Born: 7/6/1946 Birthplace: New Haven, Conn. George Walker Bush was born on July 6, 1946, in New Haven, Conn., the first child of future president George H. W. Bush. In 1948, the family moved to Odessa, Tex., where the senior Bush went to work in the oil business. George W. grew up mainly in Midland, Tex., and Houston, and later attended two of his father's alma maters, Phillips Academy in Andover, Mass., and Yale."
Yes, he was born in New Haven. So what? He moved to Texas when he was two years old, and grew up in Midland and Houston. IMHO his first two years aren't as important as the 58 which have followed them. If you'd prefer to say that he's 3.3% Connectican and 96.7% Texan, that's fine with me.
I think that you've done a nice job of supporting my assertion that there are idiots living everywhere.
Again, for the simple-minded out there - Kansas isn't in the South. Saying it is won't make it so. Kansas is Midwest.
The fact that more people in the Southern states voted for Bush than for Kerry in no way supports the assertion that "living in the South automatically and without significant exception indicates that that person is uneducated, superstitious/religious, or inherently unintelligent". It supports the assertion that the majority felt that Bush was a better President than Kerry. I personally feel that that is a monumentally incorrect feeling, but then I know several perfectly intelligent (non-Christian) Southern people who cast votes for Bush. I don't understand it, but there you go.
"Casted" is the incorrect form for the past tense of "cast". The word you wanted was "cast".
What wasn't close was the religious vote: 59%-40% for Bush among Protestants, up to 78% for evangelicals. People who cited moral values as the primary issue determining their votes voted 80% Bush, and people who cited terrorism voted 86% Bush! Kansas voted 62% Bush, and Alabama (which IS in the South) voted 63% Bush. Interestingly, 7% of Alabama Democrats voted Bush. Florida voted 52% Bush, and that is close despite being a Southern state. Again, 14% of Florida Democrats voted Bush for unknown reasons.
In any case, I would consider (as an example) the 40% of Mississippians who voted for Kerry to be a "significant exception" to the implicit assertion that all Southerners voted Bush and therefore all Southerners are "uneducated, superstitious/religious, or inherently unintelligent", to quote you quoting me.
This just in: Kansas, STILL not in the South. You might want to write that one down - you CAN write, can't you?
It's not being modded insightful because it isn't insightful. It's factually incorrect (in several places) and misses the mark completely on who is the bad guy here.
It's not Southerners, it's conservative Christians. There's a difference. Especially since Kansas isn't in the South (nor are Utah, Ohio, etc.) and since not all Southerners are conservative Christians OR stupid. Yes, there is an large infestation of CC's here in the South - but then I've noticed that the North has a remarkably large number of rude assholes. Every place has problems.
Your assertion that the average intelligence on Slashdot is "raised a bit" is unsupported.
Now if by "Insightful" you mean "aligned nicely with my own preconceptions and prejudices" then perhaps it is.
1) Kansas isn't in the south, or even in the South.
2) The South isn't landlocked.
3) Bush is from Texas. That's more West than South.
4) There are idiots and conservatives everywhere.
5) As others have pointed out, you got both the title and the author of The Handmaid's Tale wrong.
Painting all Southerners with the "ignorant, theocratic redneck" brush is as accurate and useful as painting all Northerners with the "rude asshole" brush or painting all West Coasties with the "flaky New Age neo-mystic" brush. It's just not that simple.
If you continue to perpetuate the myth that living in the South automatically and without significant exception indicates that that person is uneducated, superstitious/religious, or inherently unintelligent, then you are showing even less capability for logical, rational thought than those dipshits in Kansas about whom this story was written.
Your comment isn't being modded insightful (as of this writing) for the simple reason that it ISN'T insightful. It's wrong-headed, factually incorrect, and blames the wrong people for the wrong things.
The people you're mad at are the religiously conservative, and they're everywhere. We in the South simply have a larger infestation of them than you appear to, wherever it is you live.
"...according to the El Segundo, Calif.-based firm..."
Er... according to WHICH El Segundo, Calif.-based firm? There must be more than one firm in El Segundo, Calif. Or is this the teaser that's supposed to entice me to read the fine article?
