During the reversal, there will be some magnetic fields left, but will be more random and spiratic than usual. Your compass will still point somewhere... but that won't have any correlation to where north is.
Given theorem: Because a single photon can produce mutliple illuminations on a surface (when run through a double/quad slit experiment), we must be experiencing photons from a parallel universe and there would be some deterministic problems (but that's if we model the universe by determinism... if not then ok).
Problems: 1) Article neither explains nor gives reference to how they are certian a single photon is emitted and sent through a slit.
2) If there actually were parallel universes that somehow effected our universe by creating multiple slits of light on the refractive surface from a single photon, that would mean that we could visually see the effects of this other universe.
3) But, if WE were to see the extra photons one of two possible situations arrise.
a) Either the other universes would have to loose X number of photons or else the results would be random - See: Hume -... in some instances we get lots of light, in others none at all. Since our results are consistent that we DO get multiple photons, this should be ruled out.
b) But, I would imagine that each parallel universe would get the same result (see above), so that must mean mutiple photons are being produced from a single photon in every parallel universe. This, of course, can't happen... if it could, we just discovered free energy! But if we were to suck photons out from other universes that weren't doing the experiment at the same time, we could, in theory, totally destroy the other universes by sucking all the energy out of them... or creating large voids that suck in energy (black holes? no...).
Thus, since it is impossible for this experiment to work with multiple universes (abiding by current laws of physics and conservation of energy), their conclusion is bull hucky.
Actually, I thought that higher RPMs were more efficient. I run my car all the way up to 5k (98 Escort ZX2) and get +30mph. I tried runnin it more "consertively" for a while, and I thought I was getting worse mpg.
Then again, it all depends on the engine, type of gas, etc. So...... whatever.
I patented making MP3s full of shit noise and then naming them after known works of music? Couldn't the artists sue them for slander against their music? If I took a chior of mentally handicaped people, recorded some of their music, and distributed it as "Backstreet Boys - Every body now" (or whatever they name their stuff)... someone could take offense to that and probably take it to court.
The big problem is getting computer literate people behind the keyboard. Since we have joe-idiot running his home PC, you won't get the desktop market... the easier-to-use Windows software will dominate.
Servers, on the other hand, should be linux's play ground.
I'm gonna patent something that reacts differently to how the user uses it!
I mean... this isn't even unique. Could this effect hardware? You can make circuits that only turn on after the user has held down a button for so long (like restarting your computer by holding down the power button).
If that goes through, I'm gonna shit my pants (or should i say patents? har har, pun).
the first time it requires you to grant permission
There are multiple things that require you to "grant permission." Downlading a certificate to use HTTPS is one of them.
Now you're refuting that by saying a "notice doesn't mean a plugin is being installed."
First, I never stated such a thing, but I agree with that anyway simply because a general "notice" as you are saying it is not limited to the installation of a plugin. Who's twising around what now? From your wording and confusion I find it hard to believe that you know what you're doing or agreeing to anyway. Although Ad Hominems are usually a fallacy, it is justified in this case since we are going only on your word and not physical proof presented by you.
Again, I told you where to look to find the plugin. Did you find one? I didn't, and I tried it in IE 6 and Netscape 7. If you do find one, but sure to get the details about it and not just say "yea! it's there! i swear!" like a little 14 year old trying to prove himself right, but keeps throwing out misinformation and making himself look stupid.
You argue that I twist around words, but in that very argument you twist around mine. Good job.
Again, there is no download. Find the folder for your browser that stores all the downloaded plugins. First you will notice there is none for AOL, but delete them anyway, then go to the AOL mail website. Login, check some mail, then check the plugin folder again. There is no downloaded plugin.
The "permission" you might be granting is for a certificate since it does use https for a second. Even from what you said it doesn't sound like you downloaded a plugin. It's not even a matter of having javascript enabled since it tells you that you need it enabled (along with cookies).
