No, that's new! I actually just found that for myself, about 5 mins after posting this comment, and now I'm super excited. Anyone know by any chance whether there are issues putting Cyanogenmod on a locked phone? I found this stackexchange issue, but I feel like if it were actually a thing, it would be more commonly documented.
I recently installed Cyanogenmod on my old phone (HTC G2/Desire) so my wife, who's taken possession of it, could use some 4.x-only apps. I couldn't believe how beautifully it runs on a three-year-old phone (I mean, it's SLOW, but everything WORKS), and the lack of bloatware and pre-installed apps (read: Facebook) makes me super jealous. I'd put Cyanogenmod on my current phone (Samsung Galaxy Relay), but last I checked, there weren't any stable builds for it with an Android version greater than what I've got now (4.1).
While I honestly think this is an awesome idea, I wonder, if this takes off, whether anyone who currently pays for web hosting of a static site will decide, "fuck it--it's backed up on Internet Archive. Might as well save the $N a month I pay to maintain the website and lease the domain name."
what? 1/r^2 isn't enough for you? Depending on how the LED was constructed, I could see your eye absorbing pretty much 100% of the photons it generated. How many photons hitting the retina is enough to blind you, given that the human eye is capable of observing single photon events? I believe that much of the eye's dynamic range is due to the iris, is it not? In which case, the light source would have to be dead-center over the iris or risk getting filtered out. Now, if there are LEDs that can produce single photons, then fine--I concede the point.
but can one's eye resolve that? My eyes can't resolve dirt on my glasses--it just makes my field of vision blurrier. Or are you thinking the whole contact gets more opaque?
Is display technology yet at the level where you could actually put a HUD on a contact lens with (1) you actually being able to focus on it and (2) without it blinding you / seriously impairing your vision?
No, the design for these contacts does not feature a display at present, and the most they're thinking for the future is something along the line of a single LED light (and I don't exactly see how that would work--if it's over the part of your eye that you can actually see, won't it blind you / seriously impair your vision when it goes off? And if it's not, then won't you need a buddy to tell you, "Hey, your eye is blinking"?). Most likely, this will communicate wirelessly with your cell phone (like a Fitbit or other personal fitness device) and send you an alert when your glucose is low/high.
Right. Because the energy required to separate two quarks is so great it ends up creating a quark and an anti-quark, which just fuse with your separated quarks to form two new hadrons.
Interesting. I actually wasn't aware of the concept of partial charges before today (I guess they don't teach this kind of stuff to physicists). But, as I read it, this is some sort of shielding effect, and the integer number of charges is still present in the molecule.
The other issue is that there's no condom equivalent of Victoria's Secret (where you buy products from clerks of your own gender who are--at the very least supposed to be--trained to be discreet and not to judge). If there were, that would probably be the creepiest store in any mall. Ever.
this, I think, is more of a societal issue: not many men are going to feel comfortable going to the convenience store and checking out with a box of "size smalls." Shopping on the internet is an option, I guess, but do you really want Amazon knowing your penis size? I can just imagine the targeted advertisements on BOTH ends of the spectrum.
If anything I expect it to go the other way. I bet we'll ultimately end up with a global email-from-circles kill switch (what they've provided so far) along with per-circle settings, so you can allow people in some circles to e-mail you and not others. Since most G+ users have separate circles for friends & family vs random people whose posts they like to read, that would make a lot of sense.
Actually, IIRC that's already the setting--you can select which circles can send you emails. But to answer the question of why would they remove your option to opt out: I dunno--why did Google force its Youtube users to link their accounts to G+ when they first made it optional? Near as I can figure is that Google really wants G+ to succeed, because they want to directly compete with Facebook. But since no one was actually interested in using G+, they're trying to force you to by saying, "if you don't use it, then you can't use any of our products that you do like." It's bullying, plain and simple, and I say this as a hard-core Google fanboy.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong show. And spoiler alert.
No, that's new! I actually just found that for myself, about 5 mins after posting this comment, and now I'm super excited. Anyone know by any chance whether there are issues putting Cyanogenmod on a locked phone? I found this stackexchange issue, but I feel like if it were actually a thing, it would be more commonly documented.
I recently installed Cyanogenmod on my old phone (HTC G2/Desire) so my wife, who's taken possession of it, could use some 4.x-only apps. I couldn't believe how beautifully it runs on a three-year-old phone (I mean, it's SLOW, but everything WORKS), and the lack of bloatware and pre-installed apps (read: Facebook) makes me super jealous. I'd put Cyanogenmod on my current phone (Samsung Galaxy Relay), but last I checked, there weren't any stable builds for it with an Android version greater than what I've got now (4.1).
pony?! I wanted a fucking unicorn!
