"Are you serious? Ok if we are talking laptops I'd agree. But for desktops (which the average gaming machine is). Wired is the way to go. Why sacrifice speed for a very small convience."
Say, how does a computer with six ethernet lines, a keyboard and a mouse cable snaking out of it look compared to a case with power in, monitor cable out, and bluetooth and wireless for, respectively, peripherals and as many directed wireless signals going off in different directions as it takes to achieve the same bandwidth and connectivity of the six ethernet lines? (Radio signals also move at c so of course your latency issue is with the quality of the signal, and speed is just a matter of how many you multiplex.) Let's try an analogy:
Wilmington, Delaware, is enjoying a novel service through the telephone exchange. Phonograph music is supplied over the wires to those subscribers who sign up for the service. Attached to the wall near the telephone is a box containing a special receiver, adapted to throw out a large volume of sound into the room
Now let's try your argument in refutation: "Symphony over radio? Maybe for a portable (battery-powered) radio, but if your radio is going to be plugged in, symphony over telephone wires makes much more sense. No tuning, no interference, etc etc."
Granted, for historical reasons this analogy is of course weaker, since symphony over telephone wires did not vastly predate symphony over radio, it was not of much higher quality and lower latency in a typical reception scenario, etc. But you get the idea.
P.S. Your speed issue is just a matter of tuning to five, ten, fifteen, twenty radio stations, however many you need to get as much music as you want, in the analogy. Whereas adding another telephone line for each additional bandwidth multiplier (say you want to listen to ["download"] five different symphonies at a time) is a different proposition indeed! At the end of the day, any cable, be it power, USB, ethernet, a keyboard cable, whatever, is going to only carry signal between two points, which you must manually walk from source to destination (somebody needs to plug in both ends), it is going to be fixed length (even if you're close, in which case the lines just looks like a jumbly mess, and if you're a tad too far, too bad), and of course cost pretty much proportional to its length, which does not hold true for increasing wireless gain. Imagine how much a satellite dish costs compared with an equal distance in some kind of cable, nevermind how you connect it with its destination. A wireless solution does not require a human to manually set the exact point that is at each end, it is not of fixed length, it does not take up physical space, and, therefore, multiplying the number of these signals looks nothing like multiplying the number of ethernet lines.
I realize we're not quite where we need to be on the wireless front, but that's what the article is about, and, after all, neither was the horseless carriage when introduced.
Please forgive the intrusion; I will be as brief as possible. I know you're all good friends of Audent here at Slash Dot, and I wanted to let you be the first to know that Audent has received a very special opportunity with our research group at NIMH Outreach. The study is perfectly safe, and Audent will be back with you in no time at all! Once he is, you might notice some very small changes, but rest assured that these will all be for the better. I know you will be very happy with Auden's new opportunities in life, as all good friends are and ought to be, but if you have any questions at all, do feel free to reply, and I promise to give your concerns my fullest attention. What a wonderful chance Auden has received with our study! I am sure he will be the first to share his gift with all of you.
Until then, I wish all of you the best here at Slash Dot and elsewhere. Yours faithfully,
The fact is, the trademark they seem to be using for anything music related is a stylized fruit, along with the trademarks "iPod" and "iTunes". When have you ever heard a phrase like "the Apple iTunes store". It's just the iTunes store, it's just the iPod, and the posters just use a stylized fruit (sorry, there's no html entity I can insert for it.), which is Apple's trademark.
They can't help having a certain company name, which they don't use in their music business! Not because it wouldn't add value, but because (in music) it's not their trademark to use. They don't infringe.
Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers.
a lifting strength more than 100 times that of normal skeletal muscle
Whoa. okay.
Fact 1. You know, the human body is so efficient at converting Calorie input into work output that in the world of fitness and nutrition, we practically don't even need to differentiate between Calorie intake and Calorie output! Eating exactly 500 Calories less is almost the same as performing exactly 500 Calories of work! (I think that fairly exact Calorie output testing can be performed in the laboratory, although I don't know the technique.)