You obviously don't use AOL (since you said yourself you are not signed up), so you don't have any experience with the aolmail.aol.com feature. So, since you can't log on, I guess you won't be able to see the lack of plugins that it uses. Like I said, view the source anywhere at any stage and you won't see an object, plugin, embedded, whatever tag anywhere.
To end the dispute, if you had the chance to actually log on and check some e-mail using it, view the source. You will find no plugin anywhere, just a lot of good javascript.
And no, there has never been a time in the past 2+ years i've used the webmail feature that I ever had to download a plugin. I would know if there was one trying to be installed.
I've checked my aol mail/spam via website for going on 2 years. In order for you to download a plugin for your browser (unless you use a shitty one with no security), a nice little popup will come up asking if you accept the security certificate from a given company/group or you want to install a plugin, etc. No such thing happens.
No, it's not a recent change, and the computers that I use (work, school, home, etc) have very good security.
Mars rover Opportunity has found a rock (nicknamed 'Bounce') that "provides conclusive evidence not only of Martian meteorites on Earth, but also of the possibility of cross-seeding.
This may be redundant, but find all the evidence you want of cross seeding and you still have the question as to where that life came from and how it was created.
Chicken or egg, you still have to wonder what the hell was before that.
non-linear systems
on
A New Ice Age?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Note that this theory depends on melting ice, not growing ice, which may be one reason scientists find the ice age scenario so hard to swallow.
Because our climate is probably not bound by a purely linear occurrence of events. It is full of rebounds, snap-backs, and whatever else you want to call it... like oscillations.
Just because the melting of the caps is the result of global warming doesn't mean that doing so will not trigger a rebound, causing more of the northern hemisphere to freeze. Just like freezing the caps and lowering the sea level will (theoretically) uncover methane deposits in the soil, releasing greenhouse gasses and thus warming the planet again. So stopping the nice current bring warm water up to northern Europe will cool it down, allowing more ice caps to form. Sure, one they're formed the currents might start up again and warm up Europe, but like I said, it works in oscillations.
What really surprises me is why so many people have a hard time swallowing this. Even looking back at the history of Earth's climate shows numerous ice ages and warm periods. CO2 levels have done the same as well.
Some people just need to think a little bit longer down the line. Or maybe they disregard the claims so they don't loose grant money? Not flaming, just a warranted curiosity...
The force supplying the unexplained extra power out is generated by the magnetic strength of the permanent magnets embedded in the rotor.
Wow!! He used the exact same principle as electric motors!!
Seriously people... take some physics 101 class and learn a tincy bit about electromagnetism before you go all ape over some guy designing a better motor.
GeForce 6800 Ultra is the new king of the hill, beating ATI's fastest by over 100% in almost every benchmark.
That would mean the 6800 doubled the 9800's performance in each benchmark... Not true...
For UT2004, it only beat it by 20fps on average. And that's still in the 80+fps range.
Sure it doubled some benchmark ratings here and there, but that's not nearly "almost every benchmark." Doesn't anyone moderate how people post the story?
I have my own running on my OpenBSD firewall. Does DNS for my LAN and is the DNS for my website.
You control your own DNS, you can control all the sub-domains for free, manage them however and whenever you want, and I think the lag time is smaller from when you make the change and when it actually works (probably not, but you could tell your boss that... time is money, afterall.... right?)
The only problem I can see is getting someone to manage the 150+ domains. But if you current staff is capable, then I say go for it. More power to ya...
Slashdot Mirror
Biometric ID Cards Trialled in Glasgow
Trialled? Try "tried".
spelnig dosent mater. yuo giet the poiant across anywey.
People get too into language and proper spelling. It's all arbitrary anyway.
During the reversal, there will be some magnetic fields left, but will be more random and spiratic than usual. Your compass will still point somewhere... but that won't have any correlation to where north is.
Given theorem: Because a single photon can produce mutliple illuminations on a surface (when run through a double/quad slit experiment), we must be experiencing photons from a parallel universe and there would be some deterministic problems (but that's if we model the universe by determinism... if not then ok).
... in some instances we get lots of light, in others none at all. Since our results are consistent that we DO get multiple photons, this should be ruled out.