The way I read grandparent's comment was that the romantic "arc" tack-welded on top of the story was the 'shit smeared' on the movie. I'd agree with him in that, and your assertion that Douglas Adams himself was responsible for that is at least somewhat contradicted by the following, quoted from ccn.com's review of the film:
"After Adams' death, screenwriter Karey Kirkpatrick was called in to tighten up the script's structure, bolstering the romance and streamlining the plot." (italics mine)
Sounds an awful lot like the romance was troweled on after DA was no longer around to object. What with it being totally non-witty and not really fitting with anything else, I'd have to say that chances are good that Douglas Adams did not and would not have tarted up the romance like that.
It also sounds to me like all the subtle stuff that Americans wouldn't get anyway (yes, I'm being sarcastic and kind of pissy about it) was smoothed over, by Karey Kirkpatrick, to make it more shallow and easily digested for the Hollywood audience. I won't go into my rant about how streamlining and simplifying LOTR for the big screen reduced it to an FX extravaganza whose plot and characterization were no more exciting than any one of hundreds of thousands of games of AD&D played out in basements and bedrooms all around the world... oops, I guess I did. Sorry.
But that's how I feel about HHGTTG on the big screen, too. The genius is in the details, and Hollywood doesn't want genius - Hollywood has no desire to leave cash in the pockets of morons, and would rather dumb it down than take a chance on not getting money from everyone.
As an example: I think that when you skip the entire dialog about the plans being in the basement, where the lights had gone out, in a locked cabinet in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Tiger" or however the phrasing went, you also lose a great deal of the whimsy that made HHGTTG so brilliant. And the parallel between the bureaucrats in charge of destroying Arthur's house and those destroying Arthur's planet is damn near lost altogether.
Fortunately, I was already prepared for this movie to miss the point, so it didn't hit me too hard. YMMV.
I'm assuming that you've actually had contact with the GATOS project people, who have actually written functional software to use AIW cards under Linux in the past - right?
If not, try this:
Send Gatos-devel mailing list submissions to
gatos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
They're not using V4L2 for AIW, AFAICT mostly because it doesn't exist. I'm sure that if anyone in the community is going to be able to use your information, it's these guys.
Of course, I can't really imagine that the people running the V4L2 project would turn down support either. Unless it's the sort of support in which they are told that they have to sign NDA's which preclude ever writing any other software again, they aren't really given the information they need, and they aren't allowed to actually implement all the functionality they need to... not saying ATI is going to do that, but it's been known to happen.
While you're tossing 'em information, try sending them chip docs so that they can get a working driver again for my old 4MB AIW, too. I love that thing.
No, no, they're really serious. Not only does the EU insist that all computers "used for personal or business use" include a floppy drive, but they are also considering a ban upon external USB floppy drives since the only possible use of such devices is to circumvent the internal floppy. Strong consideration is being given to banning USB storage devices of all kinds, including flash drives and any pencils with automatic lead advance.
"Trying to find the drivers for your camera: PRICELESS"
It's funny that you should mention finding camera drivers; nearly all cameras sold today act as USB storage devices, and don't need any drivers at all. The 'driver' package from the manufacturer has been, in nearly every case I've experienced, a lame-assed GUI for copying and editing the images. I find the bundled software crappy, useless, and of course Windows-only.
The sole exception in my experience is my Sony Mavica MVCD-1000, which records images to a mini-CDR formatted with a UDF filesystem. You can finalize the disc, which adds a Joliet filesystem and makes it suitable for reading in a tray-loading CD drive. However, if you want to get images off the disc before it's finalized, you'd better be running Windows 98 or 2000 (god help you if you're running WinME - camera drivers are the least of your worries). Drivers DO NOT EXIST for Windows XP, OSX, or any flavor of Linux. I've heard people claim that the Win2K drivers work under XP, but I've heard others refute that claim. If anyone out there knows of any way to access those unfinalized discs under Linux or OSX, I'd LOVE to eat some crow on this issue.
Point is, the only situation I've run into in which finding camera drivers is really an issue is equally a problem for Linux, OSX, and Windows XP. If you bought a camera which doesn't act as a USB storage device, I have to question your sanity. In any remotely current camera, you can at the very least remove the media and put it in a reader which will work equally well (or equally poorly) under Windows XP, OSX, or Linux. I realize that you wanted to point out how much better it is to use Windows so that you can use a digital camera, but I think the facts contradict your position.
