One is those plasma globes.. you know,I'm not entirely sure. There could be a small amount of plasma there.. I believe there is even.. that's what those ribbons are. They are extremely thin though.
Second.. is temperature. Temperature by itself is not a meaningful number... total heat energy is what is important.. temperature is just a measurement of 'heat density' (sort of).
In other words, if I drop a 500 degree red-hot horseshoe into your cold bathtub.. you'll still have a cold bathtub.... but if I drop a 45 degree 1 ton weight into your bathtub (so to speak) you will find a market increase in the water temperature.
The ribbons in your plasma globe may be at 50,000 degrees.. but there are so few of them that the average temperature inside the globe is still basically room temperature, which translates in to even less energy than the air in the room, as the globe contains trace amounts of gas (it's partial vacuum, rarified rare gas..)
Another point...... It is signifantly easier to bring material back to earth than it is to put it up into space.... What is out there that we could concievably use? Moon base sounds great to me.
What radiation would it need to reflect? A hydrogen plasma is basically a proton cloud... and the magnetic field would push things in the appropriate direction.
Hmm. I wonder if they put the swarming electron cloud to use as well..... like tokemak (sp?) reactor..
Reflects "heat energy" No.. it does no such thing.
It has the ability to not store heat energy at all. It doesn't like to heat up, and cools instantly. It radiates heat away as fast as it comes in. "heat energy" is not a 'thing' to be reflected.. it is just a measure of the amount of particle activity in a given closed system.
From what I saw in a documentary on plasma propulsion, if the magnetic field collapses, and the plasma comes into contact with the surrounding material, it would absolutely destroy it. Of course, that's what the TV guy said.... but it's believable. A plasma is not that thin.. plasma at densities necessary to generate the required thrust would be rather high-energy one way or the other.
You are thinking of Deep Space One, or whatever it was called.. NASA's deep space probe last year tha tused ion propulsion (different than plasma propulsion). Roughly similar in concept, but not nearly as violent. In fact, not violent at all.
And it wasn't that each particle gave thrust equal to the weight of a piece of paper, it was that the *total* thrust was that of a piece of paper... the thing is, it's extremely efficient, and considering the length of it's journey..
They are actually taking advantage of the subpixel properties of an LCD.
In an LCD, you have rgbrgbrgb... rather than saying that a pixel is 'rgb'.. a pixel can actually be any three adjacent subpixels, as the full color group will still be present. Effectively, they triple their horizontal resolution.
On an LCD screen.. there are subpixels as follows RGBRGBRGB RGBRGBRGB RGBRGBRGB
Traditionally, we treat any group of 'rgb' as a pixel, so.. to make a 'white' display, we need *any* 3 adjacent pixels.. they use this fact to effectively triple horizontal rezolution. ie: Insted of 50%r100%g50%b, on a diagonal line, the next one would be 100%g50%b50%r, etc...
It's true. It's also amazing how many don't realize that, given the current network architecture, there isn't enough core bandwidth to give everyone even 1Mbps clean...it just can't be done.
At least your provider is up-front about what your services are. I'd rather they say 'here is what you get for $x/month, and here is what it costs if you go over' rather than 'You have been busing your connection. Please refrain from abusing it by running servers or we will discontinue your service'.
What is it they are whining about? That sprint gets UUNET connections for free? Or that UUNEt gets sprint connections for free? Or that they don't? He's mad becaues he has to pay if he wants high-speed access where it doesn't exist already? He's mad because Sprint won't pay for it?
Well... the market *IS* free, and anyone *IS* free to start their own network, lay their own fiber, and sell their own bandwidth. If the big boys want to peer with each other, what's the problem? They could always just bill each other, but it would probably just cancel itself out, and they would end up spending more in paperwork than anything else...
What? no bandwidth is available in Buckwheat, Kentucky? Oh.. perhaps, then, there is MONEY TO BE MADE if someone were to finance a big, fat pipe back to civilization! Or perhaps not.. and if not, tha'ts probably why it isn't there in the first place.
