Actually, even if the recordation of the brainwaves controlling the motion was instantaneous (which is, apparently, is not - I'm a rocket scientist, not a brain surgeon) I would anticipate a good deal of postprocessing to get the motion reformatted from MRI raw data to motor controls. Actually, I think several seconds is pretty damned good.
Of course, if the sister post here is true (1-5 seconds of delay for O2 variation sensing), we won't see this for any sort of useful controls in real-time equipment. Even for non-critical items (say, controlling your car stereo), the delay will annoy most people enough that they won't like it. Heck, the delay in x-10 lighting signalling (just a couple hundred milliseconds) is enough to put me off.
In a video demonstration in Tokyo, brain signals detected by a magnetic resonance imaging scanner were relayed to a robotic hand. A person in the MRI machine made a fist, spread his fingers and then made a V-sign. Several seconds later, a robotic hand mimicked the movements. (emphasis mine)
Afterward, a reporter who strayed too far from the crowd was warned by security not to look behind the curtain.
According to the information in your/. question, you're concerned about power, not portability or space. Since you're considering purchasing a machine, why not consider purchasing/building a machine with low power components, and spend the difference very good UPS?
I mean, you're still paying a premium for the miniturization on a laptop, and the result is a 2-3 hour built-in UPS. A good UPS, some of which will take additional external batteries, would run a low power machine for quite a while. The side advantage is you can add some redundancy to the machine, such as a simple RAID 0, which you couldn't do easily with a laptop. If you built it yourself, you can select components for low power consumption. I would look at some of the "silent" PC options, as they're probably going to use less power (less power = less waste heat = lower cooling demand = fewer/zero fans = low noise).
Can a laptop be used? Sure, I used one as a print server in my office for a while. Great for printers that are very picky about the drivers and pc-printer communication (Epson, are you listening?) and tend to choke on normal third party print servers. The advantage to me was that the screen was included with the device, and the whole thing could be stashed on a shelf near the equipment, which was remote from the file server. I don't think it's the best solution from a reliability standpoint, though.
The other poster pointed out the truth - only resales are available, TLM is in the vault. It won't be for much longer, as you can see here.
FWIW, the US copies of The Little Mermaid, not produced for sale in the US since 1989, were selling for $80 to $200 at the time I bought my overseas copy.
As for the lies about IP theft, my entire business is based on IP - it's what puts food on my table. I'm not for a lack of restrictions on IP, but I am a businessman, and I see a potential to minimize the (unlawful) competition and (potentially) increase revenue at the same time.
By the way, if I'd sent my VHS tape to someone and paid them $20 to make me a backup because I was concerned about the loss of quality on an item that was no longer in print, would that be fair use?
...but it does illustrate a point about the protection of content and the unauthorized distribution of said content. Look, these "pirates" have a copy - crappy though it may be - shortly after the first screening. And they're, apparently, selling (though no number figures are given for volume).
What is interesting is that the unauthorized distribution chain is well organized enough that a typical time frame can be placed on the "next" release of the film. It speaks volumes about the actual control content producers have on their material.
In this day of first weekend hits which fizzle or stay on the charts for such a short time, and the inevitable surfacing of the video in the "pirate" channels - both physical and online - is it really advantageous to the bottom line to spread (a) the theatrical release from the home video release by several months and (b) the theatrical release across continents by several months. In an age of essentially world wide communications and market size, and with the ability to distribute and screen content digitally, why not release the films one weekend, and the home version the following Tuesday? Have a blockbuster you think will have staying power and want to try and get a repeat audience? Delay the DVD 2-3 weeks. Get your hype budget right up front, and make sure the patrons who liked the theatrical screening can pick up their own copy before they forget about it.
All the laws and controls the studios have bought from the various governing bodies in the world won't stop the people who make a living doing this kind of stuff. And, unlike drugs or arms traffiking, we're not talking about societal crimes and social unrest. It's a God damned entertainment flick. Quit trying to constrain these "pirates" with rules they won't abide - beat them at their own game. Get the real discs into stores and into consumers hands before the "pirates" do. Crappy copies are no fun to watch. And I don't know about you folks, but if you've ever tried to get a movie of any decent quality off of the usenet you know it can be a royal pain. Quite honestly, it's not worth my time to futz with it if I can have Amazon deliver it to my door for $15. And I pay for good usenet access, so my dowloads are easy and fast. Provide the goods and take away their business and reason for being. Sure, you'll still have to deal with the snot-nosed teens who pirate stuff for the thrill, but those folks aren't going to be buyers (by and large). Write them off.
