How about adding bluetooth to any portable MP3 players? They already are mostly comprised of storage. If you add bluetooth, you have all the storage space you need until you get back to your PC.
This would be really nice for collaborative games so you can share your viewpoint with teammates. I think the US army has something similar where their tanks all pass back the info they collect to the platoon leader; turns out that the platoon leaders make much better decissions when the info they have access to is better.
HDTV has greater rendering needs than PAL or NTSC. 1040 lines * 30 fps is a little over 30 kHz.
Also, having the ability to render faster means that you can do it faster than real-time. If you are working to a deadline in a TV news studio, that might be a real advantage (think late-breaking news where a story has to be put together during a comercial break).
For me, the biggest part of the equation is automating the capture and compression parts. Burning a VCD should be a simple operation, but would have to be manual if the source is too large to fit on a single CD. I have the tools to do it right now (barring lockups due to Win98 drivers), but not the time to do every step manually.
I've been looking for some software that will let me batch capture home movies with my ATI All-in-Wonder card from my NTSC camcorder, compress them, and automatically put them on VCD via scripting.
Can you do something similar with the setup you described? To be honest, I haven't tried Linux on my current desktop; I've been putting it off until I could find a setup that works well.
When I do, I'll buy bigger harddrive and maybe even a new PC (I'm running a Compaq PIII 450) so I can archive a whole tape all in one shot. Ideally, I would hook up the camera, boot up my PC, pop in a blank CD, start the program, press play, go do something else for a while, come back in x hours and have a fresh VCD waiting for me.
In Word 2000, Tools->Options, Save tab, you can select the default format and choose to not use new features that break old version.
I don't have any newer versions of Word; do the newer versions have this same option? If so, this really isn't a problem. Even if a user doesn't know how to change the settings (or is too afraid to "mess with it", MIS can set up the PCs to do this via a startup script or when installing the corporate software package.
I'm not a fan of many of M$'s policies and technical snafus, but they have done a good enough job to rise to the top of the heap and hang on. If that wasn't the case, we'd be bashing IBM or somebody else right now for taking advantage of the semi-computer-literate masses.
Maybe the region of the universe that is visable to us has a non-constant velocity (e.g. it could be orbiting a non-visable portion of the universe that is far away but has a very large mass).
Imagine a large spacecraft traveling with a positive, but constant, velocity that was rotating in a vector orthogonal to its direction of travel. Two experiments that measure the speed of light to a high degree of accuracy are performed onboard the spacecraft; one at some distance away from the axis of rotation of the spacecraft and the other on the axis of rotation. Two observers that are very sensitive to red and blue shifts in light (due to the Doppler effect) are also on board, one by each experiment.
One observer, Alice, travels in the same portion of the spacecraft as the equipment and at the same velocity as the equipment, thus having zero velocity in the frame of reference of the equipment. However, due to rotation about the axis of the spacecraft, her (and the experiment's) frame of reference experiences time in a non-linear fashion (due to their non-constant speed with respect to the absolute frame of reference). Note that the speed of light measured in the experiment (relative to the Alice's frame of reference) changes depending on her instantaneous absolute velocity (and speed). Also note that Alice would not observe a blue or red shift in the equipment, since she has the same frame of reference as the experment and experiences time at the same rate.
The other observer, Bob, is positioned on the axis of rotation of the spacecraft and has the same frame of reference as the spacecraft. If Bob runs the same experiment as Alice, but the equipment is set up at on the axis of rotation of the spacecraft, Bob would measure the same value for the speed of light in his experiment as long as the velocity of the spacecraft remained constant. Bob would alternately observe red shifts and blue shifts when viewing Alice and her experiment. Likewise, Alice would alternately see blue and red shifts when viewing Bob and his experiment.
The red and blue shifts are due to relativity and the Doppler effect. Since their absolute velocities are changing, the light gets "bunched up" or "spread out" when leaving from an object in motion, depending on whether it is emitted from the side of the object that is in the direction of its absolute motion. When Alice's absolute velocity has a component that is the same as the velocity of the spacecraft, the light she is emitting toward's Bob is "bunched", or blue shifted. When here absolute velocity has a component that is the oposite as the velocity of the spacecraft, light she emits toward Bob is "spread out", or red shifted.
I propose that we are in the same situation as Alice the observer, that is, traveling at the same rate as the experiment setup. Our visible portion of the universe corresponds to Alice and her experiment and has a similar frame of reference. The axis of rotation of the spacecraft corresponds to an axis of rotation in our universe that is beyond our visible universe. Since we can't determine the absolute velocity of anything within our field of view, there is no way to determine whether our rate of experiencing time is constant relative to the absolute frame of reference of the universe.
