If you don't buy your Sony games locally, you undercut Sony's ability to gouge on local game prices locally.
No problem. If you need to play something from another region, simply buy the proper player for it. Import the console and the games for the region you want. Problem solved.
why micorosft are allowed to produce an OS and then re-direct users to its homepage by default (and average user doesnt know how to change their homepage)
This is different than Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, or Opera how?
Good point. It hasn't happened to me in a while. The last time I remember that was with Caldera Linux 2.3. It was about $40 for the box with a sticker on the front indicating a $20 rebate. Just send in the included form. The included form was already expired. You know how hard it is to return opened software. Grrr. I should have made a very big stink with the retailer selling expired produce with a hidden expiration date (inside the box) but I let it slide. I wish now I pressed the issue for a refund or rebate.
I wasnt aware that the civil law legal system france uses relied heavily on precedent...
Maybe not, but they used the precedent of if you pay the tax, you have paid the due. The royalty on blank media was the precedent and he was right that the royalty provided rights to use them.. I'm glad to see a court get it right. To fix the loophole, all they need to do is eliminate the royalty tax on blank media, then it could be a different ballgame.
At a time when the prime interest rate is less than 3% and banks pay less than 1% interest, charging 19-24% interest IS EXTORTION.
Slightly offtopic, but just like in the music industry. It affects only those who apply for a credit card or download mucic except in cases of stolen identity.
There is a reason for the high intrest rates. Somebody has to pay the bill because they enabled a bunch of people like me to get a free ride.
On free music, there are sources of legal free music. The industry waits and hopes you mess up so they can stick you.
With credit cards, you can pay off the balance in full each month on a card with no annual fee. They just wait for you to be late once or have to carry a balance. About 30% of credit card users pay 0 interest and annual fees. I'm now one of them. To pay for the processing, and cover the rising cost of credit fraud (It's big) those who carry a balance and have the late mail once in a while get stuck with all the fees to pay for the system.
When I was young there were not any cards without an annual fee. Competition to get users caused the elimination of the fees and transfering them to other ways to extract fees (late fees skyrocketed in the last decade) This money grab made online bill pay popular so those who used to get dinged once in a while are making very sure not to get dinged by a late fee. Therefore the number of users not paying any fees have increased. Expect the card companies to make adjustments to drop the perfect card users. They can't afford them.
Expect more music users to notice the RIAA's actions and move only to Creative Commons and other forms of non-RIAA music. Slipping even once is getting too dangerous. Expect the remaining users of RIAA music to get stuck with the high fees. Especialy since fraud (online filesharing)and non-paying users (those who buy DVD's and Games instead of music and listening to their old library) is eating them just like fraud and non-fee paying card users is eating the credit card companies.
you set passwords on user accounts and then grant permissions to users.
That's fine for XP home if this sharing is not on a LAN. The trouble is on the LAN. A Win 95, 98, etc box can open the shared folder in the Network Neighborhood with full access. It can't be protected by setting a read or write password. There is no folder option under sharing to set any password on the folder.
Are you using NTFS or FAT?
I haven't looked. It's the default Dell factory install. I'll check later.
Do you have the Guest account enabled?
I think there is one that was on the box by default, but nobody uses it. The Shared folder was not created by a guest user.
So the irony is that Microsoft can't even secure security features they're trying to cripple so they can make an extra ~$150 on you upgrading to XP "Pro"...
Um no. I'll either upgrade to an old copy of 98 SE or SUSE. I'm done with the games.. I'm ready to go to work. Why would I be interested in the next DEMO OS. I'm ready for a real OS.
How long till my Hawking printserver melts. That is the address of my laser priner! Funny, I got in in no time. It still has the password I set when I installed it.
What have they got against me. Why are they using my poor printserer?
Come on guys, what is taking you so long. The passowrd is limited to only 8 digits..
OK who's the wise guy that didn't give the real server address..
All file sharing under NT based operating systems (including XP Home) requires you to have a valid user account. Furthermore XP doesn't allow access to network shares to an account with a blank password.
Ummmm... OK you seem to know. I've seen that for several users on the one box with each user having a home directory, but it seems to fall apart for me when a folder is shared on a LAN.
