We still have RPG code running in an emulator running on SCO. Costs us tons of money per year to maintain support for it. Hell, if we wanted to move it to Linux in an emulator, that would cost $20,000.
Any company which invests in proprietary programming lanugages must not expect to be around very long, or is happy giving a cut of the profits to other companies forever.
Re:Morse has more than two symbols
on
DNA Goes Binary
·
· Score: 1
Heh, that's how I passed the 5wpm, just made sure to copy everything after IS well enough to figure out which multiple choice fit. They've done away with multiple choice now, so it is a little more difficult. I didn't learn enough to be comfortable operating on the air, and now that it's been a few years without practice, I doubt I could even copy much of anything anymore.
I didn't know you were a ham, that's pretty cool. I signed up for the nocode.org but I won't be able to contribute right now, money is tight. I do agree that morse is an artificial barrier to entry that has little to do with "advancing radio technology".
If you get a chance, stop by #electronics or #hamradio on irc.freenode.net.
Re:Morse has more than two symbols
on
DNA Goes Binary
·
· Score: 1
As someone with a basic knowledge in CW (enough to pass the FCC test for general class at least, which isn't saying much these days), I'd say your description is kinda off.
Those rules might make valid enough code to read, but there are a lot more things going into it than that, especially at high speeds. A lot of people do farnsworth these days, especially when starting out, which means the character rates are going to be a lot higher than the overall symbol rate. Basically, very fast symbols with longish spaces inbetween. Anyone who learns at true very low speeds is just screwing themselves over later, so most people learn at a minimum 13wpm character rate with 5wpm spacing.
Serial/Parallel Bus - I suppose you want this on a seperate card too?
Don't worry, pretty soon you will have to. All the motherboard will have is like 5 USB ports and a video connector. Sound will be digital and encrypted too.
Yeah, that's what I mean. What UL tests is mostly common sense stuff. Are there any dangerous areas you can stick your fingers into? Are there adquate fuses in case of part failure? Is it easy to make a common mistake and have the thing start a fire or cut your hand off? Stuff like that. It's not particularly rigorous testing, just basic stuff to make sure no one gets hurt and your house doesn't burn down.
PS: Did you see those turkey deep fryer videos on the UL site?? Those things are insanely dangerous!
If MS buys them, the open source players will develop like never before.
It's the same reason RMS doesn't allow any closed source software at all at gnu.org. If you have an (especially $free) closed source alternative, you will be a lot less motivated to write a free software version. It works both ways.
Well, you just proved Dow's case. You were misled by the parody site, beliveing it to be an official statement of Dow Chemical. That was Dow's whole complaint in the first place.
http://www.dowethics.com/r/environment/freedom.htm l
They have that linked as "Dow's response" to the incident, apparently yet another parody site, but I was sure confused at first. I could see how someone could be misled to believe it was a real Dow site.
These guys are pushing the line a little too far I think. The site looks a whole lot like an official site.
It was a direct reply to the comment that I linked to earlier in my message.
You can quote other people that know more than you?
Huh?
You have no credentials
What an assumption.
but like to bitch about other people who have no other credtials?
Well, yeah, if they are going to blindly assume everyone with credentials is an expert at everything they do.
If you have any credentials, then you better practrice linking, referencing other articles, and pretty much everything you write
You might want to practice spelling. You seem to have trouble with it. Your sentence also made little sense. Might want to watch those sentence fragments.
You could just buy something out of the gnu store.
http://www.gnu.org/order/order.html
I always like to send this link to idiots who don't understand GNU isn't about price, their top of the line GNU utilities collection cds and manual are $5000.
You can buy some reference cards or another small thing from the store if you want to make something that is similar to a one time small donation.
Asside from the use that people get out of CB and the usless FCC restrictions, these two unlicensed freqency specturms have little in common. What do you get out of FCC regulations?
Did you think I was calling for heavier regulation of 802.11b? My comment wasn't directed at 802.11b at all. I think the level of regulation there is just fine. The original poster was questioning the very existance of the FCC.
