There are SecureID systems that do just that. I have a keychain fob that displays a new random number every 60 seconds. This is somehow synced with a server-side mirror that takes that number and combines it with a PIN that only I know and that's my password. It's probably a bit expensive for non-corporate solutions, but the technology does exist.
Which I thought was pretty ridiculous. Why put each parameter on a single line like that? I guess it's partly a matter of personal style and preference, but I like a statement to be one line of code, unless it makes things more obfuscated.
I'm a developer. Widescreen also means longer lines of code before wrapping, so less vertical scrolling.
I'm not all that put out, honestly. I've got a 1680x1050 widescreen on my laptop, and if it were 1600x1200 I'd get a few extra lines of text, but big deal. My previous favored resolution was 1280x1024, so I actually get more pixels in both dimensions.
I can also watch 16:9 movies on it when I'm not coding, and I like that feature more.
You can't think of any use for producing the equivalent of the entire US energy needs if it weren't portable?
That's not what I said; I said that producing the energy needed by the US is not useful unless there's a way to deliver it to where it's needed.
Your points about fuel generation and storage are simply a restatement of the transmission problem. You can either transmit electricity over wires, with the associated losses, or you can use the electricity on-site to generate fuel (electrolysis of water into hydrogen, for example) and then store and transport the fuel to where it is needed, where it can be converted back into power to do work.
Either way, you're dealing with losses of efficiency, so if 92x92 mi of solar collection suffices if you could get everyone to use the electricity right there, then you might end up needing to bump that up to, say, 150x150 mi.
Generating the entire US's energy needs in one central location is only useful if you have a way to transmit the power to where it's needed.
I like the idea of making more, better use of solar energy, but the operation should be more dispersed, or else we're going to need to wait for a revolution in transmission (high-temperature superconductor would be wonderful if we had it).
Adobe: v1.0 is released; a week later 1.0.1 is released. A few months after that, 1.0.2. Then three years go by, and suddenly it's at 2.0, which is broken from the install.
Microsoft: v1.0 is released; no one buys it. v2.0 is released; it's still not really usable. v3.0 comes out, and people suddenly line up for it around the block. v3.0SP1 is released and fixes most of the really bad bugs while introducing a few others, some random security vulnerabilities, invalidating half the licenses of all previous versions, and causes DrDOS to crash.
Apple: v1.0 is released, but it has a bug so Apple pulls it from the download server for a few hours, after which a patched version replaces it, with the same exact version number, and no mention of any bugfix in the release notes. Any mention of any alleged switcheroo or the problem that existed in the first 1.0 release is ruthlessly and systematically quashed in the support forums on Apple's website; unfortunately, their lawyers can't censor the entire net.
With apologies to Yogi, are we reaching a point where no one will buy an Apple because everyone's buying Apple?
Well, there could always be other reasons why everyone's buying an Apple. If everyone was buying them because they were good, not because everyone else was buying them, then the Yogiism could be literally true.
No problem; I just uploaded a.png image of a EULA that I wrote which states that by accepting the upload of this file, the recipient agrees to turn over all assets in their possession to me, and to transfer any and all rights associated with them.
It's a game if people play it for fun. It's crack if they play it because they're addicted. I'm not sure what it is if they set up a bot to play for them so they can skip the drudgery or cheat. Not quite a game in the best sense of the word.
When people are so desperate not to have to play your game that they'll write a program to do it for them, the gameplay model is broken. Try to do better next time.
There are success stories and there are scandals. We have pretty unrestricted speech here at slashdot, it's true. But we're largely user-generated content, aside from the occasional so-called slashvertisement article. But look at the mass media and how controlled the message is on television, compared to a more free medium such as youtube. Audience-generated content will always be less restricted than professionally produced content. Look at the video game industry's influence on video game reviews, compared to the independence and integrity of Consumer Reports. It's a real danger, one that we need to take seriously.
Content isn't king in any advertise-subsidized medium, it's the advertiser's revenue streams. They'll censor what they fear will alienate their viewers, they won't subsidize what they think won't sell. Advertising is horrible for content, unless the power that the sponsorship dollar holds over creators and audiences can be limited.
Well, yes. But, since Microsoft does this, gets away with it, even when they get sued, even when they LOSE the lawsuits, then if you're Apple, you've pretty much got to be thinking, "Then why can't I?"
Slashdot Mirror
There are SecureID systems that do just that. I have a keychain fob that displays a new random number every 60 seconds. This is somehow synced with a server-side mirror that takes that number and combines it with a PIN that only I know and that's my password. It's probably a bit expensive for non-corporate solutions, but the technology does exist.
The First Rule of Project MAHEM is: Do not talk about Project MAHEM!
I was actually kindof joking with that remark, but there's been plenty of times where I ran into code like:
ProcedureCall(Param1, _
Param2 _
Param3 _
Param4 _
Param5);
Which I thought was pretty ridiculous. Why put each parameter on a single line like that? I guess it's partly a matter of personal style and preference, but I like a statement to be one line of code, unless it makes things more obfuscated.
I'm a developer. Widescreen also means longer lines of code before wrapping, so less vertical scrolling.