Here's the setup. An XP home machine was added to an existing peer to peer SMB LAN with a mix of Windows machines. A user with admin privilages created a shared folder on the XP machine. There is no option to set a password on the shared folder over the LAN. Now anyone with a network neighborhood icon can open the shared folder on the XP box and read and write anything to the shared folder. This is the current sad state of affairs. It doesn't ask for a password or username. Any user on Win 95, 98, 98 SE, ME can connect to the shared XP folder.
Just where is the username and password set on the XP Home box? Why isn't it required for Netbios users to submit this password to gain access? My LAN would like to know...
The XP Home seems to provide access to anyone who logs into their own machine connected to the LAN. It doesn't care the user does NOT have an account on the XP Home box.
This is more than adequate for most home users. Unless you want to provide some files to the spouse on the LAN and restrict other files such as CC and checking balances.
To win, make yourself an account. Stop network services. E-mail them that you did it. All they have to do is log on localy using the admin level account you created. Any questions? This dies after a reboot.
If they are smart they will put the IP address on the block of IP addresses they own. Then it wouldn't be any provable intent to harm anyone else. It's their block, their assigned address space, their server. I wonder if most who take the challange will take the time to look up their address block ahead of time, just to be sure they are not attacking a competitor.
Not from anything I've read. A cell phone contacts the tower and reports it's received signal strength. It's used to adjust the tower power. The tower receives the signal from the phone and if it's signal is strong, the tower tells the phone to reduce power. This is to provide longer mobile battery life and reduce close phones for swamping the receivers at the tower so weak signals can be received. I learned this from the analog days. Is digital any diffrent? Anybody from the industry care to update my information? Analog does have adjustable handset power. I would think digital would for the same reasons.
A tower does not use a ton of radiation. What good is a massive signal from the tower to a phone if the tower can not hear the phone? It is a 2 way link. The tower does not need much more power than the phone, otherwise the phone would be able to hear the tower in many places it could not be heard by the tower.
The ton of radiation is simply due to the number of connections. Each connection has a culimitave effect. It would be the same if everyone using a tower all conviened in one spot so their combined power was concentrated. That's why in my examples I gave the tower the BBQ full of bruning coals in comparison to a single coal in someone's pocket. The tower has more power simply due to the number of active channels all in one place. This cluster of radiation is located a good distance from those walking on the ground so the signal strength near a tower is still much weaker than the strength near a nearby phone.
True, but I used the heat radiation from a fire as an example of how electromagnetic signal strengths are near a phone and tower antenna. The propogation of infra-red heat and a cell signal are the same. Expoure to the distant antenna is much less than the exposure of a lower power nearby phone. One lit BBQ coal in your pocket burns much worse than standing at a picnic table 20 feet from a whole bunch of burning coals while waiting for the burgers to be done.
The same distance and exposure aplies to cell towers and the phone in your pocket.
It's the nearby one that burns. The far one has almost undetectable radiation due to the distance just like trying to warm your hands from a BBQ 20 feet away. You don't get much radiation from the one 20 feet away.
Don't be silly. Just go into 'Advanced' and untick the interfaces you do not want the firewall applied to.
I have XP Home on the wife's machine. Not XP Pro.. I asked about XP home but I get all the answers for XP Pro (which has an advanced tab that XP HOME doesn't have.)
I wonder about this everytime I go to the top of Mt. Diablo in California
I didn't know there was a school there where kids could get long term exposure.;-) The sudy in question is regarding low level long term exposure.
A cell tower and a communications relay are two different items. One has an antenna designed to cover a large area and the other has a narrow beam designed to cover a very small distant area. Please don't call a relay a cell tower. It isn't. Many of the relay dishes are low power. They don't have to cover a large area. Some of the 10' dishes run in the milli-Watts power range to just a couple watts depending on the distance coverage needed. They run low power because high power isn't needed with a high gain narrow beam antenna. This keeps the area from becomming completely flooded with microwave interference.
Simple File Sharing "feature" of XP Home Edition. Enabled by default,
I went to the KB article and it said "Simple File Sharing is always turned on in Windows XP Home Edition-based computers."
Just use this KB article to turn it off.
Then it goes on to say "By default, the Simple File Sharing UI is turned on in Windows XP Professional-based computers that are joined to a workgroup. Windows XP Professional-based computers that are joined to a domain use only the classic file sharing and security interface."
Simply put.. You can't turn it off in XP HOME!
This leaves you at this security level if you share a folder.. from the article "Level 5: Shared on the network (Read and Write) This level is the most available and least secure access level."