Dammit, where's my "-1, Whoosh!" mod? See, that was called sarcasm... there was this guy who was proposing a poll, see... and he said that we'd have a lot of Mac and Linux fanboys boasting about their systems' stability, see... and, like, he was acting like it wasn't true, and stuff...
Oh, never mind. It was sarcasm, OK? I use Linux and OSX. I don't use Windows. Why don't you go inform my parent poster? You _did_ read the parent post, to see what I was responding to - right?
Which PDA are you developing a kernel for? It's not a Nino, is it? 'Cause I could sure use a good Linux install on one of those.
There is no question that the laptop PS's in use today use wire that is too small to safely conduct more than a few amperes. Then again, since those power supplies aren't capable of driving more than a few amperes, there's no need to have larger conductors.
Should someone actually implement these batteries in a laptop, you can bet that a) the power supplies will be external, and b) they will be much larger and capable of delivering greater current than those in widepread usage today, and c) the conductors and connectors will be sized to accommodate the current requirements.
The overall point that the power and instantaneous current requirements of such a battery are difficult to implement within the existing laptop paradigm is true and, to an EE at least, pretty obvious. The suggestion that the conversion circuitry that will satisfy those power requirements will likely be external to the laptop is at best obvious and at worst indicative of a total lack of consideration on the part of the A/C grandparent poster.
I do lightning research today. Believe me, I know about high current. We deal in tens of kA every day.
Yeah, isn't that funny? All those Mac and Linux fanboys acting like their systems don't crash every day? I mean, come on! We all know those guys are just pretending that they don't have BSODs, just like the rest of us.
It's not as if it's possible for an operating system to be MORE stable than Windows XP, right?
Most laptops these days ALREADY use an external device to step down 120V AC power to ~12V-18V DC power. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a laptop that takes a 120V power cord directly. Part of that might be due to the fact that laptop designers have already figured out that putting the "device" within the confines of the laptop isn't such a good idea. Now, I'm sure you'll be astonished to find that others have already made this technological leap...
It's amazing what they think of these days. What next? horseless carriages?
Re:Slashdot users use mostly Windows
on
Hacking Mac OS X
·
· Score: 1
I've tried reading two or three different Brunner novels, and I couldn't ever come close to finishing one. I'm not sure I even got through a single chapter. This, from someone who almost CANNOT put down a novel no matter how crappy it is - I've read some of my father's dreaded 'Mack Bolan' drivel (no, he's not the author - he just reads 'em, can't imagine why), and finished the damned things without giving up. Hell, I read Clive Cussler cover to cover. Ludlum! I made it through two or three of Robert L. Forward's heavy-on-the-S-weak-on-the-F novels - folks, I read Harry Harrison's godawful DeathWorld trilogy (tripe-ogy?) in its entirety. But I can't do that with Brunner.
It's been years and years and years since I tried, and maybe I could do it now. I'm just not interested in trying again.
Re:Slashdot users use mostly Windows
on
Hacking Mac OS X
·
· Score: 1
So, the reason that Corporate America shouldn't use Macs is because they don't?
Macs users are 5% of computer users, and therefore no one should use Macs?
I'm sorry, but your reasons are worthless. You may have come to the correct conclusions (although I would disagree), but your methods are appalling.
"...or I'm going to take my OS and go home"? What are they supposed to do, release drivers that they know don't work?
Sounds to me like the OBSD guys said, "the drivers we've reverse-engineered aren't very stable, and we want more documentation so that we can make them stable for our existing users (of your hardware). If you won't give us that information, or persist in pretending to misunderstand what we want, then we will be unable to produce stable drivers for your hardware and we will refuse to release a driver with the instabilities we know of. We're in a hurry because our main coding time is coming up soon, and we've been asking for this for a while."
There is nothing that requires Adaptec to provide the necessary documentation. Nor is there anything which requires the BSD guys to release a driver that they know is buggy.