Re:Streaming Television...I don't think so...
on
iCraveTV To Relaunch
·
· Score: 2
Yup. Internet users in general.
In Canada, I'd sure like to see the numbers, but I'd bet that a great many people have broadband (as you call it).
High-speed access is available in most towns and cities in Canada now, in many cases, from multiple providers.
For instance, here in Calgary..we have cable, and 2 dsl providers.. plus emerging wireless stuff...
Actually, it's mainly the old cities that have the real problems... smaller towns have had several upgrades, and newer cities like Calgary (and Vancouver, to a degree) have no problem. The infrastructure in Montreal is rather old..
Look at music as an example. Hypothetically speaking.. if music piracy (for free, not for-profit) bankrupts the music industry as it is now.. and artists can no longer make money off recording albums... then certainly, many artists will not make music anymore, and many new ones will choose different professions, as there will be no chance for them to make money. And then, society will be without the music it wants.. so what will happen? Simply... *something* will work itself out so those who want (demand) can get what they want (supply) from those who can produce the goods. IN other words..... is the music industry as it is doomed? Certainly. Is it the end of music? Not on your life.
Mainstream (In canada?) what do you mean by that? Gibson is by no means a 'mainstream' celebrity in Canada.. at least, no more than he is in the rest of north america....
Absolutely you are correct.. they *will* want this.
But.. part of the breakup will *forbid* the Apps company and the OS company from making exclusive deals like that. If the OS company want's to publish API's for the Apps company, it will be required to also publish them for *all* companies that want them. It will be forbidden to make exclusive deals or to keep information out of the hands of other developers. To put it differently, the thing that shareholders want is increase in stock value. Period. So.. if they go to a board meeting and say 'we want you and the apps company to act like a monopoly to stranglehold the market'... well.. obviously they can't do that. It will be forbidden. As an OS company, they will be obliged to maximizeprofits.. mainly, by competing against other OS, AS AN OS. And as an Apps company, they will be obliged to maximize profits, mainly, bhy competing against other app companies..
And that's a fact. THey don't have to give away source... they just have to discolse, 100%, the entire programming interface available for writing windows software. The *ENTIRE* thing.
This is analogous to knowing what the linux system calls are, as well as what the library functions of the standard libraries we use are. We do not necessarily need source to any of these components to makefull use of it.
The problem with MS is that they don't release thisinformation completely,and use that fact to their own advantage.
If we had source to Office, we would know *exactly* what it's file formats are. This is the "ip" that MS wants to protect.
So.. to the non-computer literate, they would see this as microsoft protecting it's technological advancements, and to those like us, we just see them keeping something a secret just so nobody else can work with it. There' snothing technically advanced about it at all.
It's not that we don't want them to be able to leverage their products against each other.. ie: IIS & IE, or other properietary things they want to come up with.. it's that we don't want them to be able to stranglehold the entire industry in doing so.
Whether IE stays with the OS or Apps company, I couldn't care less... my main concern is that windows splits from apps. Period. Windows should be an OS. It can provide all kinds of functions, including those for web browsing.. as long as they are published openly. I mean.. look at DOS.. it used to be that if you bought an OS, and wanted to develop for it.. you could get *ALL* the information you needed to write software for it.. that's what made the OS powerful.
rs232? pay up. v.32bis, pay up.... You don't have to pay to use them necessarily, but you may not reproduce the standards documents, and they cost $$$$$
Slashdot Mirror
Two misleading things here....
One is those plasma globes.. you know,I'm not entirely sure. There could be a small amount of plasma there.. I believe there is even.. that's what those ribbons are. They are extremely thin though.
Second.. is temperature. Temperature by itself is not a meaningful number... total heat energy is what is important.. temperature is just a measurement of 'heat density' (sort of).