Problems: 1) Article neither explains nor gives reference to how they are certian a single photon is emitted and sent through a slit.
2) If there actually were parallel universes that somehow effected our universe by creating multiple slits of light on the refractive surface from a single photon, that would mean that we could visually see the effects of this other universe.
3) But, if WE were to see the extra photons one of two possible situations arrise.
a) Either the other universes would have to loose X number of photons or else the results would be random - See: Hume -
b) But, I would imagine that each parallel universe would get the same result (see above), so that must mean mutiple photons are being produced from a single photon in every parallel universe. This, of course, can't happen... if it could, we just discovered free energy! But if we were to suck photons out from other universes that weren't doing the experiment at the same time, we could, in theory, totally destroy the other universes by sucking all the energy out of them... or creating large voids that suck in energy (black holes? no...).
Thus, since it is impossible for this experiment to work with multiple universes (abiding by current laws of physics and conservation of energy), their conclusion is bull hucky.
Actually, I thought that higher RPMs were more efficient. I run my car all the way up to 5k (98 Escort ZX2) and get +30mph. I tried runnin it more "consertively" for a while, and I thought I was getting worse mpg.
Then again, it all depends on the engine, type of gas, etc. So...... whatever.
"Mmmm.... hhaammm..."
My faith in the patent system decreses yet again.
I patented making MP3s full of shit noise and then naming them after known works of music? Couldn't the artists sue them for slander against their music? If I took a chior of mentally handicaped people, recorded some of their music, and distributed it as "Backstreet Boys - Every body now" (or whatever they name their stuff)... someone could take offense to that and probably take it to court.
What's the power usage?
I'm an ATI fan... but how many X's are they gonna put in their names?
... x0r.
Soon ATI will become ATIX with their flagship card being the XX8X XT Pr0
Well... as long as they run fast...
From my openBSD machine:
% uptime
8:54AM up 2859 days, 1:15, 1 user, load averages: 0.22, 0.12, 0.09
Anyone can BS that...
The big problem is getting computer literate people behind the keyboard. Since we have joe-idiot running his home PC, you won't get the desktop market... the easier-to-use Windows software will dominate.
Servers, on the other hand, should be linux's play ground.
I'm gonna patent something that reacts differently to how the user uses it!
I mean... this isn't even unique. Could this effect hardware? You can make circuits that only turn on after the user has held down a button for so long (like restarting your computer by holding down the power button).
If that goes through, I'm gonna shit my pants (or should i say patents? har har, pun).
Lets try to end your confusion:
I replied by saying, yes, you do see a notice.
No, you replied by saying this:
the first time it requires you to grant permission
There are multiple things that require you to "grant permission." Downlading a certificate to use HTTPS is one of them.
Now you're refuting that by saying a "notice doesn't mean a plugin is being installed."
First, I never stated such a thing, but I agree with that anyway simply because a general "notice" as you are saying it is not limited to the installation of a plugin. Who's twising around what now? From your wording and confusion I find it hard to believe that you know what you're doing or agreeing to anyway. Although Ad Hominems are usually a fallacy, it is justified in this case since we are going only on your word and not physical proof presented by you.
Again, I told you where to look to find the plugin. Did you find one? I didn't, and I tried it in IE 6 and Netscape 7. If you do find one, but sure to get the details about it and not just say "yea! it's there! i swear!" like a little 14 year old trying to prove himself right, but keeps throwing out misinformation and making himself look stupid.
You argue that I twist around words, but in that very argument you twist around mine. Good job.
Again, there is no download. Find the folder for your browser that stores all the downloaded plugins. First you will notice there is none for AOL, but delete them anyway, then go to the AOL mail website. Login, check some mail, then check the plugin folder again. There is no downloaded plugin.
The "permission" you might be granting is for a certificate since it does use https for a second. Even from what you said it doesn't sound like you downloaded a plugin. It's not even a matter of having javascript enabled since it tells you that you need it enabled (along with cookies).