Muscle can produce 3.35 kW (4 1/2 horsepower) at full rate.
Okay, so combined with 100 times that of normal skeletal muscle, these lab muscles can perform work at a rate of 335 kW or 450 horsepower per second at pretty much perfect efficiency! Holy shit.
So how far away are we from organic power plants? Wait a minute, 459 horsepower? How far are we from starting the morning with a couple of gallons of nutritional shake for our organic car?
Exactly! Anyway, Cisco does just fine in speaking with consumers: who doesn't remember the national TV spots? "Cisco, we're the Dot in dot com." Or was that Sun? Well it's not Microsoft, that's for sure.
* KBR has been awarded a contract announced by the Department of Homeland Security's United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) component. The Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contingency contract is to support ICE facilities and has a maximum total value of $385 million over a five-year term. The contract provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the United States, or to support the rapid development of new programs. (Emphasis mine.)
As a last note, it took me about 2800 computing hours on three computers to come up with all of this (parsed among three computers), not to mention the hours it took to program everything correctly. (The words on their own only took about 25ish hours, including programming - the longest parts were running the 4x4, 5x5, and 6x6 word square searches.
Reader jefu has produced (but not yet disclosed) a one-liner that gives the correct word-list in one second! Let's try to reproduce his results![1]
Slashdot Reader CONTEST As an exercise to the slashdot reader, let's reproduce jefu's results, only this time noting total programming time as well. If you're interested, type: $ echo 'started programming!'; date at your bash prompt now! Ladies and gentleman, start your engines! Remember: post only your total programming time, and total execution time, not the actual one-liner you produce. (Don't ruin it for other readers.) May the power of script be with you!
[1] jefu, please refrain from disclosing your one-liner for generating the e-grep line above until the completion of the contest
I was born in 1983, but now I can re-experience even advances in computing that happened in the seventies and before! Cabinet-sized hard-drives that hold a couple of megabytes? Quantum computing is at A FEW QUBITS! I doubt many people here lived through the ENIAC (and realized what it meant at the time), but that's exactly what my grandchildren will be hearing from me. Granson, back in my day we had EIGHT QUBITS! Not qubytes, QUBITS, sonny boy, eight of 'em. Like this: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Total. And that was state of the art. It was a research demonstration! And we liked it!
"There is a world market for 4, maybe 5 quantum computers."
"512 kiloqubytes outta' be enough for anybody!"
Etc, etc, etc. WHOOOHOO!!! I was there at ground zero, baby!!! In ought six!!!!
What do you mean ought-six, grandpa? "I mean 2006, granson".
"Whoa! When were you born?"
"I was born in the LAST MILENNIUM, GRANSON"
"Did they have cars?"
"Just road ones."
"What about Google?"
"yeah, but it wasn't like today. Man I wish I'd have held on to that stock tho'..."
Step one. The Code. The bare code. This is the code without comments:
1. Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, 2. So do our minutes hasten to their end; 3. Each changing place with that which goes before, 4. In sequent toil all forwards do contend. 5. Nativity, once in the main of light, 6. Crawls to maturity, wherewith being crown'd, 7. Crooked eclipses 'gainst his glory fight, 8. And Time that gave doth now his gift confound. 9. Time doth transfix the flourish set on youth 10. And delves the parallels in beauty's brow, 11. Feeds on the rarities of nature's truth, 12. And nothing stands but for his scythe to mow: 13. And yet to times in hope, my verse shall stand 14. Praising thy worth, despite his cruel hand.
If you've just run over it as quickly as I have, you won't understand it either on a textual level (what each sentence means) or the poem as a whole.
Now let's add comments (from that web page).
Step Two. Code with comments.
/* The code below meditates on mortality. At the end the meditation is about beloved, and this becomes the return value.
