but only if we re-define what is commonly understood on LCD screens to be a 'pixel'.
My 1600x1200 laptop screen has 1600 red, 1600 green, and 1600 blue sub-pixels across.We don't call it a 4800x1200 screen, though.
So when they say it can display 16 bit color on the color LCD screen, the consumer has a right to assume that means they are using a 656 display... six bits for red, five for green, and 6 for blue (or whatever it is..). saying that you can use more pixels to get more color.. that's just bad advertising.
but it's not true. You can bend traditional glass fiber well beyond the point where all refraction is lost and your signal vanishes.. well before it snaps.
Maybe on really old fiber.. but any sample I've seen in the last 10 years, it's been easy to bend it far enough to lose your signal without harming the fiber one bit.
the change in the electric field propagates at near the speed of light through copper. The fact that the electrons themselves flow is more of a byproduct.
actually, electron flow through copper wire in a circuit is nowhere NEAR the speed of light. I think it's more like a few feet per second... I could look it up, but I'm lazy. I know it's not any kind of high velocity though.
but it's the elctrical impulse that travels near the speed of light, not the electrons themselves.. think of six billiard balls lined up with 1mm of space between each one. You hit the first one, how long does it take for the impulse to travel? How far do the balls themselves actually move? Not related at all.
The article states that glass can be considered either a solid or a liquid.
but it is definately not a FLUID
Fluid does not mean liquid liquid does not mean fluid
Glass does not flow. A chunk of glass in a jar will not, over time, flow to fill it up evenly.
A chunk of glass in a funnel will not slowly drip out the bottom.
Window panes do NOT flow towards the bottom, making the bottom thicker. They were simply made that way becuase of the manufacturing process of the times.
Glass is not a fluid (unless you get it really hot, in which case it most certainly is a fluid)
Yeah... and you know this how? The process that creates uniform glass panes is less than a century old.
Why is it so hard to grasp. Glass does not flow unless molten. It is not some kind of vicsous fluid, like pitch. The glass pane in your old school looks the same as the day it was installed, except for maybe some scratching due to the elements.
Yes, we absolutely expect them to do that, becuase they are not selling teddy bears, they are a REGISTRY. Their ENTIRE BUSINESS is based on keeping track of which domain is registered to which person. The contract that enables them to BE in this business REQUIRES them to keep this information accurate, and update it in a timely manner. This is something they AGREED to.. and I don't mean 'agreed' the same way you 'agree' to a clickthrough.. I mean dozens of lawyers reading documtns and commenting back and forth until a final contract is ratified.
And now they are basically ignoring a key part of that contract.
It's not breaking a law. It's breaking a contract.
The agreement that ALLOWS Verisign to be a registrar requires that they provide accurate information in the whois database for all contacts. They are required to verify said information upon registration, and to correct errors promptly when they are found.
In other words, you cannot 'anonymously' register a domain.
Privacy? If you want privacy, don't go to the trouble of having your own domain, that's pretty simple. That's like saying you want to get a business license and open a shop in your town, but you don't want anyone to know where you live or who you are.. well guess what, your business license and said filings are a matter of public record, and anyone can go see them.
But when they are contacted and informed that the contact information for a domain that THEY ISSUED is not valid, then they MUST do something about it. It is their JOB to maintain that information. ie: Try to contact the domain holder, decide if the registration was fake or not, then axe the domain.
No.. it won't. It's not about using up bandwidth.. it's simply the data packets that announce other APs as present. A very small amount of traffic, actually.
So... there is no guaranteet that once your company has rolled out it's 802.11b infrastructure city wide, that something else can't interfere with it. They don't hold a license for the spectrum. My cordless phone can smash it, and they can't do anything about it. Other can set it up as well.
You forget that, due to the nature of Apple's solid APIs and the fact that OSX is BSD based...
All the developers will have to do little more than re-target and recompile. Very little work involved, relatively speaking.
Why would a Carbon app need to be significantly modified to compile on an x86? Does an app for Solaris SPARC need heavy modification to run on Solaris X86? No, it doens't, it needs, well, no modification whatsoever, it just compiles.
Same thing here.
