/GdM_english_NOTIZIA_01.php?IDNotizia=340440&IDCategoria=2694
"There is no reason to suggest that the sequence of low-magnitude tremors are a precursor to a major event," said the committee's deputy chair Franco Barberi, according to minutes of the meeting published by prosecutors.
INGV President Enzo Boschi said "just because a small series of quakes has been observed" does not point to a large quake, which he described as "improbable, although not impossible".
It was a politician who proclaimed that there was no danger.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57537303/italian-scientists-get-6-years-for-laquila-earthquake-statements/
In a post-meeting press conference, however, Department of Civil Protection official Bernardo De Bernardinis, also a defendant, told citizens there was "no danger."
The failure here was one of communication and conclusions. Politicians want answers and will not tolerate "we don't know". The problem is, science is really short on answers and long on probability. That is doubly so with a science like seismology. Scientists like to be precise about all of the shades of nuance. So when the politicians ask, "will there be an earthquake" and the seismologists say "probably no", all the politicians hear is "no".
It may come as a surprise to you to hear this, but: Not everyone uses WiFi only for Internet access. The Internet is a network of networks, and my own network sees quite a lot of local traffic from time to time.
That's a fair point. But for the vast majority of people's home network activity wireless is not the bottleneck.
My contention is that channel bonding should have never been allowed on 802.11g. The 2.4GHz band is too congested and has too little bandwidth to go around. If you and your neighbors all enable channel bonding the interference between overlapping networks will mean that everyone's wireless networks will be crap. At work I only allow channel bonding on the 5GHz band because I need more democratic sharing an the 2.4GHz spectrum.
For anyone that needs higher bandwidth at home, some good 802.11a/g/n gear is ideal. The 5GHz band has something like 23 available, non-overlapping channels in the US. It also has the benefit of not operating in the same range as microwave ovens. And, because the 802.11a/g/n routers and access points have multiple radios, you can simultaneously run on both bands, increasing aggregate bandwidth and reducing. Besides that, all wireless sucks compared to gigabit Ethernet. If someone needs that kind of bandwidth at home, they should just plug in. They will drive themselves nuts trying to make the wireless perform like a wired network.
Channel bonding has a lot more to do with raw throughput than interference. It is required to reach past 150 Mb.
However, If you are in a crowded 2.4GHz neighborhood, be kind to your neighbors and do not enable channel bonding. Since the 2.4GHz band has only 3 non-overlapping channels, if you enable channel bonding your wireless will operate on 2 or 3 of these channels, causing more interference for your neighbors. Let's face it, unless you have better than a 150 Mb Internet connection, channel bonding will not make a lot of difference.
There is a reason why massive battery arrays really don't exist ...
Don't tell BOB that...
http://inhabitat.com/bob-americas-biggest-sodium-sulfur-battery-powers-a-texas-town/
There are known chemical processes for converting coal to gasoline and diesel. If your aim is to convert coal the more direct chemical process is probably more efficient.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_fuel
Looking at the Wikipedia article, I'm guessing that they are using a similar process, except that they use electricity to make Syngas, and then the established processes to produce fuel. Sysgas is just Hydrogen and Corbon Monoxide. You can use water electrolysis to get the Hydrogen. There are catalysts that can break down Carbon Dioxide when heated, so you can generate Carbon Monoxide that way. (I'm having a hard time finding a reference, but I remember reading about it a few years ago).
This is a significant factor in keeping good people out of medicine. I fail to understand how the physical endurance to stay awake for 36 hours makes one a better doctor.
I seriously considered a medical career at one time, but I knew from experience that I physically can not stay awake that long. Once I hit around 22 to 26 hours of being awake I will simply pass out, but not before the hallucinations start.
The best I ever saw was a hard drive that caught fire spontaneously. I had a user complain about a burning smell in his room and he said that his video editing station would not start up. It was a home-built monstrosity that a predecessor had put together, and for some reason he had installed the hard drives upside-down. In retrospect, "installed" is too strong a word. They were just sitting loose in the drive bays. I took the side off the full tower case and reseated all the cables, and since I could not see anything wrong, I powered it up. Moments later, I saw a 1 inch flame spring up from one of the drives. As I recall it was a diode, judging from the symbol on the logic board where it left a scorch mark.
A second attempt - and all subsequent attempts - to mount the drive showed it as an 8MB (yes, eight megabytes) drive.