(so you can use this whole function as a get method [get beloved] from the data in mortality, but please note that the code's more important function is its side effect, the meditation.
The thoughts the side effect brings focus on destruction, you can consider it as taking reference counts, etc, whatever meditation on mortality consists of. [Note: this function does no garbage collection, no destruction methods are invoked from objects in mortality! You're not actually killing anything here, just preparing for the death...]*/
/* like as==in like manner to the way in which: */ 1. Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore,
/* imagery of the destruction of each wave as it beats on the shore to make a simile with human life (continues forever, but each life/minute ends):*/ 2. So do our minutes hasten to their end;
/* Waves appear to change place with each other. As one rolls away, another takes its place: */ 3. Each changing place with that which goes before,
/* in sequent toil == in consecutive laborious procession: */ 4. In sequent toil all forwards do contend.
/* TO DO comment: */ 5. Nativity, once in the main of light, 6. Crawls to maturity, wherewith being crown'd, 7. Crooked eclipses 'gainst his glory fight, 8. And Time that gave doth now his gift confound. 9. Time doth transfix the flourish set on youth 10. And delves the parallels in beauty's brow, 11. Feeds on the rarities of nature's truth, 12. And nothing stands but for his scythe to mow: 13. And yet to times in hope, my verse shall stand 14. Praising thy worth, despite his cruel hand.
The 67-year-old took off from Mumbai, India in a 48m(160ft) balloon and flew to a height of 21,290m (69,852ft [= 13.22 miles]) breaking the earlier record of 19,811m(64,997ft [=12.31 miles]).
A very good source for some perspective is this Wikipedia page on atmospheric heights. Note that the troposphere (illustrated nicely with Mt. Everest just jutting into it, an airplane flying in this layer) only extends up to 17 km (at the equator, lowers as you near the poles - the figure at the right in the Wikipedia page is in miles though, so be careful) -- this guy flew well above that (21 km).
So this guy is in the stratosphere, where we see only weather balloons illustrated. The layer above (mesosphere, from about 50 km on) is practically space, it's apparently where meteors burn up. So I guess this guy reached the high stratosphere - for comparison check out that Mount Everest is at 8.84 km elevation!
It's no wonder, then, that from the article (which I actually read, just for you): He travelled in a pressurised cabin attached to a balloon as high as a 22-storey building. This "pressurized cabin" is just mentioned once more, in this "quick facts" table:
BALLOON FACTS AND FIGURES.
Current record: 64,997ft (19,811m)
Target altitude: 70,000ft (21,336m)
Balloon capacity: 1.6m cu ft
Total height: 160ft (48.8m)
Gross weight: 1,820kg (1.8 tons)
Pilot flies in 560kg sealed aluminium capsule approx 2.7m x 1.4m (9ft x 4ft 6in)
Fitted with 18 burners, three fuel tanks, sat-phone; camera; two VHF radios; GPS; life-support system; safety-release system and parachute Ascent: 3 hours
Descent: 1.5-2 hours
whoops, sorry, there's once more mention of this enclosure, here are a couple of more paragraphs quoted for you, the appropriate text in bold):
Mr Singhania's craft comprised a pressurised aluminium capsule with a specially designed multi-coloured balloon and 18 burners.
The balloon was connected to a parachute that would have been released automatically in case of any emergency.
A helicopter carrying a technical team followed the balloon closely and was in constant touch with Mr Singhania throughout the flight.
And what the hell, there's so little I didn't reproduce, you might as well have a mirror. (Although I find only the following other fact interesting: "During the ascent, air temperatures plummeted to around -93C (-135F)." And maybe a quote from his wife Asha telling of her relief and joy at the success of the trip: "When I heard that he had broken the record, I became numb in mind and heart". I'm sure there's a funny to be made about that.)
CAREFUL, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE INTERESTING BELOW!!