What I still don't understand is *why* Adaptec persist in refusing to allow a large, talented, motivated group of programmers to write a good driver for their hardware FOR FREE. If xBSD gets a working driver, then the other BSDs, Linux, etc. won't be far behind. Adaptec needs the server market, Unices are strong in the server market, more Unix drivers for Adaptec hardware means more people buying Adaptec hardware to run on free OS's, everybody wins! Except that Adaptec (apparently) won't play nice. How is that Theo de Raadt's fault?
Of course, I'm not within the loop at Adaptec, and so I don't know why they won't release documentation when it's needed. Perhaps they have some blindingly brilliant reasons why they don't want to release the information necessary to write fully functional drivers. What I do know is that it can't be seen from the outside, looking in.
In any case, I've had my share of trouble with Adaptec RAID cards under Windows. I probably wouldn't buy another one anyway.
Parent poster is referring to the whine that a TV makes, caused by mechanical vibrations in the windings of the flyback transformer. The whine is at the line retrace frequency, or about 15 kHz. A similar noise can be found in a computer monitor if it's a CRT type, but not in an LCD or plasma.
You mentioned Johnson-Nyquist noise. Johnson noise is broadband 'white' noise, caused by random thermal motion of charges in a resistance. It can be amplified in an audio system and be reproduced by the speakers, expecially if the gainstaging is incorrect ("the TV volume is on full blast but the reciever volume is low"), but if people around you say they can't hear it - dude, they're fucking with you. White noise has the same power at all frequencies, and the only way to not hear it is to be stone deaf. They may have gotten used to it and be willing to ignore it, but that's not the same as being unable to hear a 15 kHz tone.
Now, if you hear white noise in "everything", you may in fact be nuts, or have some serious hearing issues that need to be checked out. A computer monitor with no speaker, e.g., should emit essentially ZERO amplified Johnson noise. Interestingly, a case fan or CPU fan should emit fairly 'white' noise with some relatively constant tones mixed in.
In any case, parent poster is NOT referring to Johnson noise, he is referring to flyback whine.
Slashdot Mirror
"George Walker Bush
Born: 7/6/1946
Birthplace: New Haven, Conn.
George Walker Bush was born on July 6, 1946, in New Haven, Conn., the first child of future president George H. W. Bush. In 1948, the family moved to Odessa, Tex., where the senior Bush went to work in the oil business. George W. grew up mainly in Midland, Tex., and Houston, and later attended two of his father's alma maters, Phillips Academy in Andover, Mass., and Yale."
Yes, he was born in New Haven. So what? He moved to Texas when he was two years old, and grew up in Midland and Houston. IMHO his first two years aren't as important as the 58 which have followed them. If you'd prefer to say that he's 3.3% Connectican and 96.7% Texan, that's fine with me.
Bah, yourself.
I think that you've done a nice job of supporting my assertion that there are idiots living everywhere.
Again, for the simple-minded out there - Kansas isn't in the South. Saying it is won't make it so. Kansas is Midwest.
The fact that more people in the Southern states voted for Bush than for Kerry in no way supports the assertion that "living in the South automatically and without significant exception indicates that that person is uneducated, superstitious/religious, or inherently unintelligent". It supports the assertion that the majority felt that Bush was a better President than Kerry. I personally feel that that is a monumentally incorrect feeling, but then I know several perfectly intelligent (non-Christian) Southern people who cast votes for Bush. I don't understand it, but there you go.
"Casted" is the incorrect form for the past tense of "cast". The word you wanted was "cast".
What wasn't close was the religious vote: 59%-40% for Bush among Protestants, up to 78% for evangelicals. People who cited moral values as the primary issue determining their votes voted 80% Bush, and people who cited terrorism voted 86% Bush! Kansas voted 62% Bush, and Alabama (which IS in the South) voted 63% Bush. Interestingly, 7% of Alabama Democrats voted Bush. Florida voted 52% Bush, and that is close despite being a Southern state. Again, 14% of Florida Democrats voted Bush for unknown reasons.
In any case, I would consider (as an example) the 40% of Mississippians who voted for Kerry to be a "significant exception" to the implicit assertion that all Southerners voted Bush and therefore all Southerners are "uneducated, superstitious/religious, or inherently unintelligent", to quote you quoting me.
This just in: Kansas, STILL not in the South. You might want to write that one down - you CAN write, can't you?
It's not being modded insightful because it isn't insightful. It's factually incorrect (in several places) and misses the mark completely on who is the bad guy here.
