Shuttle? Are you smoking something? My entire comment was two sentences, and made no mention of anything specific, let alone a shuttle. What I was saying is that you seemed to imply that since something is maliciously- planned it cannot be foreseen
If you reply to my message without considering it in the context of the original parent message, then it is your fault you misinterpret what I say.
I don't have a monitor recommendation for you, but I do have a browser one.
In Opera, all versions I have used, you can just hit + or - to make the whole web page larger or smaller. As soon as I load pricewatch I always hit plus three times, to bump it up to 130%. Where do they get off using tiny fonts anyway?
This works on all web pages, it's insanely great. It will even enlarge flash animations, images, everything. Well, almost everything, scroll bars stay the same size, but buttons, checkboxes, and radio buttons all get bigger. It doesn't mess up the presentation most of the time. Text just flows to fit the screen correctly, so no sidescrolling necessary (except on text/plain pages)
That's not what I am saying. Jets as large as the ones that were used were not around when the buildings were built.
It's also unreasonable to design a building to specs that handle the absolute worst case conceivable. I mean, buildings in California are designed to withstand earthquakes. Could most withstand an 8.0 earthquake at the epicenter? Should we spend billions and billions of dollars planning for this highly unlikely, but conceivable event?
Comparing the shuttle incident to this is also off base. The shuttle failed in it's normal operation. That is why I said that these were maliciously planned. These weren't buildings that failed under normal use, or reasonable natural events, they failed after being attacked with a large, mostly-unforseeable force.
BTW-seeing that you used a "smart quote", I guess you are using windows. And you talk about security.:)
And 20 years later, the conservative realizes that his elected republicans are really just liberals in disguise, raising spending and taxes, increasing government waste, delcaring wars on things like drugs and terrorism that have no point except to erode the civil rights of the citizens and create fear so that the citizens will be more likely to give up said rights.
So in 20 more years they are Libertarian, but by then it's too late, and they are dependant on the milk given by the tit of government handouts, social security, and are too afraid to do anything about the system they helped to put into place.
This raises a very interesting question about our expectations vs. reality. After the shuttle disaster I think this stands as one of the most shocking slaps in the face to us concerning technology.
I agree with the rest of your post, but I take exception to this.
The buildings were subjected to something that could not have been forseen. It's not as if they just fell by themselves. This was a malicious attack. Would I say that my car sucked if I ran it into a wall at 60 mph and it didn't continue to run? I'm not sure what you were thinking, but I look forward to your reply.
Let me show some of my ignorance, but when high voltage makes a path through a solid with high resistance, does it ionize a plasma path like it does through air, or does it do something different?
CSS combined with XML addresses exactly the problem you describe. It seperates the content from the presentation. HTML is a nasty kludge compared to a nice pure XML page.
Yes, they are called transducers. Speakers are just audible frequency tranducers, but we call them speakers. An antenna is really just an RF transducer.
You can get ultrasonic transducers and pass data with them. Might drive your dog crazy though.
Now, what does this have to do with using 802.11b on ham bands again?
I've tried to install Real for linux, I really tried, over and over.... It was one of the few programs that could lock up the whole kernel hard, requiring a reboot. I got parts of the player to come up, but it never worked.
I'm sure you are right, but the original post implied that the original phones were dangerous, and the new ones are no longer.
600mW isn't dick. As a ham operator, when I transmit, I'm regularly holding a 5-10watt HT right next to my head. A noisy computer can put off quite a bit of RF too, probably more than a watt if you took the whole spectrum into consideration.
If you are working with RF as you seem to be, then you know that too. All this brain cancer stuff seems to be a pile of BS. I havn't seen one reliable study that shows any negative effects from RF other than localized thermal effects causing damage.
but modern cell phones aren't that bad for you anymore.
Um...
Cell phones always have been subject to a limitation of 600 mW, and more recently subject to specific absorption rate limitations.
If anything, the newer PCS phones that operate at higher frequencies are worse, since you are getting closer and closer to the resonant frequency of your eyeballs.
The only risk that has any real evidence for it is heating risk, so if you feel your brain starting to cook, then you might want to turn the phone off, otherwise, it's harmless.
(Hint, 600mW isn't enough to heat much of anything.)
Anyway, nothing had changed in cell phones to justify your conclusion that they are any less dangerous than they were (they weren't dangerous at all to start with).
2) It's like $20 for students and upgrades last I checked. You get one Major version upgrade free before you have to pay for the upgrade version again, if you want to not have ads.
The bots will have to be thethered to the surface, radio waves don't travel underwater*, and unless you want to string a really really long fiber option cable all the way to Europa....
*Yes, some extremely low frequency ones do, but 5 bits per second isn't going to carry video.
Slashdot Mirror
You can install whatever fonts you want. You can even download MS Windows fonts directly from MS and install them if you like.
Shuttle? Are you smoking something? My entire comment was two sentences, and made no mention of anything specific, let alone a shuttle. What I was saying is that you seemed to imply that since something is maliciously- planned it cannot be foreseen
If you reply to my message without considering it in the context of the original parent message, then it is your fault you misinterpret what I say.
I don't think you understand. Opera will make everything bigger, flash applications, graphics, everything. Not just fonts.
8/20 isn't a valid measurement.
20/8 would mean you had eyes like a hawk, literally.