Yeah, but what's the point of being able to recieve something you can't hit?
The way the FCC rules are written, they do reward directional gain, you only have to reduce your power 1dbmw for each 3db in gain, so it does benefit you to have as high a gain as you can get. I think these rules are very reasonable, but easily violated if you aren't careful or well versed in this sort of thing.
http://www.80211-planet.com/tutorials/print.php/ 14 28941
If the antenna gain is at least 6 dBi, the FCC allows operation up to 4 watts EIRP. This is 1 watt (the earlier limitation) plus 6 dB of gain.
For antennas having gain greater than 6 dBi, the FCC requires you to reduce the transmitter output power if the transmitter is already at the maximum of 1 watt. The reduction, however, is only 1 dB for every 3 dB of additional antenna gain beyond the 6 dBi mentioned above. This means that as antenna gain goes up, you decrease the transmitter power by a smaller amount. As a result, the FCC allows EIRP greater than 4 watts for antennas having gains higher than 6 dBi.
the web looked much more interessting and much less boring 2 to 5 years ago
Do you really remember the web 5 years ago?
Let me refresh your memory: "This site designed for Netscape" links Animated mailto link gifs of a letter going into an envelope "Under Construction" "Do you like my new high contrast background image??? It is the same color as my text!!" "Here is the current weather" Javascript popup: What is your name? Hi $name! Frames.... need I say more? Here are all the meaningless awards this site has gotten. (Slashdot is still guilty of this one!) 500K index.html with anchors instead of using multiple pages More animated gifs than characters of text No google
-- The list goes on... my point is, the web is better today than it has ever been in history. There is more information than ever, the pages are designed much more cleanly and usably, etc.
It appears inevitable that we are going to go with Creo's packages at work, which will cut Quark out of the picture. Lack of OS X support is a sticking point with Quark.
This also means we will be phasing out Quark's poorly spec'ed DCS 2.0 for PDF/X as our main press-ready format. Too bad Creo only supports Windows servers for their "workflow".
Of course, our artists are still very resistant to switch to OS X, apparently they are not comfortable with the new font management system. I can't wait until the switch personally, so we can dump all the proprietary backup-to-tape solutions and go with some simple shell scripts in a cron job.
As someone who is mostly Libertarian, I hear where you are coming from, but radio really is unique.
There is only one EM spectrum. There will always only be one. With proper management, we can get a whole lot more good out of it than without.
You propose a free market in frequencies. Well, how exactly do you quantify a frequency? HF frequencies are world wide. VHF/UHF are generally regional, but the range depends on dozens of factors.
How exactly would one make out a "deed" for a frequency? Would special civil courts need to be set up to determine the inevitable highly technical disputes? A world court for HF and lower? If so, you've only shifted the regulation, not eliminated it, and in the process, made it impossible for anyone other than the very rich to gain access.
I don't think our current system isn't too bad. There are some definite broken spots that are stifling new technology, and controlling the flow of information, but overall I think the system is working, and other than allowing some questionable mergers in the mass media markets, I think the FCC has at least tried to make some very good decisions in the last several years (think LPFM, which was gutted by the Senate, but advocated by the FCC).
Re:email as we know it is the problem
on
ISP Chief on Spam
·
· Score: 1
As opposed to "ISPs" forcing users to use their mail server??
Who's an ISP anyway? If I buy a T1 am I an ISP? I am for all intents and purposes, since I can resell bandwidth. You don't think spammers can afford more than an MSN account?
Blocking ports solves nothing. Say it over and over until you get it. It only hurts legitimate people that want to serve their own mail domains. Spammers will find other ways.
There are around 2 million people in prison in the US (on a population of around 265 million). Compare this to for instance to the Netherlands with 16 million people and only around 40.000 people in prison and it's very easy to see that due to the fact that it is legal to carry a gun in the US also means that there is more crime and thus more people in prison. It so simple...