FWIW, I have unauthorized copies of Star Wars (IV), The Little Mermaid, and (on VHS) Song of the South. I have since purchased Ep. IV, though it had been out for a while (heck, I already "bought" a copy, right?). TLM is "in the vault". I couldn't purchase one from Disney if I wanted to, so some Malaysian pirate got my $20 - I'm claiming fair use since I own the VHS (with the phallic cover, no less). SotS will "never be released", though having watched it I can't quite figure out why. The NAACP has nothing to worry about in the portrayal of of the slaves, but caucasians should be appalled at the portrayal of the plantation owners in the film.
IMHO, the movie cartel actually keeps these shady shops in business. That's what the story really is.
Oh, but don't ever tell your mother to type "pipe". "Shift Backward Slash" is a lot fewer syllables than it will take to explain where Pipe is on the keyboard, and why you call it pipe, and how come the didn't call it flattened colon, or something else, or even why it even exists. Oh, and don't even get me started on tilde. Best to find some other way to do what you need to do, actually, than try to explane that one.;-)
That doesn't make sense. If you can make them for $100, and sell them for $249 (as the GP suggests), you can probably afford to ramp up production, which typically lowers the unit cost, allowing you to make more. Startups would kill for this kind of product - one with a clear demand that will get the production line up and running. Give up the moral high ground and make a difference with the idea.
If there is too much demand from the "first" world, sell them auction style - one free market sale for every two sent to the "third" world. Would you pay $300, or $327, or $402? You might suggest limiting the sales to 1/3 of stock at $249, but that just means ebayers will take the cash from resales and buy more pot. Might as well put that money back in the coffers to make more laptops.
It's not as bad as people dying from things I personally screw up. As the principal in charge, I can (and likely will) be held responsible for anything anyone does in my organization. That includes simply the loss of time and money due to errors which simply result in, say, leaky roofs or blown fuses or mold due to poor air exchanges or humidity controls. If the damage is large enough - say, affecting 100,000 people and costing tens of millions of dollars in lost productivity to correct - I could lose my license, even if it was a registered engineer at my firm who did the work. The fact is that, as the principal in charge, I'm responsible. People don't have to die for me to be in trouble.
The fact is that Sony management allowed this rootkit to be distributed to their customers. Whether is was through lack of proper oversight or an intentional act may change the severity of the punishment, but it is only a particular degree. Either way, this is gross negligence on their part. If the top execs end up having to fit 1000 hours of community service into their lives, I'm guessing that the heads who were closest to the decision will roll. And that's as it should be - A judge shouldn't be telling Sony who to fire - that should be the job of the top brass, just as its the job of the top brass to make sure their underlings don't do stupid shit like this in the first place.
Sony installs a rootkit on (potentially) hundreds of thousand computers, and not a single person is on probation. I think community service for Sony USA executives would be a very worthwhile punishment for the humans who should be watching what their company is doing, and a stiff financial fine - say 10% of gross '05 earnings (just like a $3000 fine for a regular guy who makes $30k/yr) - for the corporation, with 6 years probation. Should Sony be found in violation of the terms of the settlement (to be negotiated by the plaintiffs attorney and the judge), Sony loses it's corporate status in the US.
Sound harsh? I'm a professional engineer. I own a corporation. If somehting bad happens due to my negligence in a design, I am still personally responisible, and can (1) lose my license to practice (2) lose my corporate authorization to do business (3) face financial penalties (4) be found guilty of various criminal offenses personally for acts done as a managing officer of the corporation. I only ask that Sony be held to the same standard.
Oh, and while I'm at it, I'd like world peace, too.
You meant,"we have created several dozen multimillionares among the top-level executives..." right?