ARTICLE TEXT (with markup)
------------- INDIAN SETS BALLOON FLIGHT RECORD
Mr Singhania's 160ft high balloon took off from a site near Mumbai Indian Vijaypat Singhania has claimed a new world record for the highest flight in a hot air balloon, after a voyage lasting several hours.
The 67-year-old textile tycoon soared past 21,000 metres (69,000 feet) but fell just short of his original target.
He travelled in a pressurised cabin attached to a balloon as high as a 22-storey building.
The previous record of 19,811 metres (64,997 feet) was set by Per Lindstrand in Plano, Texas, in June 1988.
Mr Singhania's son, Gautam, announced the news to the waiting media.
He said: "As you can see we are very happy. The team is also excited because they have worked very hard on this project for a very long time."
Colin Prescott, leader of Mr Singhania's British technical te
When I read "Cray Co-Founder Joins Microsoft" I immediately thought, "don't you mean joins Google" -- and anyway so what, it's not like they need him, I bet it's just for the business connections. Anyone else have this first reaction to the headline?
okay, Family of bears crashes (...for the night? crashes the party?) Anyway every camper knows to shut the flaps against the bears.
Pope is accused of defecating in forested areas Hey, when you gotta' go, you gotta' go. Nature calls.
But this? Microsoft discovered to be Catholic I call bullshit - don't let the tithing (MS tax) / real charity done by the Foundation throw you off. No way Gates would let his workers wear his crucified corpse around their neck. (Though I'm sure Balmer has thought of it...)
yes, since the time I wrote the anonymous comment above, asking my post to get modded back down, it went from a 3 to a 4! I guess I can just add here logged in with +1:
Because I wrote 20 (feet^3) instead of (20 feet)^3, my calculations are off by a factor of 400! The first reply has correct numbers: for an 8 foot x 8 foot x 20 foot box, that's ~8% of the available space.
And one more time: MOD MY POST BACK DOWN -1 WRONG!
Running with your numbers, look at this. Quoting you:
With 500GB drives, it would take 7340.032 drives to attain 3.5PB... with NO redundancy.
For the Deskstar7k500 [Please note that this isn't the "DeathStar" anymore, it was just when they put five instead of the industry-standard four platters into the DeskStar that they started dropping like flies, and I suppose the DeathStar reputation no longer stands. I've never owned one.]
The specifications [see footnote for a few other sites] state
Height (mm) 25.4 Width (mm) 101.6 Depth (mm) 146
146 mm) x (101.6 mm) x (25.4 mm) x 7 340 = 2.76551705 m^3, and, running with the article's numbers, let's see how much of 20 feet cubed that is... (article: the most storage, memory and power support into a 20...foot box -- note that a BOX of course is less cubic area than a 20-foot cube)....
WHAT? it's not a fraction, but larger by a factor of 4+??? Just for the hard-drives? Even when we assumed a CUBE???
Man, I want some of the shit that guy's smoking. I was expecting to debunk with just the hard-drives taking an impossibly large percentage of the proposed 20-foot "box". But....man. Cringely must not have done even a basic sanity check. (And remember, I'm pretty sure he didn't have a 20 foot high, 20 foot wide box in mind, or he would have said cube. To a writer, a "20-foot box" sounds like an elongated storage container, e.g. 8x8x20 feet.... BTW that's the first hit for 20 foot storage container, I can only assume a writer would have such a thing in mind...)
Are you worth $65,000 per year? Maybe you're worth more or you value your time more? In any case, at $65,000 per year, you make about $0.52 per minute.
For people "worth" $65,000/year there are three cases:
You are on salary at a day-job ($65,000 / year, irrespective of what you're doing as long as you don't get fired - commute, come in one saturday to meet a deadline, read slashdot instead of working, slip out early, come in late, or come in early, work a little late, etc.) In this case when you're off work you're still making the $0.12 per minute, assuming you're not currently doing something that makes you lose your job or that must be considered part of your next job (to pay off later when you get a higher salary doing something different). When you decide (off work) at seven PM to close your other windows and do this shit for an hour, it's like trading an hour of your time for the appropriate-sized bill appearing on your floor. There's no loss, you're already "being paid" your annual salary. Plus maybe it's fun.