It's not Southerners, it's conservative Christians. There's a difference. Especially since Kansas isn't in the South (nor are Utah, Ohio, etc.) and since not all Southerners are conservative Christians OR stupid. Yes, there is an large infestation of CC's here in the South - but then I've noticed that the North has a remarkably large number of rude assholes. Every place has problems.
Your assertion that the average intelligence on Slashdot is "raised a bit" is unsupported.
Now if by "Insightful" you mean "aligned nicely with my own preconceptions and prejudices" then perhaps it is.
A few problems:
1) Kansas isn't in the south, or even in the South.
2) The South isn't landlocked.
3) Bush is from Texas. That's more West than South.
4) There are idiots and conservatives everywhere.
5) As others have pointed out, you got both the title and the author of The Handmaid's Tale wrong.
Painting all Southerners with the "ignorant, theocratic redneck" brush is as accurate and useful as painting all Northerners with the "rude asshole" brush or painting all West Coasties with the "flaky New Age neo-mystic" brush. It's just not that simple.
If you continue to perpetuate the myth that living in the South automatically and without significant exception indicates that that person is uneducated, superstitious/religious, or inherently unintelligent, then you are showing even less capability for logical, rational thought than those dipshits in Kansas about whom this story was written.
Your comment isn't being modded insightful (as of this writing) for the simple reason that it ISN'T insightful. It's wrong-headed, factually incorrect, and blames the wrong people for the wrong things.
The people you're mad at are the religiously conservative, and they're everywhere. We in the South simply have a larger infestation of them than you appear to, wherever it is you live.
The summary says,
"...according to the El Segundo, Calif.-based firm..."
Er... according to WHICH El Segundo, Calif.-based firm? There must be more than one firm in El Segundo, Calif. Or is this the teaser that's supposed to entice me to read the fine article?
The way I read grandparent's comment was that the romantic "arc" tack-welded on top of the story was the 'shit smeared' on the movie. I'd agree with him in that, and your assertion that Douglas Adams himself was responsible for that is at least somewhat contradicted by the following, quoted from ccn.com's review of the film:
"After Adams' death, screenwriter Karey Kirkpatrick was called in to tighten up the script's structure, bolstering the romance and streamlining the plot." (italics mine)
Sounds an awful lot like the romance was troweled on after DA was no longer around to object. What with it being totally non-witty and not really fitting with anything else, I'd have to say that chances are good that Douglas Adams did not and would not have tarted up the romance like that.
It also sounds to me like all the subtle stuff that Americans wouldn't get anyway (yes, I'm being sarcastic and kind of pissy about it) was smoothed over, by Karey Kirkpatrick, to make it more shallow and easily digested for the Hollywood audience. I won't go into my rant about how streamlining and simplifying LOTR for the big screen reduced it to an FX extravaganza whose plot and characterization were no more exciting than any one of hundreds of thousands of games of AD&D played out in basements and bedrooms all around the world... oops, I guess I did. Sorry.
But that's how I feel about HHGTTG on the big screen, too. The genius is in the details, and Hollywood doesn't want genius - Hollywood has no desire to leave cash in the pockets of morons, and would rather dumb it down than take a chance on not getting money from everyone.
As an example: I think that when you skip the entire dialog about the plans being in the basement, where the lights had gone out, in a locked cabinet in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Tiger" or however the phrasing went, you also lose a great deal of the whimsy that made HHGTTG so brilliant. And the parallel between the bureaucrats in charge of destroying Arthur's house and those destroying Arthur's planet is damn near lost altogether.
Fortunately, I was already prepared for this movie to miss the point, so it didn't hit me too hard. YMMV.
it's called webmin. install it, run it. go to it at:
https://localhost:10000
You might be surprised at how much stuff you can do from there - like, pretty much everything.
"Then again, people in Soviet Russia appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation."
.sig. Nice.
Dude, I think you just found a new
I'm assuming that you've actually had contact with the GATOS project people, who have actually written functional software to use AIW cards under Linux in the past - right?
If not, try this:
Send Gatos-devel mailing list submissions to
gatos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
They're not using V4L2 for AIW, AFAICT mostly because it doesn't exist. I'm sure that if anyone in the community is going to be able to use your information, it's these guys.