FWIW, I'm not quite as pissed about the $200B we've spent as much as the fact the we were told it would cost $20B, and that would be (largely/partially) paid back through oil revenue from a liberated Iraq. At 2M barrels a day (prewar production) and at the $30 prewar price, gross revenue was maybe a year's worth of oil. Now, even at todays inflated prices, it's more than 5 years, and to even attempt to extract that kind of cash would cripple that state even worst than it is. It'll never happen, and it's made us as many enemies as friends.
All I can say is that I'm normally pretty pissed if I contract with someone cost-plus and they're more than 25-30% over their budget. 1000% is just stupid (and I'm not sure whether it's the buyer or seller who gets that moniker, which makes it twice as painful).
FTFA: Curiously, however, Evans notes that the theory behind the effect does not precisely match the results. According to their calculations, the perturbations should have released both particles and heat from the plasma. Instead, the heat was not bled off with the plasma but remained mostly contained within the magnetic field.
So it works, but they're not sure it works for the reasons that caused them to create the effect in the first place. Sort of a scientific shrug. Good news, but they're going to figure out why it really works (not just that it works) before they put it into practice.
Kind of frustrating to think that for the cost of the military action in Iraq, we could have built 8 Tokamac reactors. (I know, you could say the same about welfare...it doesn't make the money thrown at Iraq any less irritating)
Stupid people will always cause loss of life, whether it be in the miliary of civilian arena. There is actually a diminishingly small number of conditions where leaked information published by the press could cost the life of a soldier. I would venture to say that you are far more likely to die due to random equipment failure than from an article leaked to the press and then subsequently published.
That argument notwithstanding, it is interesting that it seems the AG has targeted the press because he is unwilling or unable to prosecute the actual perpetrator of the "crime" - i.e. leaker of confidential information*. That is where the criminal act has occured and where the potential danger to American forces, in the rare cases it exists, lies.
It must be realized that this is a warning - a threat, if you will - to all press. Mr. Gonzales is attempting to cow the critical press into silence, and thereby reduce the public oversight of the government. Those wearing tinfoil hats will go apoplectic over the abuse of power and big-brother-like actions of this administration. They are not completely wrong, but everyone must understand that even the most liberal of heads of state want to do their job without oversight. Even President Carter admits he wanted less congressional meddling once he ascended to the top spot. What is concerning is that the current administration has put together a number of pieces which, along with advances in technology, have given them a very strong ability to enforce their threats. I'm not sure we've seen such a concentration of power behind a single leader since WWII. Aren't you glad we have the 10 year rule now?
I don't believe that the Supreme Court, even with its new additions, will look on this type of prosecution favorably. Still, simply the threat of prosecution, and the (temporary) loss of freedom while wading through the multi-year process of getting to the Supremem Court will, indeed, have a chilling effect on the press. It may be minor, but every editor (and press corporation legal team) will have this statement from Mr. Gonzales in the back of his mind when he or she reviews copy. And in that way, Mr. Gonzales has achieved a portion, or perhaps all, of his purpose without ever penning an indictment.
*It should be remembered that an item of information may not be classified for the purpose of hiding an unlawful activity. Yes, I have held a clearance. No, you may not know to what level or for what purpose.
Of course it won't kill the geniuses at NASA - they're practically gone already. NASA is mostly a corporate welfare program, and the actual civil service staff is made up almost exclusively of project and contract managers. Oh, sure, there are some scientists there, too, but they're really just to keep all the managers in a job.
Just a matter of time before you're modded into oblivion, but those of us in the real world (i.e.: not in IT) understand your argument. Just don't expect it to get any play here at/. Buisness isn't spoken here.
That was exactly what I thought when I read the headline. Why pay for a team to dork about for a couple of months, when you can get the whole world to work for you?
I'm portable. Precision M70, 2GB RAM, 1.86 P-M, nVidia 1400go/256, 1920x1200 WUXGA, 100GB HD, a/b/g wifi, bluetooth, integrated gigabit, DVD+/-RW DL, 2 primary batteries, three chargers including an air/auto/AC univeral, D/View stand with docking station (port replicator including DVI and dual 1920x1200 support), for $1600 (had to upgrade the 100GB HD and 2GB RAM separately, sold the stock stuff), 3 years support - never been on hold more than 3 minutes to a tech with a brain and respectful attitude. That was 16 months ago, too.