I don't have a monitor recommendation for you, but I do have a browser one.
In Opera, all versions I have used, you can just hit + or - to make the whole web page larger or smaller. As soon as I load pricewatch I always hit plus three times, to bump it up to 130%. Where do they get off using tiny fonts anyway?
This works on all web pages, it's insanely great. It will even enlarge flash animations, images, everything. Well, almost everything, scroll bars stay the same size, but buttons, checkboxes, and radio buttons all get bigger. It doesn't mess up the presentation most of the time. Text just flows to fit the screen correctly, so no sidescrolling necessary (except on text/plain pages)
That's not what I am saying. Jets as large as the ones that were used were not around when the buildings were built.
:)
It's also unreasonable to design a building to specs that handle the absolute worst case conceivable. I mean, buildings in California are designed to withstand earthquakes. Could most withstand an 8.0 earthquake at the epicenter? Should we spend billions and billions of dollars planning for this highly unlikely, but conceivable event?
Comparing the shuttle incident to this is also off base. The shuttle failed in it's normal operation. That is why I said that these were maliciously planned. These weren't buildings that failed under normal use, or reasonable natural events, they failed after being attacked with a large, mostly-unforseeable force.
BTW-seeing that you used a "smart quote", I guess you are using windows. And you talk about security.
He did put quotes around the word, meaning he had the same doubts as you did in calling it that.
And 20 years later, the conservative realizes that his elected republicans are really just liberals in disguise, raising spending and taxes, increasing government waste, delcaring wars on things like drugs and terrorism that have no point except to erode the civil rights of the citizens and create fear so that the citizens will be more likely to give up said rights.
So in 20 more years they are Libertarian, but by then it's too late, and they are dependant on the milk given by the tit of government handouts, social security, and are too afraid to do anything about the system they helped to put into place.
This raises a very interesting question about our expectations vs. reality. After the shuttle disaster I think this stands as one of the most shocking slaps in the face to us concerning technology.
I agree with the rest of your post, but I take exception to this.
The buildings were subjected to something that could not have been forseen. It's not as if they just fell by themselves. This was a malicious attack. Would I say that my car sucked if I ran it into a wall at 60 mph and it didn't continue to run? I'm not sure what you were thinking, but I look forward to your reply.
Some towel-head will just hijack a sub then.
How's this. You know that a 5 inch magnifing glass can easily burn you in the sun.
Imagine a magnifier that had the same surface area as your exposed skin, focusing that energy on you, it would quickly burn you to the bone.
A more easily quantifiable analogy for your argument.
Let me show some of my ignorance, but when high voltage makes a path through a solid with high resistance, does it ionize a plasma path like it does through air, or does it do something different?
CSS combined with XML addresses exactly the problem you describe. It seperates the content from the presentation. HTML is a nasty kludge compared to a nice pure XML page.
Yeah, they seem to play that one a lot. I havn't been watching the old ones as much anymore, I've seen them all so many times now.
No reboot I!
Yes, they are called transducers. Speakers are just audible frequency tranducers, but we call them speakers. An antenna is really just an RF transducer.
You can get ultrasonic transducers and pass data with them. Might drive your dog crazy though.
Now, what does this have to do with using 802.11b on ham bands again?
I've tried to install Real for linux, I really tried, over and over.... It was one of the few programs that could lock up the whole kernel hard, requiring a reboot. I got parts of the player to come up, but it never worked.
I get several of those, they all suck. They are 24 hour infomercials.
I don't get it... who watches shopping and infomercial channels? Does the sat company get paid to carry them, instead of the normal vice-versa?
I'm sure you are right, but the original post implied that the original phones were dangerous, and the new ones are no longer.
600mW isn't dick. As a ham operator, when I transmit, I'm regularly holding a 5-10watt HT right next to my head. A noisy computer can put off quite a bit of RF too, probably more than a watt if you took the whole spectrum into consideration.
If you are working with RF as you seem to be, then you know that too. All this brain cancer stuff seems to be a pile of BS. I havn't seen one reliable study that shows any negative effects from RF other than localized thermal effects causing damage.
Nah, God's a fag. :)
but modern cell phones aren't that bad for you anymore.
Um...
Cell phones always have been subject to a limitation of 600 mW, and more recently subject to specific absorption rate limitations.
If anything, the newer PCS phones that operate at higher frequencies are worse, since you are getting closer and closer to the resonant frequency of your eyeballs.
The only risk that has any real evidence for it is heating risk, so if you feel your brain starting to cook, then you might want to turn the phone off, otherwise, it's harmless.
(Hint, 600mW isn't enough to heat much of anything.)
Anyway, nothing had changed in cell phones to justify your conclusion that they are any less dangerous than they were (they weren't dangerous at all to start with).
It's FUCK, say it loud and proud. This ain't no kiddie message board.
1) Opera has one small banner at the top.
2) It's like $20 for students and upgrades last I checked. You get one Major version upgrade free before you have to pay for the upgrade version again, if you want to not have ads.
3) It's far better than any other UNIX browser.
Of course I meant fiber *optic* cable. :)
The bots will have to be thethered to the surface, radio waves don't travel underwater*, and unless you want to string a really really long fiber option cable all the way to Europa....
*Yes, some extremely low frequency ones do, but 5 bits per second isn't going to carry video.