Man, such twisted facts. A very large percentage of the people in prision in the US are due to drug violations, a lot of them minor, not violent crimes. The Netherlands has a very loose drug policy. Right statistics, wrong conclusion. The conclusion is that the US should take a look at this "war on drugs" and the damage it does to our society.
Or maybe theyre just tired of people irresponsibly leaving Kazaa and other like programs open after they get what they want, wasting everyone else's bandwidth.
And how do you think the files get on the network in the first place? Magical P2P gnomes?
Certification of safety of products is a far cry from the acedemic world.
(Ignoring the fact that the UL standards are pretty lax. As long your product isn't blatently dangerous, if you pay them, you can get their stamp of approval. I think you overestimate the rigor of their testing.)
Anyway, university is a completely different thing. It's more about sucking up to those in power than actually learning anything. It's a disconnected and incestuous system of self-congratulary back patting and brown nosing. The real victims are those who sacrifice to go to school to actually learn, and those employers who erroneously equate degrees with real world skills.
Of course, if, as an employer, you want someone well trained at brown-nosing and playing political games, then by all means choose someone with an extensive acedemic background. You won't be let down.
It's not. Operating it in certain ways is illegal though.
Who decided that any government "owns" the radio spectrum?
The people own the radio spectrum, the government is "the people". At least in theory.
Who gives this organization such power to control the "airwaves"?
Consent of the people.
If anyone could transmit at any power anywhere on the spectrum, no one would be able to use any non-microwave frequency. One guy with one poorly designed transmitter can easily obliterate several frequencies at once, rendering them all unusable, on a nearly worldwide scale.
I suggest you listen in on CB frequencies for a while at night to see what sort of thing lack of regulation would bring to the spectrum as a whole.
Slashdot Mirror
So you were the dick that bought all the pasta! Thanks for spreading the joy asshole, I had to drive all the way across town to get pasta!
We still have RPG code running in an emulator running on SCO. Costs us tons of money per year to maintain support for it. Hell, if we wanted to move it to Linux in an emulator, that would cost $20,000.
Any company which invests in proprietary programming lanugages must not expect to be around very long, or is happy giving a cut of the profits to other companies forever.
Heh, that's how I passed the 5wpm, just made sure to copy everything after IS well enough to figure out which multiple choice fit. They've done away with multiple choice now, so it is a little more difficult. I didn't learn enough to be comfortable operating on the air, and now that it's been a few years without practice, I doubt I could even copy much of anything anymore.
I didn't know you were a ham, that's pretty cool. I signed up for the nocode.org but I won't be able to contribute right now, money is tight. I do agree that morse is an artificial barrier to entry that has little to do with "advancing radio technology".
If you get a chance, stop by #electronics or #hamradio on irc.freenode.net.
As someone with a basic knowledge in CW (enough to pass the FCC test for general class at least, which isn't saying much these days), I'd say your description is kinda off.
Those rules might make valid enough code to read, but there are a lot more things going into it than that, especially at high speeds. A lot of people do farnsworth these days, especially when starting out, which means the character rates are going to be a lot higher than the overall symbol rate. Basically, very fast symbols with longish spaces inbetween. Anyone who learns at true very low speeds is just screwing themselves over later, so most people learn at a minimum 13wpm character rate with 5wpm spacing.
Serial/Parallel Bus - I suppose you want this on a seperate card too?
Don't worry, pretty soon you will have to. All the motherboard will have is like 5 USB ports and a video connector. Sound will be digital and encrypted too.
Here is an account from Dr. Brownlee himself about the manhole cover. He is highly doubtful it actually entered space.
Link
never been more user friendly, and the latest KDE desktop on my gentoo box
Sorry, I quit reading after that comment, I was laughing too hard.
Yeah, that's what I mean. What UL tests is mostly common sense stuff. Are there any dangerous areas you can stick your fingers into? Are there adquate fuses in case of part failure? Is it easy to make a common mistake and have the thing start a fire or cut your hand off? Stuff like that. It's not particularly rigorous testing, just basic stuff to make sure no one gets hurt and your house doesn't burn down.