Unfortunately, my main application doesn't see, or use, more than one processor, so anything more tha dual core for work is probably overkill. Also, I'm stuck in windows (again, due to Win only software for most of my applications), so anything more than 3GB is inaccessible to applications, even with the boot hack. Still, I'll probably get the itch to upgrade in the next year or two, and it would be nice score another cheap-ass-dell-that-runs-my-stuff.
Me Culpa, I looked here and read bottom up to find G3...mistook it for G3 pro. Oh well, they're both old hardware (and by old, I should clarify that I mean "fully depreciated by the standards of the US Internal Revenue Service").
Okay, everybody is missing the point. Vista does not have a HD foorprint of 15GB. Really, it doesn't. Nor does it plan to use 1GB of memory for the kernel.
The "system" requirements are set to provide the average user with a pleasant experience (the use of Windows notwithstanding). That means several applications open and multimedia running in the background and/or foreground. Yes, there will be lots of clock cycles and memory for pretty (and useless). This isn't about the minimum requirements for an OS, its about the minimum requirements for the OS and a typical group of applications.
For you Mac fanboys out there - yes, Tiger will install with 3GB of HD free and will run on a G3. I don't know this as fact, but based on what I know Vista will easily fit into 3GB as well with room to spare. It will also run on an 800MHz x86 processor which...wait for it...came out the same year as the G3 was introduced (1999).
I know it's popular to get your panties all bunched up over the evil empire's latest move to try and get you to pimp your little sister for enough money to upgrade, but this really isn't that bad. I mean, this is the same place where we discuss whether it's enough to have dual 512MB video cards to play the latest game on our machines, right? Are we really that worried that we're not going to have 40GB of hard drive and a gig of RAM?
Actually, I'd put lens quality neck and neck with sensor size. There are just so many photons to go around, and shrinking the sensor means less of them available for a fixed time frame and lighting. I bought a minolta X50 (5MP) when it came out and loved the camera - simple, compact, bulletproof...and utterly useless in anything but full daylight. The noise at anything other than ISO50 equivalent was overwhelming - the shots in low light were just as poor as the 1MP Fuji freebie I got with the launch of XP two or three years earlier - just at higher resolution.
I won't argue that lens isn't a huge factor, but putting 8 million sensors in a little package is going to be good for nothing but outdoor shots at the beach.
I know, don't feed the trolls. But I was once a foolish young lad like this. I think he need to be modded up as "interesting", if only to highlight the trivial tasks which whould be encrypted.
Simple to say, every financial transaction I make over the web is encrypted. It's not necessarily private data. I don't care if you know that I'm ordering a textbook on widgets with my Visa from amazon.com at 2 in the afternoon. You can even have my cc# as plaintext, if you want it. You can have my PIN. You can have my SSN (seems like everybody already does - what makes you any different). I can always just cancel the card and get a new one, or reset my pin, or petition to have a new SSN (yes, that's a hard one, but it can be done). But it's an inconvenience to me, and in some cases a major inconvenience and results in a loss of income. Sometimes you just don't want the world to know. Sometimes you don't want personal information out there. Sure, it's not necessary - but most of the time privacy is a reasonable expectation. I suppose I could take a shit with the bathroom door open, but I'm more comforatble with it closed - as are most other people (on both sides of the door, I might add).
There are times when you _need_ encryption. Certain corporate communications, personal record transfers (HIPAA comes to mind), etc. And criminal activities, too. Just because it can be used for evil doesn't make it evil. We in the US saw just how foolish this attitude was when the TSA considered banning nailclippers from air transportation. No, nobody actually needs nail clippers on an airplane and, yes, they could be used to fashion a makeshift weapon, but... (they are allowed, btw). (someone will point out that they never considered banning them - mod that nitpicker down, I'm trying to make a point here)
So while you go on blabbing that your life is an open book, and that you don't need encryption so nobody does, there will still be cases and conditions where encryption is both resonable and necessary in the lawful engagement of everyday life. Just remember that your attitude is what allows the government to get away with the slow erosion of personal rights all over the world.
Slashdot Mirror
It was a joke. Really.