You are employed by the hour (the number of hours you actually put in is what comes to $65,000 / year, with the assumption you could take more hours if you wanted 'em. If you couldn't take more hours it's the same as case 1.). In this case we shouldn't just divide your minutely earning for the whole year, we should say that you make money when you're on the clock, and no money when you're off the clock. The question is, if your on-the-clock job is worth more than this shit, then why would you take an hour of this shit instead of just clocking one more hour? If you consider this shit work and not just relaxation or something, you probably wouldn't. You'd just put in one more hour at work.
You are unemployed. In this case your profession could very well be worth $65,000 / year, but you might not be seeing any of this because you are currently unemployed. Maybe you spend 8 hrs a day interviewing or job-searching (sometimes to include learning something, getting a certificate, etc). In this scenario I think someone is in the same case as 1 (salaried) if they have enough savings (or can take on enough debt) to reach their next job [let's say the signing bonus pays you back these invested days/weeks -- no matter how many hours you actually spent doing them] , and case 2 (hourly) if they don't have enough savings to reach their next job -- except that the hourly wage should be considered slightly negative (you spend something during your job hunt, but don't actually make anything).
Why would someone invest work in a negative hourly wage? Because they don't know that they don't have enough savings / can't take on enough debt to reach their next job on that investment!
I think this is a nice way of showing the different cases someone could be in who is "worth $65,000/yr" (interestingly I think the first case works for a completely passive income too, like if you live off of interest. You're still salaried, you just never have to come in to work "in order not to get fired". If you invest time, however, in making sure you get that interest, then that's what coming into work consists of. (Or think of absentee landlords, who must "come into work" for their salary only very rarely if at all.)
I can very well imagine someone is "worth 65,000/yr" whose "job" consists of reading the Wall Street Journal in the morning and making sure they don't have to head for the hills (the $65,000 is from the interest on "very safe" bonds). The rest of their day is as in case 1.
Also, please think about case 3, because I could be wrong and maybe there is a better way to analyze this one.
I am interested in how your analysis changes if you consider Google attempting to leverage the cash into retaining a search monopoly amidst new competition, and securing a monopoly in semantically relevant text advertising (the other half of their income.) I don't know how (literally corner the market on developers smart enough -- the last few are expensive -- to create service as good as theirs, unlikely but for example buy very key patents, deploy massive infrastructure to tie web hosts or users into somehow (remember Google's Internet Accelerator... why does it say you can't download it right now?), whatever you want to imagine.) Please analyze from that perspective.
Interactive 3D Display: Its Here! Posted on 08.17.05 @ 7:05 am
Story by Asim Waqar
Originally mentioned at Gizmodo as a prototype in 2003, IO2 Technology has just completed the production unit and provided the details behind the revolutionary HelioDisplay which produces interactive 3D dsiplays in thin air (via lasers) from common sources.
The HelioDisplay technology page lists some of its remarkable features:
Inputs from most regular sources: PC,TV, DVD, HDTV, Video game consoles Projects a 22 to 42 (depending on model) diagonal image that floats above the device It is interactive, like a virtual touch screen: a hand or finger can act as a mouse Although the HelioDisplay uses lasers, the images are not holographic Possible uses for this product include advertising, entertainment facilities, design prototyping, teleconferencing etc. Obviously the applications for such a product are endless. Most importantly it may convince my wife to finally allow the purchase of the Brook Burke Swimsuit calendar for testing purposes! This of course relies heavily on pricing (TBD) and other more, um, personal matters.
Apparently the product is ready for release; visit the product page here which looks like its being updated right now.
For a citation that has probably very much relevance to the researcher's phrase "adaptive immune system (like mammals)" in response to your post, look at the research behind a Nobel Prize given not long ago for "The Generative Grammar of the Immune System"..