In other words, if I drop a 500 degree red-hot horseshoe into your cold bathtub.. you'll still have a cold bathtub.... but if I drop a 45 degree 1 ton weight into your bathtub (so to speak) you will find a market increase in the water temperature.
The ribbons in your plasma globe may be at 50,000 degrees.. but there are so few of them that the average temperature inside the globe is still basically room temperature, which translates in to even less energy than the air in the room, as the globe contains trace amounts of gas (it's partial vacuum, rarified rare gas..)
Why would they be heated up if they are not in contact with the plasma?
Another point......
It is signifantly easier to bring material back to earth than it is to put it up into space....
What is out there that we could concievably use? Moon base sounds great to me.
What radiation would it need to reflect?
A hydrogen plasma is basically a proton cloud... and the magnetic field would push things in the appropriate direction.
Hmm. I wonder if they put the swarming electron cloud to use as well..... like tokemak (sp?) reactor..
Reflects "heat energy" No.. it does no such thing.
It has the ability to not store heat energy at all. It doesn't like to heat up, and cools instantly. It radiates heat away as fast as it comes in.
"heat energy" is not a 'thing' to be reflected.. it is just a measure of the amount of particle activity in a given closed system.
From what I saw in a documentary on plasma propulsion, if the magnetic field collapses, and the plasma comes into contact with the surrounding material, it would absolutely destroy it.
Of course, that's what the TV guy said.... but it's believable. A plasma is not that thin.. plasma at densities necessary to generate the required thrust would be rather high-energy one way or the other.
You are thinking of Deep Space One, or whatever it was called.. NASA's deep space probe last year tha tused ion propulsion (different than plasma propulsion). Roughly similar in concept, but not nearly as violent. In fact, not violent at all.
And it wasn't that each particle gave thrust equal to the weight of a piece of paper, it was that the *total* thrust was that of a piece of paper...
the thing is, it's extremely efficient, and considering the length of it's journey..
They are actually taking advantage of the subpixel properties of an LCD.
In an LCD, you have rgbrgbrgb... rather than saying that a pixel is 'rgb'.. a pixel can actually be any three adjacent subpixels, as the full color group will still be present. Effectively, they triple their horizontal resolution.
On an LCD screen.. there are subpixels as follows
RGBRGBRGB
RGBRGBRGB
RGBRGBRGB
Traditionally, we treat any group of 'rgb' as a pixel, so.. to make a 'white' display, we need *any* 3 adjacent pixels.. they use this fact to effectively triple horizontal rezolution. ie: Insted of 50%r100%g50%b, on a diagonal line, the next one would be 100%g50%b50%r, etc...
It's true. .it just can't be done.
It's also amazing how many don't realize that, given the current network architecture, there isn't enough core bandwidth to give everyone even 1Mbps clean..
At least your provider is up-front about what your services are. I'd rather they say 'here is what you get for $x/month, and here is what it costs if you go over' rather than 'You have been busing your connection. Please refrain from abusing it by running servers or we will discontinue your service'.
All these posts from people shows something about our collective mentality.
.. uh.. research? You know? Science?
Everyone seems to assume that the only use for 'submarines' are 'combat submarines'.
Sheesh. Ever heard of
That pisses you off, eh?
Know what pisses me off? Someone selling me a 2Mbps connection, and then trying to make me out like some kind of asshole for actually *using* it.
That, and people who tell me that 'internet' access = 'web' access.....
Actually.. "intranet" has come to mean a collection of web-based services within a corporate network..
What is it they are whining about? That sprint gets UUNET connections for free? Or that UUNEt gets sprint connections for free? Or that they don't? He's mad becaues he has to pay if he wants high-speed access where it doesn't exist already? He's mad because Sprint won't pay for it?
Well... the market *IS* free, and anyone *IS* free to start their own network, lay their own fiber, and sell their own bandwidth. If the big boys want to peer with each other, what's the problem? They could always just bill each other, but it would probably just cancel itself out, and they would end up spending more in paperwork than anything else...