Actually, even if the recordation of the brainwaves controlling the motion was instantaneous (which is, apparently, is not - I'm a rocket scientist, not a brain surgeon) I would anticipate a good deal of postprocessing to get the motion reformatted from MRI raw data to motor controls. Actually, I think several seconds is pretty damned good.
Of course, if the sister post here is true (1-5 seconds of delay for O2 variation sensing), we won't see this for any sort of useful controls in real-time equipment. Even for non-critical items (say, controlling your car stereo), the delay will annoy most people enough that they won't like it. Heck, the delay in x-10 lighting signalling (just a couple hundred milliseconds) is enough to put me off.
FTA:
In a video demonstration in Tokyo, brain signals detected by a magnetic resonance imaging scanner were relayed to a robotic hand. A person in the MRI machine made a fist, spread his fingers and then made a V-sign. Several seconds later, a robotic hand mimicked the movements. (emphasis mine)
Afterward, a reporter who strayed too far from the crowd was warned by security not to look behind the curtain.
According to the information in your /. question, you're concerned about power, not portability or space. Since you're considering purchasing a machine, why not consider purchasing/building a machine with low power components, and spend the difference very good UPS?
I mean, you're still paying a premium for the miniturization on a laptop, and the result is a 2-3 hour built-in UPS. A good UPS, some of which will take additional external batteries, would run a low power machine for quite a while. The side advantage is you can add some redundancy to the machine, such as a simple RAID 0, which you couldn't do easily with a laptop. If you built it yourself, you can select components for low power consumption. I would look at some of the "silent" PC options, as they're probably going to use less power (less power = less waste heat = lower cooling demand = fewer/zero fans = low noise).
Can a laptop be used? Sure, I used one as a print server in my office for a while. Great for printers that are very picky about the drivers and pc-printer communication (Epson, are you listening?) and tend to choke on normal third party print servers. The advantage to me was that the screen was included with the device, and the whole thing could be stashed on a shelf near the equipment, which was remote from the file server. I don't think it's the best solution from a reliability standpoint, though.
The other poster pointed out the truth - only resales are available, TLM is in the vault. It won't be for much longer, as you can see here.
FWIW, the US copies of The Little Mermaid, not produced for sale in the US since 1989, were selling for $80 to $200 at the time I bought my overseas copy.
As for the lies about IP theft, my entire business is based on IP - it's what puts food on my table. I'm not for a lack of restrictions on IP, but I am a businessman, and I see a potential to minimize the (unlawful) competition and (potentially) increase revenue at the same time.
By the way, if I'd sent my VHS tape to someone and paid them $20 to make me a backup because I was concerned about the loss of quality on an item that was no longer in print, would that be fair use?
...but it does illustrate a point about the protection of content and the unauthorized distribution of said content. Look, these "pirates" have a copy - crappy though it may be - shortly after the first screening. And they're, apparently, selling (though no number figures are given for volume).
What is interesting is that the unauthorized distribution chain is well organized enough that a typical time frame can be placed on the "next" release of the film. It speaks volumes about the actual control content producers have on their material.
In this day of first weekend hits which fizzle or stay on the charts for such a short time, and the inevitable surfacing of the video in the "pirate" channels - both physical and online - is it really advantageous to the bottom line to spread (a) the theatrical release from the home video release by several months and (b) the theatrical release across continents by several months. In an age of essentially world wide communications and market size, and with the ability to distribute and screen content digitally, why not release the films one weekend, and the home version the following Tuesday? Have a blockbuster you think will have staying power and want to try and get a repeat audience? Delay the DVD 2-3 weeks. Get your hype budget right up front, and make sure the patrons who liked the theatrical screening can pick up their own copy before they forget about it.
All the laws and controls the studios have bought from the various governing bodies in the world won't stop the people who make a living doing this kind of stuff. And, unlike drugs or arms traffiking, we're not talking about societal crimes and social unrest. It's a God damned entertainment flick. Quit trying to constrain these "pirates" with rules they won't abide - beat them at their own game. Get the real discs into stores and into consumers hands before the "pirates" do. Crappy copies are no fun to watch. And I don't know about you folks, but if you've ever tried to get a movie of any decent quality off of the usenet you know it can be a royal pain. Quite honestly, it's not worth my time to futz with it if I can have Amazon deliver it to my door for $15. And I pay for good usenet access, so my dowloads are easy and fast. Provide the goods and take away their business and reason for being. Sure, you'll still have to deal with the snot-nosed teens who pirate stuff for the thrill, but those folks aren't going to be buyers (by and large). Write them off.