This sounds like the 8MB bug in the Intel 320 series. http://www.techspot.com/news/44694-intel-confirms-8mb-bug-in-320-series-ssds-fix-available.html
There is a known issue with the 320 series where if the drive looses power suddenly it may corrupt itself, loose all data, and report that it has only 8MB capacity. According to Intel, the only way to fix the drive is to do a secure erase, wiping all data. It happened to me once last spring when windows locked up and I had to force a reboot by holding down the power button. Incidentally, Intel's 4PC10362 that was supposed to fix the problem did not. My drive was running the updated firmware version when it corrupted. This is not considered a manufacturing defect either, so the drive is not replaceable under warranty.
My advice for everyone who asks is to avoid SSDs. If Intel's SSDs, which are widely regarded as the most reliable in the field, can't be relied on in the real world, then the technology is not ready.
I use FF 10 ESR personally and I install it on the work computers. In general I'm happy with it and my users are happy with the web browser interface not changing every month and a half, but I have run across one annoying issue. Many web developers have a policy of only supporting browsers 2 or 3 versions older than what is current. Developers in the know should certainly make an exception for Firefox ESR, but I have had a few web sites admonish me for running an outdated browser.
For what it's worth, according to Netmarketshare, http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=0, Chrome on the desktop has not been gaining ground since early 2012. It's hovering at around 19%. IE is holding steady as well at around 53-54%, with Firefox staying at about 20%. Judging by the trend lines, I'd say that for the desktop markets these shares are entrenched. I don't expect to see much change unless FF, IE, or Chrome does a major screw up to drive people off their platforms.
Netmarketshare's report on mobile devices is very different. http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=1&qpcustomb=1 Opera mini, Blackberry, and Symbian have been falling with Safari Mobile and Android browsers picking up the slack. Interestingly enough, it doesn't look like the iPad2 back in April really affected the mobile browser shares at all.
It depends on the transmission's programming. I have driven some automatics where I really had to stomp on the accelerator before the computer figured out that I wanted to accelerate. This seems more and more common as cars are programmed for fuel efficiency over performance. The last few automatics I've driven have had an O/D off button, as in "overdrive" off, to be used when the driver wants better accelleration, but it's hard to explain the concept of overdrive to a person who doesn't know how how to drive a manual transmission.
I've been driving manuals since I was 16 and I just don't feel in control in an automatic. With my last car purchase, about 4 years ago, I was looking at a CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission) which should have real power and efficiency advantages, but for the model I was looking at the manufacturer had not worked out all of the bugs yet. The CVT version had less power and lower estimated MPG and cost about a grand more.
French people have about 2.5 less guns per capita compared with the US, they have comparable suicide rates (sometimes red wine is not enough), but only 10% ot the murder rate.
Nice stat, but it is not accurate. The index you sited only includes gun related homicides, not overall homicides. The overall US homicide rate is about 3.8 times what it is in France, according to Wikipedia. It's still an outrageous figure, but not nearly 10 times. Americans commit almost 99% of our murders with guns, while the French choose guns for only 40% of their murders. Overall homicide rates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_homicide_rate
If you can't get into the meetings, you must get a data plan into the architectural drawings.
I've done this 3 times at work with new buildings or renovations and additions to new buildings. Each time I was only asked as an afterthought, and things got screwed up or left out without my knowledge. In no case did our architects give a moment's thought to data drop locations or cable paths, and if it's not printed on some layer of the drawings, it is not in the plans. It sucks to have to do 3x walk-throughs with the cable installers, scribbling on a copy of the plans, only to have to redo it every time the plans are revised. In the end the electricians will just put the wall boxes wherever they please because your scribbles never make it back to the printed plans, so your network installers will have to cut in their own boxes, raising your installation costs.
In one building that was constructed about 10 years ago, the server room was moved and the dedicated air conditioning disappeared in the process. That caused the email server crash and corrupted its storage one June weekend when the Buildings and Grounds Manager decided to turn off the AC to save power. Also in the change, the width of the server room shrank by 18 inches, making it impossible to fit a standard server cabinet. The first floor in this building is pretty easy to network, except for the fact that the in-floor conduit grid for the library was hacked out of the plans without my knowledge, but the second floor is a real trial. Wiring passing down the corridor has to pass through about 20' of an indoor soffit with no conduit and no access except from small hatches at each end. It just has J-hooks and a pull-string, and the pull-string broke.
In one building added onto about 10 years ago there is no network closet. The IDF is a cabinet perched above a slop sink. No disaster's yet, but I'm waiting for the day when someone splashes water into the power outlet.