The absolute frame of reference of the universe would be the frame of reference that has the maximum speed of light. Since models of the universe that have a big bang event nicely condense all matter into a small area, it is easy to imagine a point in the absolute frame of reverence--one that has all the matter with zero velocity. In that frame of reference, the speed of light as emmitted and measured within that frame of reference would be the maximum out of all possible frame of references that have light being emitted and measured.
since our current point of view of the universe is infinitesimaly small compared to the size of the universe, the universe COULD have almost infinite mass and be in a small bubble and we would never know. Sortof like an equation could have inputs that make it go to infinity, but it might have higher-order derivatives that do not.
Walking battle platforms need close-quarter arms, in addition to the mid-range and long range armements that they have been depicted with in existing movies/games. Flaws that easily restrict movement have been available as a plot forwarding device to give the little guy a chance to stand up to the behemoth. In Star Wars, entanglement devices were used. In the original Mech Warrior, if the smallest mechs could get in close enough, the main armements of the giants couldn't aim low enough to hit them.
If the walkers in Star Wars were equipped with close weapons, they would have a) been able to dispatch the Ewoks/rebels that cast the nets or set the triplines and b) been able to destroy the entaglement device. In Mech Warrior, close quarter armements would have been able to hit mechs that were below the range of the main weapons, eliminating the "save zone"
A real-world waling weapons platform would be able to use a rapid-fire projectile weapon to the same effect. Small belly-mounted turrets would be able to fill this niche.
This is for an 8051 8 bit processor. When you talk about cheap when manufacturing toasters and microwaves, $1 is a lot (multiply by hundreds of thousands or even millions of toasters and microwaves). In the automotive world, $.50 difference in parts is enough to justify a years worth of engineering. Many consumer products have similar volumes and price points.
Would/do you recommend open source tools to others in your field? If not, what is holding you back? If you are already an advocate, have you convinced anyone to switch? Who?
The only US team who participated this year scored 69th, with 1136mpg (483km with 1l).
As a European, why doesn't that surprise me?
As an American, why should it? Statistically, we were right in the middle of the curve with our one entry. There were 114 other teams in the competition, most from France (who also came in last).
Did you mean to infer that Europeans are good at statistics?
According to the article, the load is the crucible. It has a lining that includes graphite and magnetite, both of which act as a load. The article states that the graphite heats up the magnetite to a sufficient degree to cause it to act as a load. However, the magnetite seems to stop functioning in this capacity above 900 C (I presume this is when the magnetite melts; I don't know what the load would be then).
1. We don't have a memory chip; we use a microcontroller with no external bus. And even if you do manage to bypass security, all you'll end up with is assembly code. Have you every tried to decypher 50K+ of assembly?
2. I would wager that most bugs found in Microsoft code are found by studying APIs or by running debuggers on the code to find buffer overflows and the like. Automotive computers don't run outside programs.
3. If we did GPL the code, it would be hard to prove that another company was using it. As it is, automotive companies heavily use patent laws and trade secrets to protect their IP from their competitors. Granted, an individual may come up with something better, but how do you convice a manager that this is more likely than losing IP to your competitor?
The software that my company puts in its products for the OEM is given to them for "free". I've approached my managers about opening up the source code, but they are fearful that it could give our competitors an advantage over them and open them up for lawsuits if a bug was found.
You could have it be a "dumb" device. It could communicate with the actual device a la Blue tooth and just act as a speaker and microphone.
Benefits to using it as a dumb device would include allowing audio communication with any device that communicates in that protocol (laptops, PDAs, cell phones, pagers, portable audio devices, or even cordless adapters to work with an existing device that has an existing stereo headphone or line-in/out jack.
While the article is low on details, I would guess that it would be possible to implant multiple devices that are tuned to the user's individul characteristics to provide high fidelity, stereo sound.
I hesitate at using any previously mentioned technology implanted in your body other than for medical reasons, but this sounds really cool. Depending on price (and the results of safety studies), I would sign up for this one.
We did and only pay interest to boot. But the only way we could get by with this was posting some mutual funds as collateral. The only problem was that we had to post more collateral when the stock market crashed.
Although I do not condone killing the (willfully) ignorant, I understand the motivation for killing abortion abortion clinic personal as "killing the killers".
At what point does a human embryo become a person with rights (legal and otherwise)? Keep in mind that:
1. Abortion is legal up until birth,
2. Neo-natal care has enabled children born at 25 weeks to survive,
3. Many legal cases exist that charge a person with attempted murder, murder or child abuse of the fetus within a pregnant woman,
4. Human babies are pretty much helpless the first few months after birth and that they show less intelligence than similarly aged animals of other species.