You obviously don't use AOL (since you said yourself you are not signed up), so you don't have any experience with the aolmail.aol.com feature. So, since you can't log on, I guess you won't be able to see the lack of plugins that it uses. Like I said, view the source anywhere at any stage and you won't see an object, plugin, embedded, whatever tag anywhere.
There is no more proof that needs to be offered.
To end the dispute, if you had the chance to actually log on and check some e-mail using it, view the source. You will find no plugin anywhere, just a lot of good javascript.
And no, there has never been a time in the past 2+ years i've used the webmail feature that I ever had to download a plugin. I would know if there was one trying to be installed.
I've checked my aol mail/spam via website for going on 2 years. In order for you to download a plugin for your browser (unless you use a shitty one with no security), a nice little popup will come up asking if you accept the security certificate from a given company/group or you want to install a plugin, etc. No such thing happens.
No, it's not a recent change, and the computers that I use (work, school, home, etc) have very good security.
Shit, get a clue.
Oh yeah! And all you have to do to use it is download and install a massive browser plugin. Good luck doing that on a public computer.
You don't have to download any plugin. I check it from public computers all the time.
Shit, do some homework.
...AOL's e-mail service, long accessible only via AOL's proprietary, monolithic app...
AOL Mail has been available online via HTTP for quite some time.
Now the candyman is the ultimate hacker. Able to get 70% of all passwords with ease!
Mars rover Opportunity has found a rock (nicknamed 'Bounce') that "provides conclusive evidence not only of Martian meteorites on Earth, but also of the possibility of cross-seeding.
This may be redundant, but find all the evidence you want of cross seeding and you still have the question as to where that life came from and how it was created.
Chicken or egg, you still have to wonder what the hell was before that.
Note that this theory depends on melting ice, not growing ice, which may be one reason scientists find the ice age scenario so hard to swallow.
Because our climate is probably not bound by a purely linear occurrence of events. It is full of rebounds, snap-backs, and whatever else you want to call it... like oscillations.
Just because the melting of the caps is the result of global warming doesn't mean that doing so will not trigger a rebound, causing more of the northern hemisphere to freeze. Just like freezing the caps and lowering the sea level will (theoretically) uncover methane deposits in the soil, releasing greenhouse gasses and thus warming the planet again. So stopping the nice current bring warm water up to northern Europe will cool it down, allowing more ice caps to form. Sure, one they're formed the currents might start up again and warm up Europe, but like I said, it works in oscillations.
What really surprises me is why so many people have a hard time swallowing this. Even looking back at the history of Earth's climate shows numerous ice ages and warm periods. CO2 levels have done the same as well.
Some people just need to think a little bit longer down the line. Or maybe they disregard the claims so they don't loose grant money? Not flaming, just a warranted curiosity...
The force supplying the unexplained extra power out is generated by the magnetic strength of the permanent magnets embedded in the rotor.
Wow!! He used the exact same principle as electric motors!!
Seriously people... take some physics 101 class and learn a tincy bit about electromagnetism before you go all ape over some guy designing a better motor.
GeForce 6800 Ultra is the new king of the hill, beating ATI's fastest by over 100% in almost every benchmark.
That would mean the 6800 doubled the 9800's performance in each benchmark... Not true...
For UT2004, it only beat it by 20fps on average. And that's still in the 80+fps range.
Sure it doubled some benchmark ratings here and there, but that's not nearly "almost every benchmark." Doesn't anyone moderate how people post the story?
I have my own running on my OpenBSD firewall. Does DNS for my LAN and is the DNS for my website.
You control your own DNS, you can control all the sub-domains for free, manage them however and whenever you want, and I think the lag time is smaller from when you make the change and when it actually works (probably not, but you could tell your boss that... time is money, afterall.... right?)
The only problem I can see is getting someone to manage the 150+ domains. But if you current staff is capable, then I say go for it. More power to ya...
There's a rather large difference between having a set of programmer's manuals and having the transistor-level blurprints of the logic implementation.
And if you did have the transistor level blueprints of the logic implementation, what exactly would you be reverse engineering?