In another building offices on sides are separated by masonry walls floor to cieling (no drop ceiling) and a gymnasium and workout room. The only conduits connecting the 2 sides are 3, 1" underground runs from the data/sports equipment closet to a locker room in the far corner of the building, or a long, serpentine nest of conduits around the gym ceiling. The building was renovated about 4 years ago when the workout room and additional office was added. They could have added a simple 4" or so conduit through the workout room. Instead, I'm using the underground conduits, making the data runs about 100 feet longer than they need to be and a lot more trouble than they need to be. The underground cat 5e cables have not shorted out yet, but it's just
There is a difference. Zediva was acquiring all sorts of content at retail prices and rebroadcasting it without any kind of licensing agreements. Aereo is recording and streaming content broadcast on public airwaves and they are acting as an agent for their customers to maintain an antenna and a DVR. It that regard, they claim they are protected by the broadcasters' public performance licensing. They even require customers to be in New York City, so they aren't placeshifting. Aero is like an outsourced VCR service. The legality of VCRs was established in 1984 with Universal City Studios v. Sony Corp provided that it is not used to deprive the content owners of revenue. In this case, the service is making broadcast TV easier for New Yorkers to watch, and probably increasing viewership and revenues for the broadcasters. Because they maintain a separate antenna for each customer, Aereo is even less shady than the cable companies that record everything and let customers watch programming on demand.
Assassination is a killing of a prominent person for political or ideological reasons. Assassination dates back to the earliest forms of government, with the killing of Philip II of Macedon, the father of Alexander the Great. Some of the more recent well-known assassinations include those of Abraham Lincoln, President John F. Kennedy, and Martin Luther King.
There are various motivations for assassinations, including money, moral issues, political power, military purposes, and others. In the 20th century, the prevalence of assassins and their capabilities skyrocketed, and security measures such as armored cars or armored limousines and bulletproof vests came into popular use.
It is time to call a spade a spade. A terrorist organization, like al-Qa'ida, is a political military organization that acts to promote political and religious ideals. Yeah, their methods are totally fuckin' indefensible, but killing bin Laden in a midnight raid was an assassination, because you had better believe that Obama reaped political rewards for taking out that murderer. Obama went from arguing that terrorism is a law enforcement issue to dropping a bombs on buildings and crowds of civilians as a messy way to execute terrorist leaders. Attacks like these are defensible in a theater of war where we are engaged, like in Afghanistan and the tribal regions of Pakistan. But Obama's kill list has reached into Yemen, where we are not at war, and have assassinated terrorists, including two US citizens who were executed without trial, Anwar al-Awlaki and his son. (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/05/the-presidents-kill-list.html)
What's even more frightening is the memo that came out of Obama's justice department. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=7)
“The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel prepared a lengthy memo justifying that extraordinary step, asserting that while the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process applied, it could be satisfied by internal deliberations in the executive branch.”
By this doctrine, there is nowhere we could not strike to assassinate a terrorist leader if a local government was not willing to help us bring them to justice. Of course we would not strike inside countries with nukes, or in places like Saudi Arabia and China where we have vested economic interests. I doubt we would strike targets inside any Eastern European countries because they are too white and, as Carlin said, "we only bomb brown people". But Africa, most of the Middle East, South America, South-East Asia? All are fair game.
Of FFS, you really think if I copy a non-DRM .mp4 out of iTunes and give it to my kids Apple Ninjas are going to appear with Cease and Desist orders?
This isn't something anyone is going to get in any kind of legal trouble over, and Apple knew that when they decided to go DRM free. If you take your iTunes music collection and throw it up on PirateBay that might be different, but in a case like this no one is going to care.
What happens if you piss off the wrong cop and they just need an excuse for a warrant to search your computer or to simply get into your house? What if you have the wrong color skin for the neighbor hood you live in? What if your cousin is a real dipshit and gets involved with a terrorist organization? Criminalization of trivial actions is one step towards an effective police state.
Are we talking about the same Steve Jobs? The most famous ass in the entire world of tech and all-time champion of locked and proprietary software? If anyone in the entire world would willingly lock down user's rights it would be Apple and Steve Jobs.
And you have any evidence for that? By evidence I mean things that don't get torn apart in a millisecond by anyone with a brain? MacOS X _still_ doesn't have any protection that prevents you from running copies on any number of Macs you want.
So, if I want to run OSX on a million Macs it's easy to copy, but I have to buy a millions Macs.... from Apple.