5. Children are the property of their parents until they are 18 or legally emancipated.
6. Some scientists have stated the goal of completely creating a human being outside the natural womb (making the term "birth" unapplicable)
My personal views aside, this is not a consistant set of legal positions. The abortion issue is no more solved than the slavery issues was in the late 18th and early 19th century. Cloning and other related issues will be no better.
If governments keep banning this and banning that in regards to embrionic and cloning research, all that is accomplished is the nightmare of an underground science community, "evil" doctors.
Does this mean that since slavery was pushed underground and into countries with poor human rights policies after it was outlawed in most of the world that it should have been kept legal and in the open? Should the other countries of the world give up on reducing global emissions because the US governement has pooh-poohed the issue? Enforcement issues should not be used as an excuse to ignore morality. Even if research would continues in other countries, we have the moral obligation to do what is right, regardless of what anyone else is doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like a good mod for a game with a Heretic theme.
I wouldn't consider Doom 3 as part of that set since they haven't finished making it yet.
Also, having the ability to render faster means that you can do it faster than real-time. If you are working to a deadline in a TV news studio, that might be a real advantage (think late-breaking news where a story has to be put together during a comercial break).
As unpopular as this idea might be with some people, there are some areas that would benefit from a goverment with worldwide, legitimate jurisdiction.
Both are upper body sports that require endurance to be very good at.
For me, the biggest part of the equation is automating the capture and compression parts. Burning a VCD should be a simple operation, but would have to be manual if the source is too large to fit on a single CD. I have the tools to do it right now (barring lockups due to Win98 drivers), but not the time to do every step manually.
Can you do something similar with the setup you described? To be honest, I haven't tried Linux on my current desktop; I've been putting it off until I could find a setup that works well. When I do, I'll buy bigger harddrive and maybe even a new PC (I'm running a Compaq PIII 450) so I can archive a whole tape all in one shot. Ideally, I would hook up the camera, boot up my PC, pop in a blank CD, start the program, press play, go do something else for a while, come back in x hours and have a fresh VCD waiting for me.
I don't have any newer versions of Word; do the newer versions have this same option? If so, this really isn't a problem. Even if a user doesn't know how to change the settings (or is too afraid to "mess with it", MIS can set up the PCs to do this via a startup script or when installing the corporate software package.
I'm not a fan of many of M$'s policies and technical snafus, but they have done a good enough job to rise to the top of the heap and hang on. If that wasn't the case, we'd be bashing IBM or somebody else right now for taking advantage of the semi-computer-literate masses.
Imagine a large spacecraft traveling with a positive, but constant, velocity that was rotating in a vector orthogonal to its direction of travel. Two experiments that measure the speed of light to a high degree of accuracy are performed onboard the spacecraft; one at some distance away from the axis of rotation of the spacecraft and the other on the axis of rotation. Two observers that are very sensitive to red and blue shifts in light (due to the Doppler effect) are also on board, one by each experiment.
One observer, Alice, travels in the same portion of the spacecraft as the equipment and at the same velocity as the equipment, thus having zero velocity in the frame of reference of the equipment. However, due to rotation about the axis of the spacecraft, her (and the experiment's) frame of reference experiences time in a non-linear fashion (due to their non-constant speed with respect to the absolute frame of reference). Note that the speed of light measured in the experiment (relative to the Alice's frame of reference) changes depending on her instantaneous absolute velocity (and speed). Also note that Alice would not observe a blue or red shift in the equipment, since she has the same frame of reference as the experment and experiences time at the same rate.
The other observer, Bob, is positioned on the axis of rotation of the spacecraft and has the same frame of reference as the spacecraft. If Bob runs the same experiment as Alice, but the equipment is set up at on the axis of rotation of the spacecraft, Bob would measure the same value for the speed of light in his experiment as long as the velocity of the spacecraft remained constant. Bob would alternately observe red shifts and blue shifts when viewing Alice and her experiment. Likewise, Alice would alternately see blue and red shifts when viewing Bob and his experiment.
The red and blue shifts are due to relativity and the Doppler effect. Since their absolute velocities are changing, the light gets "bunched up" or "spread out" when leaving from an object in motion, depending on whether it is emitted from the side of the object that is in the direction of its absolute motion. When Alice's absolute velocity has a component that is the same as the velocity of the spacecraft, the light she is emitting toward's Bob is "bunched", or blue shifted. When here absolute velocity has a component that is the oposite as the velocity of the spacecraft, light she emits toward Bob is "spread out", or red shifted.