FWIW, I have unauthorized copies of Star Wars (IV), The Little Mermaid, and (on VHS) Song of the South. I have since purchased Ep. IV, though it had been out for a while (heck, I already "bought" a copy, right?). TLM is "in the vault". I couldn't purchase one from Disney if I wanted to, so some Malaysian pirate got my $20 - I'm claiming fair use since I own the VHS (with the phallic cover, no less). SotS will "never be released", though having watched it I can't quite figure out why. The NAACP has nothing to worry about in the portrayal of of the slaves, but caucasians should be appalled at the portrayal of the plantation owners in the film.
IMHO, the movie cartel actually keeps these shady shops in business. That's what the story really is.
Sounds more like they're buying a stolen car, and complaining it doesn't have air conditioning.
Oh, but don't ever tell your mother to type "pipe". "Shift Backward Slash" is a lot fewer syllables than it will take to explain where Pipe is on the keyboard, and why you call it pipe, and how come the didn't call it flattened colon, or something else, or even why it even exists. Oh, and don't even get me started on tilde. Best to find some other way to do what you need to do, actually, than try to explane that one. ;-)
That doesn't make sense. If you can make them for $100, and sell them for $249 (as the GP suggests), you can probably afford to ramp up production, which typically lowers the unit cost, allowing you to make more. Startups would kill for this kind of product - one with a clear demand that will get the production line up and running. Give up the moral high ground and make a difference with the idea.
If there is too much demand from the "first" world, sell them auction style - one free market sale for every two sent to the "third" world. Would you pay $300, or $327, or $402? You might suggest limiting the sales to 1/3 of stock at $249, but that just means ebayers will take the cash from resales and buy more pot. Might as well put that money back in the coffers to make more laptops.
It's not as bad as people dying from things I personally screw up. As the principal in charge, I can (and likely will) be held responsible for anything anyone does in my organization. That includes simply the loss of time and money due to errors which simply result in, say, leaky roofs or blown fuses or mold due to poor air exchanges or humidity controls. If the damage is large enough - say, affecting 100,000 people and costing tens of millions of dollars in lost productivity to correct - I could lose my license, even if it was a registered engineer at my firm who did the work. The fact is that, as the principal in charge, I'm responsible. People don't have to die for me to be in trouble.
The fact is that Sony management allowed this rootkit to be distributed to their customers. Whether is was through lack of proper oversight or an intentional act may change the severity of the punishment, but it is only a particular degree. Either way, this is gross negligence on their part. If the top execs end up having to fit 1000 hours of community service into their lives, I'm guessing that the heads who were closest to the decision will roll. And that's as it should be - A judge shouldn't be telling Sony who to fire - that should be the job of the top brass, just as its the job of the top brass to make sure their underlings don't do stupid shit like this in the first place.
Sony installs a rootkit on (potentially) hundreds of thousand computers, and not a single person is on probation. I think community service for Sony USA executives would be a very worthwhile punishment for the humans who should be watching what their company is doing, and a stiff financial fine - say 10% of gross '05 earnings (just like a $3000 fine for a regular guy who makes $30k/yr) - for the corporation, with 6 years probation. Should Sony be found in violation of the terms of the settlement (to be negotiated by the plaintiffs attorney and the judge), Sony loses it's corporate status in the US.
Sound harsh? I'm a professional engineer. I own a corporation. If somehting bad happens due to my negligence in a design, I am still personally responisible, and can (1) lose my license to practice (2) lose my corporate authorization to do business (3) face financial penalties (4) be found guilty of various criminal offenses personally for acts done as a managing officer of the corporation. I only ask that Sony be held to the same standard.
Oh, and while I'm at it, I'd like world peace, too.
You meant,"we have created several dozen multimillionares among the top-level executives..." right?