You grab the scotch tape, I'll get the broom handle: problem solved.
Makes us really nervous when people talk this way.
While I honestly think this is an awesome idea, I wonder, if this takes off, whether anyone who currently pays for web hosting of a static site will decide, "fuck it--it's backed up on Internet Archive. Might as well save the $N a month I pay to maintain the website and lease the domain name."
Why does everyone assume that our AIs are going to turn into Skynet? Why couldn't we end up with Tachikomas?
...but I don't think an evolutionary algorithm approach to pattern recognition is anything new.
what? 1/r^2 isn't enough for you? Depending on how the LED was constructed, I could see your eye absorbing pretty much 100% of the photons it generated. How many photons hitting the retina is enough to blind you, given that the human eye is capable of observing single photon events? I believe that much of the eye's dynamic range is due to the iris, is it not? In which case, the light source would have to be dead-center over the iris or risk getting filtered out. Now, if there are LEDs that can produce single photons, then fine--I concede the point.
but can one's eye resolve that? My eyes can't resolve dirt on my glasses--it just makes my field of vision blurrier. Or are you thinking the whole contact gets more opaque?
I think pretty much anything is blindingly bright if placed on your cornea.
Is display technology yet at the level where you could actually put a HUD on a contact lens with (1) you actually being able to focus on it and (2) without it blinding you / seriously impairing your vision?
No, the design for these contacts does not feature a display at present, and the most they're thinking for the future is something along the line of a single LED light (and I don't exactly see how that would work--if it's over the part of your eye that you can actually see, won't it blind you / seriously impair your vision when it goes off? And if it's not, then won't you need a buddy to tell you, "Hey, your eye is blinking"?). Most likely, this will communicate wirelessly with your cell phone (like a Fitbit or other personal fitness device) and send you an alert when your glucose is low/high.
Right. Because the energy required to separate two quarks is so great it ends up creating a quark and an anti-quark, which just fuse with your separated quarks to form two new hadrons.
My point was that you can't define the Amp in terms of Ohms, because then you end up with 1 Ohm = 1 Ohm. Very useful definition indeed.
Interesting. I actually wasn't aware of the concept of partial charges before today (I guess they don't teach this kind of stuff to physicists). But, as I read it, this is some sort of shielding effect, and the integer number of charges is still present in the molecule.
The Ohm is a derived unit (depends on the Volt and the Ampere). So no, sorry.
Technically no. As noted above, the Ampere, not the Coulomb, is the fundamental unit. A Coulomb is an Ampere-second.
Crap. I did just type "naturally in nature."
Charge is quantized. This has been known since Millikan. You can't ever arrive at an electron-and-a-half of charge (though you can, in theory, get a third or two thirds, but not naturally in nature).
Actually, the Imperial Pound is legally defined as exactly 0.45359237 kilograms. It is (but possibly has not always been?) a unit of mass. Citation.
how about a half a bit? They can only send half a one or half a zero at a time. That should be quite effective at throttling them.
The other issue is that there's no condom equivalent of Victoria's Secret (where you buy products from clerks of your own gender who are--at the very least supposed to be--trained to be discreet and not to judge). If there were, that would probably be the creepiest store in any mall. Ever.
this, I think, is more of a societal issue: not many men are going to feel comfortable going to the convenience store and checking out with a box of "size smalls." Shopping on the internet is an option, I guess, but do you really want Amazon knowing your penis size? I can just imagine the targeted advertisements on BOTH ends of the spectrum.
If anything I expect it to go the other way. I bet we'll ultimately end up with a global email-from-circles kill switch (what they've provided so far) along with per-circle settings, so you can allow people in some circles to e-mail you and not others. Since most G+ users have separate circles for friends & family vs random people whose posts they like to read, that would make a lot of sense.
Actually, IIRC that's already the setting--you can select which circles can send you emails. But to answer the question of why would they remove your option to opt out: I dunno--why did Google force its Youtube users to link their accounts to G+ when they first made it optional? Near as I can figure is that Google really wants G+ to succeed, because they want to directly compete with Facebook. But since no one was actually interested in using G+, they're trying to force you to by saying, "if you don't use it, then you can't use any of our products that you do like." It's bullying, plain and simple, and I say this as a hard-core Google fanboy.