Unfortunately, that is not how it works. You don't own the copies of the music on your iPod. You own a personal use license that lets you download copies of purchased music to your iPod. You can have up to 10 devices concurrently associated with your iTunes account and download copies of your purchased content to those devices. That's why if your iPod gets smashed you can download your music again. http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/us/terms.html#SALE
That is not at all like owning a copy, like a CD. When you own a CD you do not have the explicit right to copy the music to your computer or iPod, but the right to make copies for personal use is implied under fair use. If your CD gets destroyed and you loose your backup copies, you do not have the right to call up the music label and get a replacement. On the other hand, because owning a CD is OWNING a CD, you have the right to transfer ownership to anyone at any time, provided that you do not retain any copies. This is the right that Bruce Willis and others are fighting for.
I remember when the mice study came out. "Mice live 50% longer! You might live to 150!" and the guy, bald IIRC, started himself on a lo-cal diet.
Mice lived 3 years instead of 2. Did it greatly extend their lives, or did it just add a year?
This is my hypothesis on the findings: Short-lived animals, like nematodes and lab mice, tend to produce lots of free radicals as they metabolize calories. Long-lived animals tend to have metabolisms that release far fewer free radicals. Free radicals damage DNA and promote cancer. Most lab mice are bred for a high propensity towards developing cancer because that makes them better test subjects for testing anti-cancer drugs and for finding cancer causing agents. I have been told by friends in the biological sciences that all lab rodents, who don't otherwise meet an untimely end, will die of cancer. So, it makes sense that by cutting a lab mouse's calories dramatically you would also dramatically reduce the level of free radicals in its system and, consequently, how quickly it develops terminal cancer. Higher primates, who are much better at controlling free-radical production, seem unlikely to see the same positive results from a calorie-restricting diet.
I can see there being benefits for human health, but the +50% lifespan projections always seemed ridiculous to me. The other question science has yet to answer here is how much calorie reduction is too much? Presumably, there is a range of caloric intake where you wouldn't exactly be starving, but your body would not have enough calories to function correctly, and that would likely have a negative effect on lifespan and long-term health. I'm not going to jump on the extreme low-calorie diet bandwagon until we know better where the right balance lies.
Physicists don't think that mathematics and physics are the same thing.
When I was a physics undergrad in the mid-90's I was advised against going into the Mathematical Physics program by one of my PHD physics professors. He told me, and I'm paraphrasing, that mathematical physicists rarely make groundbreaking discoveries. He claimed the field is hampered by trying to get the math right, and that there are equations that, while being technically incorrect, are useful in general even though they fall apart in edge cases, and that many mathematical physicists find using such equations distasteful. I dropped out of physics a long time ago so I don't have my own opinion on the quality of mathematical physicists as researchers.
Windows Pro versions contain cipher.exe, and that can wipe free space as well
/W:[drive letter]:\
cipher
According to the FBI's Uniform crime reports, http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/, and comparing that to the Texas A&M study http://econweb.tamu.edu/mhoekstra/castle_doctrine.pdf murder rates per capita have gone down in most of the states that have enacted Stand your Ground type laws. I'm afraid that my stats knowledge is not strong enough to go delving in the full study report, but it seems their best argument is that Stand your Ground states have not seen murder rates fall as fast as other states. That is a pretty hard position to argue.
My own feeling is that it probably does not affect violent crime rates at all, it just means fewer people go to jail for defensive shootings. In Ohio, if I shoot someone in self defense (there is an exception if I am in my home or my car), whether I am a murderer or not depends on if I tried to run away or not. If I did not try to run, I'm a murderer. If I did try to run, or if I claimed I was unable to run, then the cops and the courts would have to do some work to decide if I am guilty or not. Before Ohio passed a Castle Doctrine law, if someone broke down my door and started shooting, I could not legally return fire until I had retreated to another room and been pursued. Granted, the odds of a stranger trying to force their way into my house while I am home is small, but I know of a few cases in the surrounding cites where men went to jail for murder simply because they defended their homes.
Incidentally, Florida's Stand Your Ground law does not apply in the Zimmerman case because he claims to have been retreating to his car when the fight started and that he was on the ground with Martin crouched over him and reaching for the gun when he fired. Even without a Stand Your Ground type of law, that is a defensible case. It's going to come down to if the jury believes Martin or Zimmerman was the aggressor.
There are many studies that show that gun ownership is dangerous. Some do so by including suicides in the statistics. None of them include (as far as I have seen) defensive uses of firearms when no one is killed. On the other hand, gun ownership rates are higher than ever in the US and murder rates continue to drop.