Of course, I can't really imagine that the people running the V4L2 project would turn down support either. Unless it's the sort of support in which they are told that they have to sign NDA's which preclude ever writing any other software again, they aren't really given the information they need, and they aren't allowed to actually implement all the functionality they need to... not saying ATI is going to do that, but it's been known to happen.
While you're tossing 'em information, try sending them chip docs so that they can get a working driver again for my old 4MB AIW, too. I love that thing.
Thank you, sir.
No, no, they're really serious. Not only does the EU insist that all computers "used for personal or business use" include a floppy drive, but they are also considering a ban upon external USB floppy drives since the only possible use of such devices is to circumvent the internal floppy. Strong consideration is being given to banning USB storage devices of all kinds, including flash drives and any pencils with automatic lead advance.
.... and then it brings out the "dupe-post hater" haters. Three words: "Get Over!"
"Trying to find the drivers for your camera: PRICELESS"
It's funny that you should mention finding camera drivers; nearly all cameras sold today act as USB storage devices, and don't need any drivers at all. The 'driver' package from the manufacturer has been, in nearly every case I've experienced, a lame-assed GUI for copying and editing the images. I find the bundled software crappy, useless, and of course Windows-only.
The sole exception in my experience is my Sony Mavica MVCD-1000, which records images to a mini-CDR formatted with a UDF filesystem. You can finalize the disc, which adds a Joliet filesystem and makes it suitable for reading in a tray-loading CD drive. However, if you want to get images off the disc before it's finalized, you'd better be running Windows 98 or 2000 (god help you if you're running WinME - camera drivers are the least of your worries). Drivers DO NOT EXIST for Windows XP, OSX, or any flavor of Linux. I've heard people claim that the Win2K drivers work under XP, but I've heard others refute that claim. If anyone out there knows of any way to access those unfinalized discs under Linux or OSX, I'd LOVE to eat some crow on this issue.
Point is, the only situation I've run into in which finding camera drivers is really an issue is equally a problem for Linux, OSX, and Windows XP. If you bought a camera which doesn't act as a USB storage device, I have to question your sanity. In any remotely current camera, you can at the very least remove the media and put it in a reader which will work equally well (or equally poorly) under Windows XP, OSX, or Linux. I realize that you wanted to point out how much better it is to use Windows so that you can use a digital camera, but I think the facts contradict your position.
Dammit, where's my "-1, Whoosh!" mod? See, that was called sarcasm... there was this guy who was proposing a poll, see... and he said that we'd have a lot of Mac and Linux fanboys boasting about their systems' stability, see... and, like, he was acting like it wasn't true, and stuff...
Oh, never mind. It was sarcasm, OK? I use Linux and OSX. I don't use Windows. Why don't you go inform my parent poster? You _did_ read the parent post, to see what I was responding to - right?
Which PDA are you developing a kernel for? It's not a Nino, is it? 'Cause I could sure use a good Linux install on one of those.
Thanks, A/C. I admit that I like yours better.
Mine's actually not all that appropriate anyway, since my wife is 5 months pregnant with my child.
There is no question that the laptop PS's in use today use wire that is too small to safely conduct more than a few amperes. Then again, since those power supplies aren't capable of driving more than a few amperes, there's no need to have larger conductors.
Should someone actually implement these batteries in a laptop, you can bet that a) the power supplies will be external, and b) they will be much larger and capable of delivering greater current than those in widepread usage today, and c) the conductors and connectors will be sized to accommodate the current requirements.
The overall point that the power and instantaneous current requirements of such a battery are difficult to implement within the existing laptop paradigm is true and, to an EE at least, pretty obvious. The suggestion that the conversion circuitry that will satisfy those power requirements will likely be external to the laptop is at best obvious and at worst indicative of a total lack of consideration on the part of the A/C grandparent poster.
I do lightning research today. Believe me, I know about high current. We deal in tens of kA every day.
Yeah, isn't that funny? All those Mac and Linux fanboys acting like their systems don't crash every day? I mean, come on! We all know those guys are just pretending that they don't have BSODs, just like the rest of us.
It's not as if it's possible for an operating system to be MORE stable than Windows XP, right?