If you share a folder in XP HOME, your only choice of security is the very lowest. Full write privilages to anyone without a password! What the heck were they thinking?
So yes I did read the article and all the hints provided to change the setting apply to XP Pro, not XP HOME. I Share a folder on my SAMBA box instead. It's much more secure. At least I can set permissions.
It breaks sharing files on a LAN. Even if you have dual network cards or are on dial-up. The firewall is all or nothing. You can't firewall the Internet connection (dialup or otherwise) and not firewall the other adaptor (NIC or second NIC) for local LAN filesharing. Getting the first XP box on both the LAN and Internet was an endless configuration circle for a while. Turning one on turned the other off.
things that used to work in the old version still works in the new version
Slightly offtopic but in reply to the parent post..
My wife bought a new machine with XP home. I decided to move some files. I turned on sharing. I wanted some protection. I tried to set a password on the shared folder.... Um where do you set a password on a folder for read and write privilages? It is missing. You can't share a folder and deny write privilages! This is major not good. My old version of Windows 95 does better on that one. XP home does not pass the Regression test. It's been crippled in several security areas. Ouch! MS missed on that one.
I'd say that windows is passing its regression tests with flying colors;)
Is there any research showing negative health effects of nearby cell towers,
Microwave radiation follows the same propogation rules as light radition including long wavelengths. I made the statement so you could easly compare a easly detected ratation and compare it's levels with an invisable radiation of the electromagnetic spectrum.
If I build a campfire, I can sit several feet from it and be warmed by it from it's thermal radiation. Someone walking between me and the fire will block the radiation and I notice the cold. If they built a huge bonfire, say they have a house catch fire, I can feel the heat at a greater distance. I may get the same warm feeling a couple houses distant from the fire. The house fire is several orders of magnitude larger than a campfire. By increasing my distance from the fire, I can keep my heat exposure to a comfortable level.
Now how far are you from a cell phone stuck against your head and how far are you from the radiating antenna on the top of a cell tower. The tower radiates more power by a couple orders of magnitude, but the guy on the other side of the cubicle wall is hitting you with more power than the tower. It's less power, but a whole lot closer.
There are not too much research on the negative health effects of nearby cell towers, because they measure the signal strength in the area and it is orders of magnitude less strong than the radiation from the phone used by the kids mom in the car. The cell tower health effects are in a background level compared to going to a movie or riding a city bus where somone close grabs his ringing phone.
The study would be inconclusive because there is no control environment without cell phone end users in the area of a tower.
They don't put DRM on CDs, and it didn't damage CD sales.
What scares the industry is the lack of degeneration from copy to copy. They also don't like one copy providing thousands of duplicates.
When CD's came out ther was no such thing as a consumer CD burner. The only way to copy a CD was to copy it to tape. This is done one copy at a time. A one hour CD takes an hour to make a single copy (most people only had one cassette deck) and the copy was degenerated from the original. A copy of the copy is even worse. It's like getting a copy of a movie years ago that has been copied from VHS to VHS to VHS. Not a nice copy by any stretch.
Things have changed. Computers can now RIP a CD. That involves a one generation loss. After that a copy of a copy of a copy is the same as the original copy and is good enough. The RIAA hates that. If the file is posted, then one copy can make thousands all the same as the original with no loss. This is even worse for the RIAA.
They don't put DRM on CDs, and it didn't damage CD sales.
It didn't until everyone and their brother got a CD burner and blanks were $0.25 each. Be honest. Do you have a burnded copy of a friends CD? The first copy is like a tape copy. Now, did you get a copy of an original or a copy of a copy? There is the problem. Even worse, is the copy from KaZa? That's the worst offence to the RIAA. There is no DRM on CD's because at first the tools to rip them didn't exist. Neither did the tools for anyone to burn a CD.
Fourth, the site uses blind links. I don't know what will happen until I click.
Sixth, some advertisers abuse flash. I removed flash when mousing over a flash banner ad (to reach the URL bar) poped up a new window. No click needed. The same advertiser did the same thing on the right side of the page so I would get new windows if I tried to use the scroll bar. Flash completely lacks end user controls. It has no stop button unless the content provider is nice enough to include one. There is enough abuse of this to keep flash off my machine entirely.