Yes, they would need a new emulator for classic apps.. but many of these already exist for x86, they could probably purchase code if they don't want to do it themselves. it would be no harder than writing one for PPC. PPC and 68K do not have any kind of inherent compatability.
The cool part of the experiment is when you start sending that light 1 photon at a time, so we can demonstrate that individual particles are being sent. The diffraction pattern STILL appears... so we end up with a particle interfering with itself.
Now, as people view light as some kind of weird beast.. the experiment is even more exotic when done with an electron beam. Done with single electrons, which we REALLY think of as particles, we still get the diffraction pattern. That's where things get really weird.
But that one link from slashdot, though it will have more weight than many other links out there, is not enough to drive it to the top of google, it still requires volume. I bet if tons of chat sites mentioned it, it would shoot to the top for that reason.. but then, wait, if tons of popular sites are linking to it, there must be a reason.
How do you think those 'channels' are used? You think your TCP session is limited to a single DS0 because your ISP has a T1? That would mean only 64Kbps per TCP session. I'm not sure what you mean though.. I'm fairly certain that's not what you meant.
Routers use a T1, usually, as a single channel. The fact that's it's channelized is irrelevant, all channels are used equally in round-robin fashion, usually. The T1 appears as a single point-to-point interface on the router.
Oh, of course, it doesn't HAVE to, and you could be using a channelized T1 as aseveral fractional connections to different locations.. but that's another story.
The insinuation was that TCP cannot make full (or mostly full) use of the bandwidth available to it, and that multiple connections are required in order to get full utilisation. This is not true.
Maybe for you it can be easily achieved, but it is not normal. nor is staying up for 20 hours straight. 8 hours of sleep per day is the natural average, and basically the rule. if your cumulative sleep average dips below 8 hours a day, your body WILL make up the difference with added sleep later on. Sleep debt is very real, and can be tracked even over long periods of time. Even drugs don't help. Stay up for a few days on speed, you WILL get extra sleep until you catch up.
Now.. I'm not saying that there is no such thing as long, long productive binges.. when you get into "the zone" and just go and go and go, and only stop when your body literally cannot keep going (ie: low blood sugar, can't keep eyes open, etc). And as much as everyone THINKS this is what programmign is about.. it's not.
The thing about lack of natural light causing a 26 hour day or whatever it was came form a sleep experiment 30 years ago or so where they set up a test group in a deep cave, where there was no possible trace of day/night cycles. They did observe that people seemed to be on a 25 hour cycle.. but it was determined this was due to the artificial lighting being on a weird cycle. It's not normal or healthy. One could also argue that how we would behave without the sun is a useless argument, we have millions of years of evolution behind us with the sun there.. it was there before us, and will be there after we are gone. our day and night cycles are completely based on the way the earth works.. not some alien like weird timescale.
It's funny you should mention emergency physicians.. they are one group that DOES do this, I think rather frequently. They will often work 24 hour shifts, catching a nap if things slow down. Unfortunate but true.
Also, you are in College. This is not a permanent situation, and you are most likely still quite young, and your body can heal and deal with less sleep easier than it will be able to a few years form now. I'm saying you might change your mind about rediculous working hours when you are trying to live a normal life 10 years from now.
Comparing sound doesn't really help though.. that's a totally differnet thing. Totally different kind of wave in a totally different medium.. does the same thing even apply?
Slashdot Mirror
but only if we re-define what is commonly understood on LCD screens to be a 'pixel'.
My 1600x1200 laptop screen has 1600 red, 1600 green, and 1600 blue sub-pixels across.We don't call it a 4800x1200 screen, though.
So when they say it can display 16 bit color on the color LCD screen, the consumer has a right to assume that means they are using a 656 display... six bits for red, five for green, and 6 for blue (or whatever it is..). saying that you can use more pixels to get more color.. that's just bad advertising.
It doesn't even display the 50,000 color number the claim.. it is 12 bit color.
They claim that by 'color mixing' you can get more colors..
but it's not true. You can bend traditional glass fiber well beyond the point where all refraction is lost and your signal vanishes.. well before it snaps.
Maybe on really old fiber.. but any sample I've seen in the last 10 years, it's been easy to bend it far enough to lose your signal without harming the fiber one bit.
one tenth? More like nine tenths.