What? no bandwidth is available in Buckwheat, Kentucky? Oh.. perhaps, then, there is MONEY TO BE MADE if someone were to finance a big, fat pipe back to civilization! Or perhaps not.. and if not, tha'ts probably why it isn't there in the first place.
Yup. Internet users in general.
In Canada, I'd sure like to see the numbers, but I'd bet that a great many people have broadband (as you call it).
High-speed access is available in most towns and cities in Canada now, in many cases, from multiple providers.
For instance, here in Calgary..we have cable, and 2 dsl providers.. plus emerging wireless stuff...
So? we're talking about canadian second-level domains here....
Perhaps, so they can get your credit card information, and hence, know what country you live in?
Actually, it's mainly the old cities that have the real problems... smaller towns have had several upgrades, and newer cities like Calgary (and Vancouver, to a degree) have no problem.
The infrastructure in Montreal is rather old..
Look at music as an example.
Hypothetically speaking..
if music piracy (for free, not for-profit) bankrupts the music industry as it is now.. and artists can no longer make money off recording albums... then certainly, many artists will not make music anymore, and many new ones will choose different professions, as there will be no chance for them to make money. And then, society will be without the music it wants.. so what will happen?
Simply... *something* will work itself out so those who want (demand) can get what they want (supply) from those who can produce the goods. IN other words.....
is the music industry as it is doomed? Certainly.
Is it the end of music? Not on your life.
Mainstream (In canada?) what do you mean by that?
Gibson is by no means a 'mainstream' celebrity in Canada.. at least, no more than he is in the rest of north america....
Absolutely you are correct.. they *will* want this.
But.. part of the breakup will *forbid* the Apps company and the OS company from making exclusive deals like that. If the OS company want's to publish API's for the Apps company, it will be required to also publish them for *all* companies that want them. It will be forbidden to make exclusive deals or to keep information out of the hands of other developers.
To put it differently, the thing that shareholders want is increase in stock value. Period. So.. if they go to a board meeting and say 'we want you and the apps company to act like a monopoly to stranglehold the market'... well.. obviously they can't do that. It will be forbidden.
As an OS company, they will be obliged to maximizeprofits.. mainly, by competing against other OS, AS AN OS.
And as an Apps company, they will be obliged to maximize profits, mainly, bhy competing against other app companies..
And that's a fact. THey don't have to give away source...
they just have to discolse, 100%, the entire programming interface available for writing windows software. The *ENTIRE* thing.
This is analogous to knowing what the linux system calls are, as well as what the library functions of the standard libraries we use are. We do not necessarily need source to any of these components to makefull use of it.
The problem with MS is that they don't release thisinformation completely,and use that fact to their own advantage.
It's so simple when you get to the heart of it.
If we had source to Office, we would know *exactly* what it's file formats are. This is the "ip" that MS wants to protect.
So.. to the non-computer literate, they would see this as microsoft protecting it's technological advancements, and to those like us, we just see them keeping something a secret just so nobody else can work with it. There' snothing technically advanced about it at all.
It's not that we don't want them to be able to leverage their products against each other.. ie:
IIS & IE, or other properietary things they want to come up with.. it's that we don't want them to be able to stranglehold the entire industry in doing so.
Whether IE stays with the OS or Apps company, I couldn't care less... my main concern is that windows splits from apps. Period. Windows should be an OS. It can provide all kinds of functions, including those for web browsing.. as long as they are published openly.
I mean.. look at DOS.. it used to be that if you bought an OS, and wanted to develop for it.. you could get *ALL* the information you needed to write software for it.. that's what made the OS powerful.
Uhh.. that's how MOST ansi standards work.
802.3? Pay up. 802.11? pay up.
rs232? pay up. v.32bis, pay up....
You don't have to pay to use them necessarily, but you may not reproduce the standards documents, and they cost $$$$$