I am not worried... on the other hand: I just tunnel it to my server on an unusual port as it was streaming whatever, and they can come and look really close and still see nothing:)
If they suspect, they can delay packets to give you a good 2 second latency just to discourage active real time 2 way apps.
demand for stolen eSlates will be minimal - they simply will not work for uses other than those for which they were designed."
Those who do not learn from their mistakes are condemmed to repeat them.
The X-Box will only play MS software. The I-Opener will only work with their subscription service, The Cue Cat will only work with the Digital Convergance online database....
the article lists the size of 120 watt panel as 14 feet by 10 feet.
Re-read the article...
The flagship product, Nanosolar SolarPly, is a 14 feet x 10 feet solar electricity module delivering 120 watts per square inch at 110V.
It seems to have been written by the PR department, not the engineering department. I doubt you can get 120 watts/sq inch.
Energy is about 1000 watts/sq. meter on the face of the earth. I don't see how you can get 120 Watts/Square inch when there is only a KW/Square Meter. The math doesn't add up. Per the article I should be able to get 1.2KW with only 10 square inches. That's hard to do when you only get 1KW/Square Meter of sunlight. I wonder if they meant 120 Watts/Square Foot. That might be closer to realistic, but not quite believable. A square yard (9 Sq feet) is a little smaller than a Square Meter and then the claim is close to 1,080 Watts/Square Yard. If that is true, they are now claiming better than 100% conversion effeciency by getting 1080 watts per Square Yard out of sunshine providing about 1,000 Watts per Square Meter.
Before you nag me for references.. Sun's Power. http://instech.tusd.k12.az.us/environment/activiti es/solar/water.htm And of course TFA.
If I got 120 watts per square inch from a module 14 feet by 10 feet or 140 Sq Feet or 20,160 watts, I'd buy one for the roof of my van and kiss gas stations goodbye. You would only need a square inch for the laptop. That kind of power simply isn't in the sunlight and solar cells are not going to put out more than they receive. It may aproach 100% conversion, but it won't exceed it. Don't belive anybody that claims more power out than put in from any machine.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't buy your Sony games locally, you undercut Sony's ability to gouge on local game prices locally.
No problem. If you need to play something from another region, simply buy the proper player for it. Import the console and the games for the region you want. Problem solved.
why micorosft are allowed to produce an OS and then re-direct users to its homepage by default (and average user doesnt know how to change their homepage)
This is different than Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape, or Opera how?
I also had rebates that "expire" by the company
Good point. It hasn't happened to me in a while. The last time I remember that was with Caldera Linux 2.3. It was about $40 for the box with a sticker on the front indicating a $20 rebate. Just send in the included form. The included form was already expired. You know how hard it is to return opened software. Grrr. I should have made a very big stink with the retailer selling expired produce with a hidden expiration date (inside the box) but I let it slide. I wish now I pressed the issue for a refund or rebate.
He/she most certainly WAS distributing them in violation of copyright law.
He was?
on the ground that those were private copies, and that he didn't redistributed them
He paid the royalty for the private copies by the tax on the blank media. The royalties were paid. That's what the court saw.
I wasnt aware that the civil law legal system france uses relied heavily on precedent...
Maybe not, but they used the precedent of if you pay the tax, you have paid the due. The royalty on blank media was the precedent and he was right that the royalty provided rights to use them.. I'm glad to see a court get it right. To fix the loophole, all they need to do is eliminate the royalty tax on blank media, then it could be a different ballgame.
At a time when the prime interest rate is less than 3% and banks pay less than 1% interest, charging 19-24% interest IS EXTORTION.
Slightly offtopic, but just like in the music industry. It affects only those who apply for a credit card or download mucic except in cases of stolen identity.
There is a reason for the high intrest rates. Somebody has to pay the bill because they enabled a bunch of people like me to get a free ride.
On free music, there are sources of legal free music. The industry waits and hopes you mess up so they can stick you.
With credit cards, you can pay off the balance in full each month on a card with no annual fee. They just wait for you to be late once or have to carry a balance. About 30% of credit card users pay 0 interest and annual fees. I'm now one of them. To pay for the processing, and cover the rising cost of credit fraud (It's big) those who carry a balance and have the late mail once in a while get stuck with all the fees to pay for the system.