Most laptops these days ALREADY use an external device to step down 120V AC power to ~12V-18V DC power. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a laptop that takes a 120V power cord directly. Part of that might be due to the fact that laptop designers have already figured out that putting the "device" within the confines of the laptop isn't such a good idea. Now, I'm sure you'll be astonished to find that others have already made this technological leap...
It's amazing what they think of these days. What next? horseless carriages?
Care to elaborate?
I've tried reading two or three different Brunner novels, and I couldn't ever come close to finishing one. I'm not sure I even got through a single chapter. This, from someone who almost CANNOT put down a novel no matter how crappy it is - I've read some of my father's dreaded 'Mack Bolan' drivel (no, he's not the author - he just reads 'em, can't imagine why), and finished the damned things without giving up. Hell, I read Clive Cussler cover to cover. Ludlum! I made it through two or three of Robert L. Forward's heavy-on-the-S-weak-on-the-F novels - folks, I read Harry
Harrison's godawful DeathWorld trilogy (tripe-ogy?) in its entirety. But I can't do that with Brunner.
It's been years and years and years since I tried, and maybe I could do it now. I'm just not interested in trying again.
So, the reason that Corporate America shouldn't use Macs is because they don't?
Macs users are 5% of computer users, and therefore no one should use Macs?
I'm sorry, but your reasons are worthless. You may have come to the correct conclusions (although I would disagree), but your methods are appalling.
Bill Brasky fathered every sonofabitch on Slashdot with a User ID greater than 198978!
thanks.
"...or I'm going to take my OS and go home"? What are they supposed to do, release drivers that they know don't work?
Sounds to me like the OBSD guys said, "the drivers we've reverse-engineered aren't very stable, and we want more documentation so that we can make them stable for our existing users (of your hardware). If you won't give us that information, or persist in pretending to misunderstand what we want, then we will be unable to produce stable drivers for your hardware and we will refuse to release a driver with the instabilities we know of. We're in a hurry because our main coding time is coming up soon, and we've been asking for this for a while."
There is nothing that requires Adaptec to provide the necessary documentation. Nor is there anything which requires the BSD guys to release a driver that they know is buggy.
What I still don't understand is *why* Adaptec persist in refusing to allow a large, talented, motivated group of programmers to write a good driver for their hardware FOR FREE. If xBSD gets a working driver, then the other BSDs, Linux, etc. won't be far behind. Adaptec needs the server market, Unices are strong in the server market, more Unix drivers for Adaptec hardware means more people buying Adaptec hardware to run on free OS's, everybody wins! Except that Adaptec (apparently) won't play nice. How is that Theo de Raadt's fault?
Of course, I'm not within the loop at Adaptec, and so I don't know why they won't release documentation when it's needed. Perhaps they have some blindingly brilliant reasons why they don't want to release the information necessary to write fully functional drivers. What I do know is that it can't be seen from the outside, looking in.
In any case, I've had my share of trouble with Adaptec RAID cards under Windows. I probably wouldn't buy another one anyway.
Your post is curious.
Parent poster is referring to the whine that a TV makes, caused by mechanical vibrations in the windings of the flyback transformer. The whine is at the line retrace frequency, or about 15 kHz. A similar noise can be found in a computer monitor if it's a CRT type, but not in an LCD or plasma.
You mentioned Johnson-Nyquist noise. Johnson noise is broadband 'white' noise, caused by random thermal motion of charges in a resistance. It can be amplified in an audio system and be reproduced by the speakers, expecially if the gainstaging is incorrect ("the TV volume is on full blast but the reciever volume is low"), but if people around you say they can't hear it - dude, they're fucking with you. White noise has the same power at all frequencies, and the only way to not hear it is to be stone deaf. They may have gotten used to it and be willing to ignore it, but that's not the same as being unable to hear a 15 kHz tone.
Now, if you hear white noise in "everything", you may in fact be nuts, or have some serious hearing issues that need to be checked out. A computer monitor with no speaker, e.g., should emit essentially ZERO amplified Johnson noise. Interestingly, a case fan or CPU fan should emit fairly 'white' noise with some relatively constant tones mixed in.
In any case, parent poster is NOT referring to Johnson noise, he is referring to flyback whine.
Oh, and you misspelled 'reciever'.