FWIW, I'm not quite as pissed about the $200B we've spent as much as the fact the we were told it would cost $20B, and that would be (largely/partially) paid back through oil revenue from a liberated Iraq. At 2M barrels a day (prewar production) and at the $30 prewar price, gross revenue was maybe a year's worth of oil. Now, even at todays inflated prices, it's more than 5 years, and to even attempt to extract that kind of cash would cripple that state even worst than it is. It'll never happen, and it's made us as many enemies as friends.
All I can say is that I'm normally pretty pissed if I contract with someone cost-plus and they're more than 25-30% over their budget. 1000% is just stupid (and I'm not sure whether it's the buyer or seller who gets that moniker, which makes it twice as painful).
FTFA: Curiously, however, Evans notes that the theory behind the effect does not precisely match the results. According to their calculations, the perturbations should have released both particles and heat from the plasma. Instead, the heat was not bled off with the plasma but remained mostly contained within the magnetic field.
So it works, but they're not sure it works for the reasons that caused them to create the effect in the first place. Sort of a scientific shrug. Good news, but they're going to figure out why it really works (not just that it works) before they put it into practice.
Kind of frustrating to think that for the cost of the military action in Iraq, we could have built 8 Tokamac reactors. (I know, you could say the same about welfare...it doesn't make the money thrown at Iraq any less irritating)
Stupid people will always cause loss of life, whether it be in the miliary of civilian arena. There is actually a diminishingly small number of conditions where leaked information published by the press could cost the life of a soldier. I would venture to say that you are far more likely to die due to random equipment failure than from an article leaked to the press and then subsequently published.
That argument notwithstanding, it is interesting that it seems the AG has targeted the press because he is unwilling or unable to prosecute the actual perpetrator of the "crime" - i.e. leaker of confidential information*. That is where the criminal act has occured and where the potential danger to American forces, in the rare cases it exists, lies.
It must be realized that this is a warning - a threat, if you will - to all press. Mr. Gonzales is attempting to cow the critical press into silence, and thereby reduce the public oversight of the government. Those wearing tinfoil hats will go apoplectic over the abuse of power and big-brother-like actions of this administration. They are not completely wrong, but everyone must understand that even the most liberal of heads of state want to do their job without oversight. Even President Carter admits he wanted less congressional meddling once he ascended to the top spot. What is concerning is that the current administration has put together a number of pieces which, along with advances in technology, have given them a very strong ability to enforce their threats. I'm not sure we've seen such a concentration of power behind a single leader since WWII. Aren't you glad we have the 10 year rule now?
I don't believe that the Supreme Court, even with its new additions, will look on this type of prosecution favorably. Still, simply the threat of prosecution, and the (temporary) loss of freedom while wading through the multi-year process of getting to the Supremem Court will, indeed, have a chilling effect on the press. It may be minor, but every editor (and press corporation legal team) will have this statement from Mr. Gonzales in the back of his mind when he or she reviews copy. And in that way, Mr. Gonzales has achieved a portion, or perhaps all, of his purpose without ever penning an indictment.
*It should be remembered that an item of information may not be classified for the purpose of hiding an unlawful activity. Yes, I have held a clearance. No, you may not know to what level or for what purpose.
God damned Repulicans.
(That's joke folks, just in case you missed it.)
Of course it won't kill the geniuses at NASA - they're practically gone already. NASA is mostly a corporate welfare program, and the actual civil service staff is made up almost exclusively of project and contract managers. Oh, sure, there are some scientists there, too, but they're really just to keep all the managers in a job.
Em-CHING!, of course.
Just a matter of time before you're modded into oblivion, but those of us in the real world (i.e.: not in IT) understand your argument. Just don't expect it to get any play here at /. Buisness isn't spoken here.
Sweet irony, isn't it.
That was exactly what I thought when I read the headline. Why pay for a team to dork about for a couple of months, when you can get the whole world to work for you?
I'm portable. Precision M70, 2GB RAM, 1.86 P-M, nVidia 1400go/256, 1920x1200 WUXGA, 100GB HD, a/b/g wifi, bluetooth, integrated gigabit, DVD+/-RW DL, 2 primary batteries, three chargers including an air/auto/AC univeral, D/View stand with docking station (port replicator including DVI and dual 1920x1200 support), for $1600 (had to upgrade the 100GB HD and 2GB RAM separately, sold the stock stuff), 3 years support - never been on hold more than 3 minutes to a tech with a brain and respectful attitude. That was 16 months ago, too.
