Indeed... Nothing spectacular.
Now is the time to laugh at all the fanboys that had already sold their iPhone 4s to buy iPhone 5s, but now have to buy new iPhone 4S (es)
Pun very much intended.
Epically so. I've never seen Engadget go down under pressure, not on E3, not during any Apple event I can remember, not during any other keynote...
Are people *really* that excited about the iPhone 5?
Not really. By detecting the load, it could automatically decide which cores to activate. Since they're all the same architecture, the only difference should be execution speed.
Maybe it only exposes 4 cores to the OS, and the companion core "shares" core 1's tasks. For example: While idle, companion core is active, running the network stack (for example). When the user does something: the companion core offloads its tasks to core 1 as soon as the load increases, or maybe core 4 as soon as cores 1-3 are saturated. Either way, the OS only sees 4 cores.
If you don't have a thick bundle of cables weighing several pounds, those rolls of light-duty velcro for tying plants to stakes work great for cables.
A few bucks per several yards instead of several bucks for a few feet.
In more permanent setups, plastic non-reusable cable ties are an even cheaper alternative, assuming there's little need to mess with the cables
Here's the thing: non-particle ionizing radiation (e.g. ultraviolet light) is fundamentally just higher energy because of the higher frequency. Claims that UV causes damage while lower frequency RF signals can never cause damage are just plain contrary to reason. Nothing else in nature has a sudden threshold like that; there's always a continuum, such that you start to see significant numbers of additional deaths at some concentration, with near complete destruction of the population at some point, but that doesn't mean that levels below the level where you saw the first death aren't dangerous.
As a general rule, it is silly to assume that there is some magic threshold above or below which you can say that suddenly this energy is or isn't going to cause damage. This strongly suggests that the dividing line between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation is really nothing more than an arbitrary cutoff below which the odds of damage are small enough that we consider it to be "mostly harmless", not a point below which RF is completely harmless. Thus, you would expect chance to play a major role in whether the effects are or are not detectable at those levels. Crank up the gain by a factor of a million and see if the effects are still undetectable. If they suddenly become consistently observable, then what you are seeing is really no more than the difference between one instance and zero instances in a sample size that's too small to adequately show the effect.
Actually, there *is* a sudden jump, assuming the material you're observing is the same. A photon either has enough energy to remove an electron or it doesn't.
Also, RF and UV are nowhere near each other.
Would *you* like mr. crazy-ass to have nukes he can deploy anywhere at any time? Remember, he's crazy, so he doesn't give a damn about MAD. (no pun intended)
Stuxnet uses Windows machines as carriers to infect the centrifuge controllers, so basically, windows is also infected, but it's not affected (as in lost data or whatever), it just spreads the worm around.
It provides a downright horrible framework for dealing with "XP-era" software; in fact, running any software in "combatibility mode" requires admin privileges (Why?!?) and is likely not to work.
Quite simple: UAC - Win 9x programs made a lot of assumptions about access to stuff no well-written program should access routinely. Same goes, albeit in a far more controlled manner, for XP programs. They just expect access to some stuff that under vista or 7 requires elevated priviliges.
And it's not mandatory: you aren't forced to start the programs with admin priviledges, you have that choice.
And how are they going to handle multiple viewers wanting to operate the camera at the same time?
I'd say they mean we can manipulate the image down here, but the camera is static. Kinda like digital zoom and optical zoom.
If we can actually control the camera through the web, I'd guess they draw a few people a day from a pool of registered users and allow them to control the camera for 30 seconds or something of the sort.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed... Nothing spectacular. Now is the time to laugh at all the fanboys that had already sold their iPhone 4s to buy iPhone 5s, but now have to buy new iPhone 4S (es) Pun very much intended.
Epically so. I've never seen Engadget go down under pressure, not on E3, not during any Apple event I can remember, not during any other keynote... Are people *really* that excited about the iPhone 5?
How come I immediately thought about "helper monkeys" instead of robot apocalypse?
Can't tell if trolling or just very, very stupid.
Can't tell if trolling, communist, or just plain conspiracy theorist.
Not really. By detecting the load, it could automatically decide which cores to activate. Since they're all the same architecture, the only difference should be execution speed. Maybe it only exposes 4 cores to the OS, and the companion core "shares" core 1's tasks. For example: While idle, companion core is active, running the network stack (for example). When the user does something: the companion core offloads its tasks to core 1 as soon as the load increases, or maybe core 4 as soon as cores 1-3 are saturated. Either way, the OS only sees 4 cores.
But then we'd be forced to commit murder by throwing them into an incinerator!
The Companion Core will never threaten to stab you, and, in fact, cannot speak.
Or we could hook them up to an answering machine: "Your call is important to us..."
Where you least expect them to be.
If you don't have a thick bundle of cables weighing several pounds, those rolls of light-duty velcro for tying plants to stakes work great for cables. A few bucks per several yards instead of several bucks for a few feet.
In more permanent setups, plastic non-reusable cable ties are an even cheaper alternative, assuming there's little need to mess with the cables
They're keepin' it a bit too real
I wouldn't risk it. It's the 4th or so launch that ends badly in a row.
Here's the thing: non-particle ionizing radiation (e.g. ultraviolet light) is fundamentally just higher energy because of the higher frequency. Claims that UV causes damage while lower frequency RF signals can never cause damage are just plain contrary to reason. Nothing else in nature has a sudden threshold like that; there's always a continuum, such that you start to see significant numbers of additional deaths at some concentration, with near complete destruction of the population at some point, but that doesn't mean that levels below the level where you saw the first death aren't dangerous.
As a general rule, it is silly to assume that there is some magic threshold above or below which you can say that suddenly this energy is or isn't going to cause damage. This strongly suggests that the dividing line between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation is really nothing more than an arbitrary cutoff below which the odds of damage are small enough that we consider it to be "mostly harmless", not a point below which RF is completely harmless. Thus, you would expect chance to play a major role in whether the effects are or are not detectable at those levels. Crank up the gain by a factor of a million and see if the effects are still undetectable. If they suddenly become consistently observable, then what you are seeing is really no more than the difference between one instance and zero instances in a sample size that's too small to adequately show the effect.
Actually, there *is* a sudden jump, assuming the material you're observing is the same. A photon either has enough energy to remove an electron or it doesn't. Also, RF and UV are nowhere near each other.
Would *you* like mr. crazy-ass to have nukes he can deploy anywhere at any time? Remember, he's crazy, so he doesn't give a damn about MAD. (no pun intended)
Stuxnet uses Windows machines as carriers to infect the centrifuge controllers, so basically, windows is also infected, but it's not affected (as in lost data or whatever), it just spreads the worm around.
It provides a downright horrible framework for dealing with "XP-era" software; in fact, running any software in "combatibility mode" requires admin privileges (Why?!?) and is likely not to work.
Quite simple: UAC - Win 9x programs made a lot of assumptions about access to stuff no well-written program should access routinely. Same goes, albeit in a far more controlled manner, for XP programs. They just expect access to some stuff that under vista or 7 requires elevated priviliges. And it's not mandatory: you aren't forced to start the programs with admin priviledges, you have that choice.
The same way Mir got them - Soyuz and Progress rockets, maybe the odd ESA rocket, too.
And how are they going to handle multiple viewers wanting to operate the camera at the same time?
I'd say they mean we can manipulate the image down here, but the camera is static. Kinda like digital zoom and optical zoom. If we can actually control the camera through the web, I'd guess they draw a few people a day from a pool of registered users and allow them to control the camera for 30 seconds or something of the sort.