I'm not all that put out, honestly. I've got a 1680x1050 widescreen on my laptop, and if it were 1600x1200 I'd get a few extra lines of text, but big deal. My previous favored resolution was 1280x1024, so I actually get more pixels in both dimensions.
I can also watch 16:9 movies on it when I'm not coding, and I like that feature more.
That's not what I said; I said that producing the energy needed by the US is not useful unless there's a way to deliver it to where it's needed.
Your points about fuel generation and storage are simply a restatement of the transmission problem. You can either transmit electricity over wires, with the associated losses, or you can use the electricity on-site to generate fuel (electrolysis of water into hydrogen, for example) and then store and transport the fuel to where it is needed, where it can be converted back into power to do work.
Either way, you're dealing with losses of efficiency, so if 92x92 mi of solar collection suffices if you could get everyone to use the electricity right there, then you might end up needing to bump that up to, say, 150x150 mi.
Generating the entire US's energy needs in one central location is only useful if you have a way to transmit the power to where it's needed.
I like the idea of making more, better use of solar energy, but the operation should be more dispersed, or else we're going to need to wait for a revolution in transmission (high-temperature superconductor would be wonderful if we had it).
I wonder if the set crew were eating symbolic pieces of bread that represented Dawkins. It would have been fitting. Dawkins donuts, maybe.
Oh, and your wife is running low on condoms. Please pick some more up at the drug store on your way home, please.
Adobe: v1.0 is released; a week later 1.0.1 is released. A few months after that, 1.0.2. Then three years go by, and suddenly it's at 2.0, which is broken from the install.
Microsoft: v1.0 is released; no one buys it. v2.0 is released; it's still not really usable. v3.0 comes out, and people suddenly line up for it around the block. v3.0SP1 is released and fixes most of the really bad bugs while introducing a few others, some random security vulnerabilities, invalidating half the licenses of all previous versions, and causes DrDOS to crash.
Apple: v1.0 is released, but it has a bug so Apple pulls it from the download server for a few hours, after which a patched version replaces it, with the same exact version number, and no mention of any bugfix in the release notes. Any mention of any alleged switcheroo or the problem that existed in the first 1.0 release is ruthlessly and systematically quashed in the support forums on Apple's website; unfortunately, their lawyers can't censor the entire net.
Apple should have made the iPhone twice as thick, and dedicated that extra 100% of space to battery.
I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.
With apologies to Yogi, are we reaching a point where no one will buy an Apple because everyone's buying Apple?
Well, there could always be other reasons why everyone's buying an Apple. If everyone was buying them because they were good, not because everyone else was buying them, then the Yogiism could be literally true.
No problem; I just uploaded a .png image of a EULA that I wrote which states that by accepting the upload of this file, the recipient agrees to turn over all assets in their possession to me, and to transfer any and all rights associated with them.
I now own Adobe.
I mean, fair's fair, right?
Just think, in another 50ish years, the copyright will be expiring.
My .torrent of S01-S11 is at 92%. Screw you guys, I'm going home!
It's a game if people play it for fun. It's crack if they play it because they're addicted. I'm not sure what it is if they set up a bot to play for them so they can skip the drudgery or cheat. Not quite a game in the best sense of the word.
Dear Blizzard,
When people are so desperate not to have to play your game that they'll write a program to do it for them, the gameplay model is broken. Try to do better next time.
Sincerely,
An indie gamer
You speak Perl? Wow, what a coincidence! @P=split//,".URRUU\c8R";@d=split//,"\nrekcah xinU / lreP rehtona tsuJ";sub p{@p{"r$p","u$p"}=(P,P);pipe"r$p","u$p";++$p;($q*=2)+=$f=!fork;map{$P=$P[$f^ord($p{$_})&6];$p{$_}=/ ^$P/ix?$P:close$_}keys%p}p;p;p;p;p;map{$p{$_}=~/^[P.]/&&close$_}%p;wait until$?;map{/^r/&&<$_>}%p;$_=$d[$q];sleep rand(2)if/\S/;print
There are success stories and there are scandals. We have pretty unrestricted speech here at slashdot, it's true. But we're largely user-generated content, aside from the occasional so-called slashvertisement article. But look at the mass media and how controlled the message is on television, compared to a more free medium such as youtube. Audience-generated content will always be less restricted than professionally produced content. Look at the video game industry's influence on video game reviews, compared to the independence and integrity of Consumer Reports. It's a real danger, one that we need to take seriously.
Content isn't king in any advertise-subsidized medium, it's the advertiser's revenue streams. They'll censor what they fear will alienate their viewers, they won't subsidize what they think won't sell. Advertising is horrible for content, unless the power that the sponsorship dollar holds over creators and audiences can be limited.
Well, yes. But, since Microsoft does this, gets away with it, even when they get sued, even when they LOSE the lawsuits, then if you're Apple, you've pretty much got to be thinking, "Then why can't I?"
$100 fine!? That's, like, a century's salary to Jobs! Please, won't anyone think of the Jobs?
Regardless, now I don't feel so bad, as they do not have pizza in space. How do they cope?
Well, since no one can hear them screaming, it all works out.
It might not surprise me, but I guess I'll never know since there's no link to the fucking article. Nice going, editors!