Unfortunately, my main application doesn't see, or use, more than one processor, so anything more tha dual core for work is probably overkill. Also, I'm stuck in windows (again, due to Win only software for most of my applications), so anything more than 3GB is inaccessible to applications, even with the boot hack. Still, I'll probably get the itch to upgrade in the next year or two, and it would be nice score another cheap-ass-dell-that-runs-my-stuff.
...will this get to the workstations! That's where I need my horsepower.
Me Culpa, I looked here and read bottom up to find G3...mistook it for G3 pro. Oh well, they're both old hardware (and by old, I should clarify that I mean "fully depreciated by the standards of the US Internal Revenue Service").
I stand corrected.
Okay, everybody is missing the point. Vista does not have a HD foorprint of 15GB. Really, it doesn't. Nor does it plan to use 1GB of memory for the kernel.
The "system" requirements are set to provide the average user with a pleasant experience (the use of Windows notwithstanding). That means several applications open and multimedia running in the background and/or foreground. Yes, there will be lots of clock cycles and memory for pretty (and useless). This isn't about the minimum requirements for an OS, its about the minimum requirements for the OS and a typical group of applications.
For you Mac fanboys out there - yes, Tiger will install with 3GB of HD free and will run on a G3. I don't know this as fact, but based on what I know Vista will easily fit into 3GB as well with room to spare. It will also run on an 800MHz x86 processor which...wait for it...came out the same year as the G3 was introduced (1999).
I know it's popular to get your panties all bunched up over the evil empire's latest move to try and get you to pimp your little sister for enough money to upgrade, but this really isn't that bad. I mean, this is the same place where we discuss whether it's enough to have dual 512MB video cards to play the latest game on our machines, right? Are we really that worried that we're not going to have 40GB of hard drive and a gig of RAM?
Actually, I'd put lens quality neck and neck with sensor size. There are just so many photons to go around, and shrinking the sensor means less of them available for a fixed time frame and lighting. I bought a minolta X50 (5MP) when it came out and loved the camera - simple, compact, bulletproof...and utterly useless in anything but full daylight. The noise at anything other than ISO50 equivalent was overwhelming - the shots in low light were just as poor as the 1MP Fuji freebie I got with the launch of XP two or three years earlier - just at higher resolution.
I won't argue that lens isn't a huge factor, but putting 8 million sensors in a little package is going to be good for nothing but outdoor shots at the beach.
I know, don't feed the trolls. But I was once a foolish young lad like this. I think he need to be modded up as "interesting", if only to highlight the trivial tasks which whould be encrypted.
Simple to say, every financial transaction I make over the web is encrypted. It's not necessarily private data. I don't care if you know that I'm ordering a textbook on widgets with my Visa from amazon.com at 2 in the afternoon. You can even have my cc# as plaintext, if you want it. You can have my PIN. You can have my SSN (seems like everybody already does - what makes you any different). I can always just cancel the card and get a new one, or reset my pin, or petition to have a new SSN (yes, that's a hard one, but it can be done). But it's an inconvenience to me, and in some cases a major inconvenience and results in a loss of income. Sometimes you just don't want the world to know. Sometimes you don't want personal information out there. Sure, it's not necessary - but most of the time privacy is a reasonable expectation. I suppose I could take a shit with the bathroom door open, but I'm more comforatble with it closed - as are most other people (on both sides of the door, I might add).
There are times when you _need_ encryption. Certain corporate communications, personal record transfers (HIPAA comes to mind), etc. And criminal activities, too. Just because it can be used for evil doesn't make it evil. We in the US saw just how foolish this attitude was when the TSA considered banning nailclippers from air transportation. No, nobody actually needs nail clippers on an airplane and, yes, they could be used to fashion a makeshift weapon, but... (they are allowed, btw). (someone will point out that they never considered banning them - mod that nitpicker down, I'm trying to make a point here)
So while you go on blabbing that your life is an open book, and that you don't need encryption so nobody does, there will still be cases and conditions where encryption is both resonable and necessary in the lawful engagement of everyday life. Just remember that your attitude is what allows the government to get away with the slow erosion of personal rights all over the world.
First they came for the Communists...