Communication over copper is near lightspeed.
He said electrical impulses. And he's right.
the change in the electric field propagates at near the speed of light through copper. The fact that the electrons themselves flow is more of a byproduct.
actually, electron flow through copper wire in a circuit is nowhere NEAR the speed of light. I think it's more like a few feet per second... I could look it up, but I'm lazy.
I know it's not any kind of high velocity though.
but it's the elctrical impulse that travels near the speed of light, not the electrons themselves.. think of six billiard balls lined up with 1mm of space between each one. You hit the first one, how long does it take for the impulse to travel? How far do the balls themselves actually move? Not related at all.
In Michael's defence....
The article states that glass can be considered either a solid or a liquid.
but it is definately not a FLUID
Fluid does not mean liquid
liquid does not mean fluid
Glass does not flow. A chunk of glass in a jar will not, over time, flow to fill it up evenly.
A chunk of glass in a funnel will not slowly drip out the bottom.
Window panes do NOT flow towards the bottom, making the bottom thicker. They were simply made that way becuase of the manufacturing process of the times.
Glass is not a fluid (unless you get it really hot, in which case it most certainly is a fluid)
Yeah... and you know this how?
The process that creates uniform glass panes is less than a century old.
Why is it so hard to grasp. Glass does not flow unless molten. It is not some kind of vicsous fluid, like pitch. The glass pane in your old school looks the same as the day it was installed, except for maybe some scratching due to the elements.
Yes, we absolutely expect them to do that, becuase they are not selling teddy bears, they are a REGISTRY. Their ENTIRE BUSINESS is based on keeping track of which domain is registered to which person.
The contract that enables them to BE in this business REQUIRES them to keep this information accurate, and update it in a timely manner. This is something they AGREED to.. and I don't mean 'agreed' the same way you 'agree' to a clickthrough.. I mean dozens of lawyers reading documtns and commenting back and forth until a final contract is ratified.
And now they are basically ignoring a key part of that contract.
It's not breaking a law. It's breaking a contract.
The agreement that ALLOWS Verisign to be a registrar requires that they provide accurate information in the whois database for all contacts.
They are required to verify said information upon registration, and to correct errors promptly when they are found.
In other words, you cannot 'anonymously' register a domain.
Privacy? If you want privacy, don't go to the trouble of having your own domain, that's pretty simple. That's like saying you want to get a business license and open a shop in your town, but you don't want anyone to know where you live or who you are.. well guess what, your business license and said filings are a matter of public record, and anyone can go see them.
This is not dissimilar.
No... they should not do that.
But when they are contacted and informed that the contact information for a domain that THEY ISSUED is not valid, then they MUST do something about it.
It is their JOB to maintain that information.
ie: Try to contact the domain holder, decide if the registration was fake or not, then axe the domain.
No.. it won't.
It's not about using up bandwidth.. it's simply the data packets that announce other APs as present.
A very small amount of traffic, actually.
for widespread roaming use is this...
It's in an ISM band.
So... there is no guaranteet that once your company has rolled out it's 802.11b infrastructure city wide, that something else can't interfere with it. They don't hold a license for the spectrum. My cordless phone can smash it, and they can't do anything about it. Other can set it up as well.
But it's not stealing.
Trespassing, yes.
You have not COST the movie theater a dime by sitting in an empty seat in their theater, watching a movie you didn't pay to watch.
Now, I'm not excusing it... I'm simply saying it's not the same as if you walk into wal-mart and steal six leather jackets.
The GA produced the result, just in a bizarre way. This is not uncommon.
Change, test for success, if none, change again.
If it happens to work... it works, the circuit itself has no concept of WHY.
So. if that's because there was some other, unforseen by the inventor, stimuls involved... so be it.
You forget that, due to the nature of Apple's solid APIs and the fact that OSX is BSD based...
All the developers will have to do little more than re-target and recompile. Very little work involved, relatively speaking.
Why would a Carbon app need to be significantly modified to compile on an x86? Does an app for Solaris SPARC need heavy modification to run on Solaris X86? No, it doens't, it needs, well, no modification whatsoever, it just compiles.
Same thing here.