PS: Did you see those turkey deep fryer videos on the UL site?? Those things are insanely dangerous!
If MS buys them, the open source players will develop like never before.
It's the same reason RMS doesn't allow any closed source software at all at gnu.org. If you have an (especially $free) closed source alternative, you will be a lot less motivated to write a free software version. It works both ways.
Well, you just proved Dow's case. You were misled by the parody site, beliveing it to be an official statement of Dow Chemical. That was Dow's whole complaint in the first place.
http://www.dowethics.com/r/environment/freedom.htm l
They have that linked as "Dow's response" to the incident, apparently yet another parody site, but I was sure confused at first. I could see how someone could be misled to believe it was a real Dow site.
These guys are pushing the line a little too far I think. The site looks a whole lot like an official site.
it links to someone else, nothing to do with you
It was a direct reply to the comment that I linked to earlier in my message.
You can quote other people that know more than you?
Huh?
You have no credentials
What an assumption.
but like to bitch about other people who have no other credtials?
Well, yeah, if they are going to blindly assume everyone with credentials is an expert at everything they do.
If you have any credentials, then you better practrice linking, referencing other articles, and pretty much everything you write
You might want to practice spelling. You seem to have trouble with it. Your sentence also made little sense. Might want to watch those sentence fragments.
You could just buy something out of the gnu store.
http://www.gnu.org/order/order.html
I always like to send this link to idiots who don't understand GNU isn't about price, their top of the line GNU utilities collection cds and manual are $5000.
You can buy some reference cards or another small thing from the store if you want to make something that is similar to a one time small donation.
Asside from the use that people get out of CB and the usless FCC restrictions, these two unlicensed freqency specturms have little in common. What do you get out of FCC regulations?
Did you think I was calling for heavier regulation of 802.11b? My comment wasn't directed at 802.11b at all. I think the level of regulation there is just fine. The original poster was questioning the very existance of the FCC.
Yeah, but what's the point of being able to recieve something you can't hit?
/ 14 28941
The way the FCC rules are written, they do reward directional gain, you only have to reduce your power 1dbmw for each 3db in gain, so it does benefit you to have as high a gain as you can get. I think these rules are very reasonable, but easily violated if you aren't careful or well versed in this sort of thing.
http://www.80211-planet.com/tutorials/print.php
If the antenna gain is at least 6 dBi, the FCC allows operation up to 4 watts EIRP. This is 1 watt (the earlier limitation) plus 6 dB of gain.
For antennas having gain greater than 6 dBi, the FCC requires you to reduce the transmitter output power if the transmitter is already at the maximum of 1 watt. The reduction, however, is only 1 dB for every 3 dB of additional antenna gain beyond the 6 dBi mentioned above. This means that as antenna gain goes up, you decrease the transmitter power by a smaller amount. As a result, the FCC allows EIRP greater than 4 watts for antennas having gains higher than 6 dBi.
the web looked much more interessting and much less boring 2 to 5 years ago
Do you really remember the web 5 years ago?
Let me refresh your memory:
"This site designed for Netscape" links
Animated mailto link gifs of a letter going into an envelope
"Under Construction"
"Do you like my new high contrast background image??? It is the same color as my text!!"
"Here is the current weather"
Javascript popup: What is your name? Hi $name!
Frames.... need I say more?
Here are all the meaningless awards this site has gotten. (Slashdot is still guilty of this one!)
500K index.html with anchors instead of using multiple pages
More animated gifs than characters of text
No google
--
The list goes on... my point is, the web is better today than it has ever been in history. There is more information than ever, the pages are designed much more cleanly and usably, etc.
It appears inevitable that we are going to go with Creo's packages at work, which will cut Quark out of the picture. Lack of OS X support is a sticking point with Quark.
This also means we will be phasing out Quark's poorly spec'ed DCS 2.0 for PDF/X as our main press-ready format. Too bad Creo only supports Windows servers for their "workflow".