When I was young there were not any cards without an annual fee. Competition to get users caused the elimination of the fees and transfering them to other ways to extract fees (late fees skyrocketed in the last decade) This money grab made online bill pay popular so those who used to get dinged once in a while are making very sure not to get dinged by a late fee. Therefore the number of users not paying any fees have increased. Expect the card companies to make adjustments to drop the perfect card users. They can't afford them.
Expect more music users to notice the RIAA's actions and move only to Creative Commons and other forms of non-RIAA music. Slipping even once is getting too dangerous. Expect the remaining users of RIAA music to get stuck with the high fees. Especialy since fraud (online filesharing)and non-paying users (those who buy DVD's and Games instead of music and listening to their old library) is eating them just like fraud and non-fee paying card users is eating the credit card companies.
you set passwords on user accounts and then grant permissions to users.
That's fine for XP home if this sharing is not on a LAN. The trouble is on the LAN. A Win 95, 98, etc box can open the shared folder in the Network Neighborhood with full access. It can't be protected by setting a read or write password. There is no folder option under sharing to set any password on the folder.
Are you using NTFS or FAT?
I haven't looked. It's the default Dell factory install. I'll check later.
Do you have the Guest account enabled?
I think there is one that was on the box by default, but nobody uses it. The Shared folder was not created by a guest user.
So the irony is that Microsoft can't even secure security features they're trying to cripple so they can make an extra ~$150 on you upgrading to XP "Pro"...
Um no. I'll either upgrade to an old copy of 98 SE or SUSE. I'm done with the games.. I'm ready to go to work. Why would I be interested in the next DEMO OS. I'm ready for a real OS.
How long till my Hawking printserver melts. That is the address of my laser priner! Funny, I got in in no time. It still has the password I set when I installed it.
What have they got against me. Why are they using my poor printserer?
Come on guys, what is taking you so long. The passowrd is limited to only 8 digits..
OK who's the wise guy that didn't give the real server address..
All file sharing under NT based operating systems (including XP Home) requires you to have a valid user account. Furthermore XP doesn't allow access to network shares to an account with a blank password.
Ummmm... OK you seem to know. I've seen that for several users on the one box with each user having a home directory, but it seems to fall apart for me when a folder is shared on a LAN.
Here's the setup. An XP home machine was added to an existing peer to peer SMB LAN with a mix of Windows machines. A user with admin privilages created a shared folder on the XP machine. There is no option to set a password on the shared folder over the LAN. Now anyone with a network neighborhood icon can open the shared folder on the XP box and read and write anything to the shared folder. This is the current sad state of affairs. It doesn't ask for a password or username. Any user on Win 95, 98, 98 SE, ME can connect to the shared XP folder.
Just where is the username and password set on the XP Home box? Why isn't it required for Netbios users to submit this password to gain access? My LAN would like to know...
The XP Home seems to provide access to anyone who logs into their own machine connected to the LAN. It doesn't care the user does NOT have an account on the XP Home box.
This is more than adequate for most home users.
Unless you want to provide some files to the spouse on the LAN and restrict other files such as CC and checking balances.
To win, make yourself an account. Stop network services. E-mail them that you did it. All they have to do is log on localy using the admin level account you created. Any questions? This dies after a reboot.
If they are smart they will put the IP address on the block of IP addresses they own. Then it wouldn't be any provable intent to harm anyone else. It's their block, their assigned address space, their server. I wonder if most who take the challange will take the time to look up their address block ahead of time, just to be sure they are not attacking a competitor.
A handheld does not do this.
Not from anything I've read. A cell phone contacts the tower and reports it's received signal strength. It's used to adjust the tower power. The tower receives the signal from the phone and if it's signal is strong, the tower tells the phone to reduce power. This is to provide longer mobile battery life and reduce close phones for swamping the receivers at the tower so weak signals can be received. I learned this from the analog days. Is digital any diffrent? Anybody from the industry care to update my information? Analog does have adjustable handset power. I would think digital would for the same reasons.
A tower does not use a ton of radiation. What good is a massive signal from the tower to a phone if the tower can not hear the phone? It is a 2 way link. The tower does not need much more power than the phone, otherwise the phone would be able to hear the tower in many places it could not be heard by the tower.
The ton of radiation is simply due to the number of connections. Each connection has a culimitave effect. It would be the same if everyone using a tower all conviened in one spot so their combined power was concentrated. That's why in my examples I gave the tower the BBQ full of bruning coals in comparison to a single coal in someone's pocket. The tower has more power simply due to the number of active channels all in one place. This cluster of radiation is located a good distance from those walking on the ground so the signal strength near a tower is still much weaker than the strength near a nearby phone.