Yes, they would need a new emulator for classic apps.. but many of these already exist for x86, they could probably purchase code if they don't want to do it themselves. it would be no harder than writing one for PPC. PPC and 68K do not have any kind of inherent compatability.
Okay
So let's see
Your 100MHZ PPC chip is faster than my 2GHZ P4 because yours is risc?
This is the #1 most common thing mac freaks say.. that it's better because it's RISC.
RISC is better as a *technology*... that doesn't mean a RISC chip is inherently better than a CISC chip.
That's like saying Diesel is better than gasoline.. so a diesel vehicle is faster.
didn't we already know this?
Apple maintains this in case they decide to switch the Mac processor to x86.
It's not so that OSX will work on your PC.
It's so that apple can build a Mac using an intel chip instead of ppc.
You forgot to mention.
The cool part of the experiment is when you start sending that light 1 photon at a time, so we can demonstrate that individual particles are being sent. The diffraction pattern STILL appears... so we end up with a particle interfering with itself.
Now, as people view light as some kind of weird beast.. the experiment is even more exotic when done with an electron beam. Done with single electrons, which we REALLY think of as particles, we still get the diffraction pattern. That's where things get really weird.
You are right, it probably can't.
But that one link from slashdot, though it will have more weight than many other links out there, is not enough to drive it to the top of google, it still requires volume.
I bet if tons of chat sites mentioned it, it would shoot to the top for that reason.. but then, wait, if tons of popular sites are linking to it, there must be a reason.
Google is quite hard to fake out.
you are.
Or at least, you are guilty of something, not sure what the charge would be.
How do you think those 'channels' are used? You think your TCP session is limited to a single DS0 because your ISP has a T1? That would mean only 64Kbps per TCP session.
I'm not sure what you mean though.. I'm fairly certain that's not what you meant.
Routers use a T1, usually, as a single channel. The fact that's it's channelized is irrelevant, all channels are used equally in round-robin fashion, usually.
The T1 appears as a single point-to-point interface on the router.
Oh, of course, it doesn't HAVE to, and you could be using a channelized T1 as aseveral fractional connections to different locations.. but that's another story.
The insinuation was that TCP cannot make full (or mostly full) use of the bandwidth available to it, and that multiple connections are required in order to get full utilisation. This is not true.
But in a dedicated connection, frame relay has no meaning or purpose.
What if I want circuit switched.. I want that perfect timing and exact data rate and latency between point A and B. Frame relay becomes pointless.
Okay. You are wrong.
Maybe for you it can be easily achieved, but it is not normal. nor is staying up for 20 hours straight.
8 hours of sleep per day is the natural average, and basically the rule. if your cumulative sleep average dips below 8 hours a day, your body WILL make up the difference with added sleep later on. Sleep debt is very real, and can be tracked even over long periods of time. Even drugs don't help. Stay up for a few days on speed, you WILL get extra sleep until you catch up.
Now.. I'm not saying that there is no such thing as long, long productive binges.. when you get into "the zone" and just go and go and go, and only stop when your body literally cannot keep going (ie: low blood sugar, can't keep eyes open, etc). And as much as everyone THINKS this is what programmign is about.. it's not.
The thing about lack of natural light causing a 26 hour day or whatever it was came form a sleep experiment 30 years ago or so where they set up a test group in a deep cave, where there was no possible trace of day/night cycles. They did observe that people seemed to be on a 25 hour cycle.. but it was determined this was due to the artificial lighting being on a weird cycle. It's not normal or healthy.
One could also argue that how we would behave without the sun is a useless argument, we have millions of years of evolution behind us with the sun there.. it was there before us, and will be there after we are gone. our day and night cycles are completely based on the way the earth works.. not some alien like weird timescale.
It's funny you should mention emergency physicians.. they are one group that DOES do this, I think rather frequently. They will often work 24 hour shifts, catching a nap if things slow down. Unfortunate but true.
Also, you are in College. This is not a permanent situation, and you are most likely still quite young, and your body can heal and deal with less sleep easier than it will be able to a few years form now. I'm saying you might change your mind about rediculous working hours when you are trying to live a normal life 10 years from now.
Comparing sound doesn't really help though.. that's a totally differnet thing. Totally different kind of wave in a totally different medium.. does the same thing even apply?