Of course, our artists are still very resistant to switch to OS X, apparently they are not comfortable with the new font management system. I can't wait until the switch personally, so we can dump all the proprietary backup-to-tape solutions and go with some simple shell scripts in a cron job.
(I do not speak for my employer, nor Creo)
As someone who is mostly Libertarian, I hear where you are coming from, but radio really is unique.
There is only one EM spectrum. There will always only be one. With proper management, we can get a whole lot more good out of it than without.
You propose a free market in frequencies. Well, how exactly do you quantify a frequency? HF frequencies are world wide. VHF/UHF are generally regional, but the range depends on dozens of factors.
How exactly would one make out a "deed" for a frequency? Would special civil courts need to be set up to determine the inevitable highly technical disputes? A world court for HF and lower? If so, you've only shifted the regulation, not eliminated it, and in the process, made it impossible for anyone other than the very rich to gain access.
I don't think our current system isn't too bad. There are some definite broken spots that are stifling new technology, and controlling the flow of information, but overall I think the system is working, and other than allowing some questionable mergers in the mass media markets, I think the FCC has at least tried to make some very good decisions in the last several years (think LPFM, which was gutted by the Senate, but advocated by the FCC).
As opposed to "ISPs" forcing users to use their mail server??
Who's an ISP anyway? If I buy a T1 am I an ISP? I am for all intents and purposes, since I can resell bandwidth. You don't think spammers can afford more than an MSN account?
Blocking ports solves nothing. Say it over and over until you get it. It only hurts legitimate people that want to serve their own mail domains. Spammers will find other ways.
There are around 2 million people in prison in the US (on a population of around 265 million).
Compare this to for instance to the Netherlands with 16 million people and only around 40.000 people in prison and it's very easy to see that due to the fact that it is legal to carry a gun in the US also means that there is more crime and thus more people in prison.
It so simple...
Man, such twisted facts. A very large percentage of the people in prision in the US are due to drug violations, a lot of them minor, not violent crimes. The Netherlands has a very loose drug policy. Right statistics, wrong conclusion. The conclusion is that the US should take a look at this "war on drugs" and the damage it does to our society.
Or maybe theyre just tired of people irresponsibly leaving Kazaa and other like programs open after they get what they want, wasting everyone else's bandwidth.
And how do you think the files get on the network in the first place? Magical P2P gnomes?
Certification of safety of products is a far cry from the acedemic world.
(Ignoring the fact that the UL standards are pretty lax. As long your product isn't blatently dangerous, if you pay them, you can get their stamp of approval. I think you overestimate the rigor of their testing.)
Anyway, university is a completely different thing. It's more about sucking up to those in power than actually learning anything. It's a disconnected and incestuous system of self-congratulary back patting and brown nosing. The real victims are those who sacrifice to go to school to actually learn, and those employers who erroneously equate degrees with real world skills.
Of course, if, as an employer, you want someone well trained at brown-nosing and playing political games, then by all means choose someone with an extensive acedemic background. You won't be let down.
Leonid shower
Through a telescope?
Maybe if he set up some wide angle lenses or something.
Why is building your own transmitter ilegal?
It's not. Operating it in certain ways is illegal though.
Who decided that any government "owns" the radio spectrum?
The people own the radio spectrum, the government is "the people". At least in theory.
Who gives this organization such power to control the "airwaves"?
Consent of the people.
If anyone could transmit at any power anywhere on the spectrum, no one would be able to use any non-microwave frequency. One guy with one poorly designed transmitter can easily obliterate several frequencies at once, rendering them all unusable, on a nearly worldwide scale.
I suggest you listen in on CB frequencies for a while at night to see what sort of thing lack of regulation would bring to the spectrum as a whole.
To all the people that flamed me in the previous story for pointing out they were likely violating FCC regs, bite me.
People just couldn't fathom that college professors might not know what they are doing. Credentialism at it's worst.