True, but I used the heat radiation from a fire as an example of how electromagnetic signal strengths are near a phone and tower antenna. The propogation of infra-red heat and a cell signal are the same. Expoure to the distant antenna is much less than the exposure of a lower power nearby phone. One lit BBQ coal in your pocket burns much worse than standing at a picnic table 20 feet from a whole bunch of burning coals while waiting for the burgers to be done.
The same distance and exposure aplies to cell towers and the phone in your pocket.
It's the nearby one that burns.
The far one has almost undetectable radiation due to the distance just like trying to warm your hands from a BBQ 20 feet away. You don't get much radiation from the one 20 feet away.
Don't be silly. Just go into 'Advanced' and untick the interfaces you do not want the firewall applied to.
I have XP Home on the wife's machine. Not XP Pro.. I asked about XP home but I get all the answers for XP Pro (which has an advanced tab that XP HOME doesn't have.)
I wonder about this everytime I go to the top of Mt. Diablo in California
;-) The sudy in question is regarding low level long term exposure.
I didn't know there was a school there where kids could get long term exposure.
A cell tower and a communications relay are two different items. One has an antenna designed to cover a large area and the other has a narrow beam designed to cover a very small distant area. Please don't call a relay a cell tower. It isn't. Many of the relay dishes are low power. They don't have to cover a large area. Some of the 10' dishes run in the milli-Watts power range to just a couple watts depending on the distance coverage needed. They run low power because high power isn't needed with a high gain narrow beam antenna. This keeps the area from becomming completely flooded with microwave interference.
Simple File Sharing "feature" of XP Home Edition. Enabled by default,
I went to the KB article and it said "Simple File Sharing is always turned on in Windows XP Home Edition-based computers."
Just use this KB article to turn it off.
Then it goes on to say "By default, the Simple File Sharing UI is turned on in Windows XP Professional-based computers that are joined to a workgroup. Windows XP Professional-based computers that are joined to a domain use only the classic file sharing and security interface."
Simply put.. You can't turn it off in XP HOME!
This leaves you at this security level if you share a folder.. from the article "Level 5: Shared on the network (Read and Write)
This level is the most available and least secure access level."
If you share a folder in XP HOME, your only choice of security is the very lowest. Full write privilages to anyone without a password! What the heck were they thinking?
So yes I did read the article and all the hints provided to change the setting apply to XP Pro, not XP HOME. I Share a folder on my SAMBA box instead. It's much more secure. At least I can set permissions.
Yes but it does break a few things.
It breaks sharing files on a LAN. Even if you have dual network cards or are on dial-up. The firewall is all or nothing. You can't firewall the Internet connection (dialup or otherwise) and not firewall the other adaptor (NIC or second NIC) for local LAN filesharing. Getting the first XP box on both the LAN and Internet was an endless configuration circle for a while. Turning one on turned the other off.
things that used to work in the old version still works in the new version
;)
Slightly offtopic but in reply to the parent post..
My wife bought a new machine with XP home. I decided to move some files. I turned on sharing. I wanted some protection. I tried to set a password on the shared folder.... Um where do you set a password on a folder for read and write privilages? It is missing. You can't share a folder and deny write privilages! This is major not good. My old version of Windows 95 does better on that one. XP home does not pass the Regression test. It's been crippled in several security areas. Ouch! MS missed on that one.
I'd say that windows is passing its regression tests with flying colors
Secutity is job 1 Yea, Right!
Is there any research showing negative health effects of nearby cell towers,
Microwave radiation follows the same propogation rules as light radition including long wavelengths. I made the statement so you could easly compare a easly detected ratation and compare it's levels with an invisable radiation of the electromagnetic spectrum.
If I build a campfire, I can sit several feet from it and be warmed by it from it's thermal radiation. Someone walking between me and the fire will block the radiation and I notice the cold. If they built a huge bonfire, say they have a house catch fire, I can feel the heat at a greater distance. I may get the same warm feeling a couple houses distant from the fire. The house fire is several orders of magnitude larger than a campfire. By increasing my distance from the fire, I can keep my heat exposure to a comfortable level.