I propose that we are in the same situation as Alice the observer, that is, traveling at the same rate as the experiment setup. Our visible portion of the universe corresponds to Alice and her experiment and has a similar frame of reference. The axis of rotation of the spacecraft corresponds to an axis of rotation in our universe that is beyond our visible universe. Since we can't determine the absolute velocity of anything within our field of view, there is no way to determine whether our rate of experiencing time is constant relative to the absolute frame of reference of the universe.
The absolute frame of reference of the universe would be the frame of reference that has the maximum speed of light. Since models of the universe that have a big bang event nicely condense all matter into a small area, it is easy to imagine a point in the absolute frame of reverence--one that has all the matter with zero velocity. In that frame of reference, the speed of light as emmitted and measured within that frame of reference would be the maximum out of all possible frame of references that have light being emitted and measured.
since our current point of view of the universe is infinitesimaly small compared to the size of the universe, the universe COULD have almost infinite mass and be in a small bubble and we would never know. Sortof like an equation could have inputs that make it go to infinity, but it might have higher-order derivatives that do not.
If the walkers in Star Wars were equipped with close weapons, they would have a) been able to dispatch the Ewoks/rebels that cast the nets or set the triplines and b) been able to destroy the entaglement device. In Mech Warrior, close quarter armements would have been able to hit mechs that were below the range of the main weapons, eliminating the "save zone"
A real-world waling weapons platform would be able to use a rapid-fire projectile weapon to the same effect. Small belly-mounted turrets would be able to fill this niche.
This is for an 8051 8 bit processor. When you talk about cheap when manufacturing toasters and microwaves, $1 is a lot (multiply by hundreds of thousands or even millions of toasters and microwaves). In the automotive world, $.50 difference in parts is enough to justify a years worth of engineering. Many consumer products have similar volumes and price points.
But the half life of the fuel is something like 8 DAYS, not 10,000 YEARS.
As a European, why doesn't that surprise me?
As an American, why should it? Statistically, we were right in the middle of the curve with our one entry. There were 114 other teams in the competition, most from France (who also came in last).
Did you mean to infer that Europeans are good at statistics?
Some are mean. This one pokes at a wound that hasn't healed yet.
Show some humanity.
2. I would wager that most bugs found in Microsoft code are found by studying APIs or by running debuggers on the code to find buffer overflows and the like. Automotive computers don't run outside programs.
3. If we did GPL the code, it would be hard to prove that another company was using it. As it is, automotive companies heavily use patent laws and trade secrets to protect their IP from their competitors. Granted, an individual may come up with something better, but how do you convice a manager that this is more likely than losing IP to your competitor?
The problem is if somebody finds a bug in our code. Then it IS covered by warranty or we could be hit with liabilty lawsuits (frivolous or otherwise).
Any ideas on how to answer these concerns?
Benefits to using it as a dumb device would include allowing audio communication with any device that communicates in that protocol (laptops, PDAs, cell phones, pagers, portable audio devices, or even cordless adapters to work with an existing device that has an existing stereo headphone or line-in/out jack.
While the article is low on details, I would guess that it would be possible to implant multiple devices that are tuned to the user's individul characteristics to provide high fidelity, stereo sound.
I hesitate at using any previously mentioned technology implanted in your body other than for medical reasons, but this sounds really cool. Depending on price (and the results of safety studies), I would sign up for this one.
We did and only pay interest to boot. But the only way we could get by with this was posting some mutual funds as collateral. The only problem was that we had to post more collateral when the stock market crashed.
At what point does a human embryo become a person with rights (legal and otherwise)? Keep in mind that:
1. Abortion is legal up until birth,
2. Neo-natal care has enabled children born at 25 weeks to survive,
3. Many legal cases exist that charge a person with attempted murder, murder or child abuse of the fetus within a pregnant woman,
4. Human babies are pretty much helpless the first few months after birth and that they show less intelligence than similarly aged animals of other species.
5. Children are the property of their parents until they are 18 or legally emancipated.
6. Some scientists have stated the goal of completely creating a human being outside the natural womb (making the term "birth" unapplicable)
My personal views aside, this is not a consistant set of legal positions. The abortion issue is no more solved than the slavery issues was in the late 18th and early 19th century. Cloning and other related issues will be no better.
If governments keep banning this and banning that in regards to embrionic and cloning research, all that is accomplished is the nightmare of an underground science community, "evil" doctors.
Does this mean that since slavery was pushed underground and into countries with poor human rights policies after it was outlawed in most of the world that it should have been kept legal and in the open? Should the other countries of the world give up on reducing global emissions because the US governement has pooh-poohed the issue? Enforcement issues should not be used as an excuse to ignore morality. Even if research would continues in other countries, we have the moral obligation to do what is right, regardless of what anyone else is doing.