Now how far are you from a cell phone stuck against your head and how far are you from the radiating antenna on the top of a cell tower. The tower radiates more power by a couple orders of magnitude, but the guy on the other side of the cubicle wall is hitting you with more power than the tower. It's less power, but a whole lot closer.
There are not too much research on the negative health effects of nearby cell towers, because they measure the signal strength in the area and it is orders of magnitude less strong than the radiation from the phone used by the kids mom in the car. The cell tower health effects are in a background level compared to going to a movie or riding a city bus where somone close grabs his ringing phone.
The study would be inconclusive because there is no control environment without cell phone end users in the area of a tower.
They don't put DRM on CDs, and it didn't damage CD sales.
What scares the industry is the lack of degeneration from copy to copy. They also don't like one copy providing thousands of duplicates.
When CD's came out ther was no such thing as a consumer CD burner. The only way to copy a CD was to copy it to tape. This is done one copy at a time. A one hour CD takes an hour to make a single copy (most people only had one cassette deck) and the copy was degenerated from the original. A copy of the copy is even worse. It's like getting a copy of a movie years ago that has been copied from VHS to VHS to VHS. Not a nice copy by any stretch.
Things have changed. Computers can now RIP a CD. That involves a one generation loss. After that a copy of a copy of a copy is the same as the original copy and is good enough. The RIAA hates that. If the file is posted, then one copy can make thousands all the same as the original with no loss. This is even worse for the RIAA.
They don't put DRM on CDs, and it didn't damage CD sales.
It didn't until everyone and their brother got a CD burner and blanks were $0.25 each. Be honest. Do you have a burnded copy of a friends CD? The first copy is like a tape copy. Now, did you get a copy of an original or a copy of a copy? There is the problem. Even worse, is the copy from KaZa? That's the worst offence to the RIAA. There is no DRM on CD's because at first the tools to rip them didn't exist. Neither did the tools for anyone to burn a CD.
Fourth, the site uses blind links. I don't know what will happen until I click.
Sixth, some advertisers abuse flash. I removed flash when mousing over a flash banner ad (to reach the URL bar) poped up a new window. No click needed. The same advertiser did the same thing on the right side of the page so I would get new windows if I tried to use the scroll bar. Flash completely lacks end user controls. It has no stop button unless the content provider is nice enough to include one. There is enough abuse of this to keep flash off my machine entirely.
I am not worried ... on the other hand: I just tunnel it to my server on an unusual port as it was streaming whatever, and they can come and look really close and still see nothing :)
If they suspect, they can delay packets to give you a good 2 second latency just to discourage active real time 2 way apps.
demand for stolen eSlates will be minimal - they simply will not work for uses other than those for which they were designed."
Those who do not learn from their mistakes are condemmed to repeat them.
The X-Box will only play MS software. The I-Opener will only work with their subscription service, The Cue Cat will only work with the Digital Convergance online database....
Yea Right!
the article lists the size of 120 watt panel as 14 feet by 10 feet.
i es/solar/water.htm
Re-read the article...
The flagship product, Nanosolar SolarPly, is a 14 feet x 10 feet solar electricity module delivering 120 watts per square inch at 110V.
It seems to have been written by the PR department, not the engineering department. I doubt you can get 120 watts/sq inch.
Energy is about 1000 watts/sq. meter on the face of the earth. I don't see how you can get 120 Watts/Square inch when there is only a KW/Square Meter. The math doesn't add up. Per the article I should be able to get 1.2KW with only 10 square inches. That's hard to do when you only get 1KW/Square Meter of sunlight. I wonder if they meant 120 Watts/Square Foot. That might be closer to realistic, but not quite believable. A square yard (9 Sq feet) is a little smaller than a Square Meter and then the claim is close to 1,080 Watts/Square Yard. If that is true, they are now claiming better than 100% conversion effeciency by getting 1080 watts per Square Yard out of sunshine providing about 1,000 Watts per Square Meter.
Before you nag me for references..
Sun's Power. http://instech.tusd.k12.az.us/environment/activit
And of course TFA.
If I got 120 watts per square inch from a module 14 feet by 10 feet or 140 Sq Feet or 20,160 watts, I'd buy one for the roof of my van and kiss gas stations goodbye. You would only need a square inch for the laptop. That kind of power simply isn't in the sunlight and solar cells are not going to put out more than they receive. It may aproach 100% conversion, but it won't exceed it. Don't belive anybody that claims more power out than put in from any machine.