Slashdot Mirror
From Distributing Music Over Telephone Lines (Telephony, December 18, 1909, pages 699-701):Now let's try your argument in refutation: "Symphony over radio? Maybe for a portable (battery-powered) radio, but if your radio is going to be plugged in, symphony over telephone wires makes much more sense. No tuning, no interference, etc etc."
Granted, for historical reasons this analogy is of course weaker, since symphony over telephone wires did not vastly predate symphony over radio, it was not of much higher quality and lower latency in a typical reception scenario, etc. But you get the idea.
P.S. Your speed issue is just a matter of tuning to five, ten, fifteen, twenty radio stations, however many you need to get as much music as you want, in the analogy. Whereas adding another telephone line for each additional bandwidth multiplier (say you want to listen to ["download"] five different symphonies at a time) is a different proposition indeed! At the end of the day, any cable, be it power, USB, ethernet, a keyboard cable, whatever, is going to only carry signal between two points, which you must manually walk from source to destination (somebody needs to plug in both ends), it is going to be fixed length (even if you're close, in which case the lines just looks like a jumbly mess, and if you're a tad too far, too bad), and of course cost pretty much proportional to its length, which does not hold true for increasing wireless gain. Imagine how much a satellite dish costs compared with an equal distance in some kind of cable, nevermind how you connect it with its destination. A wireless solution does not require a human to manually set the exact point that is at each end, it is not of fixed length, it does not take up physical space, and, therefore, multiplying the number of these signals looks nothing like multiplying the number of ethernet lines.
I realize we're not quite where we need to be on the wireless front, but that's what the article is about, and, after all, neither was the horseless carriage when introduced.
Hello Everyone!
Please forgive the intrusion; I will be as brief as possible. I know you're all good friends of Audent here at Slash Dot, and I wanted to let you be the first to know that Audent has received a very special opportunity with our research group at NIMH Outreach. The study is perfectly safe, and Audent will be back with you in no time at all! Once he is, you might notice some very small changes, but rest assured that these will all be for the better. I know you will be very happy with Auden's new opportunities in life, as all good friends are and ought to be, but if you have any questions at all, do feel free to reply, and I promise to give your concerns my fullest attention. What a wonderful chance Auden has received with our study! I am sure he will be the first to share his gift with all of you.
Until then, I wish all of you the best here at Slash Dot and elsewhere. Yours faithfully,
Dr. 3-State Bit
Research Coordinator
National Institute of Mental Health
http://www.nimh.nih.gov/outreach/index.cfm
Mr. President, we cannot allow a mineshaft gap!
Go ahead, search for the word "Apple" on this page:
The fact is, the trademark they seem to be using for anything music related is a stylized fruit, along with the trademarks "iPod" and "iTunes". When have you ever heard a phrase like "the Apple iTunes store". It's just the iTunes store, it's just the iPod, and the posters just use a stylized fruit (sorry, there's no html entity I can insert for it.), which is Apple's trademark.
They can't help having a certain company name, which they don't use in their music business! Not because it wouldn't add value, but because (in music) it's not their trademark to use. They don't infringe.
skeletal muscle
Whoa. okay.
Fact 1. You know, the human body is so efficient at converting Calorie input into work output that in the world of fitness and nutrition, we practically don't even need to differentiate between Calorie intake and Calorie output! Eating exactly 500 Calories less is almost the same as performing exactly 500 Calories of work! (I think that fairly exact Calorie output testing can be performed in the laboratory, although I don't know the technique.)
Fact 2. Now let's all take a moment to read the Wipedia article on the human muscle, which includes:Okay, so combined with 100 times that of normal skeletal muscle, these lab muscles can perform work at a rate of 335 kW or 450 horsepower per second at pretty much perfect efficiency! Holy shit.
So how far away are we from organic power plants?
Wait a minute, 459 horsepower? How far are we from starting the morning with a couple of gallons of nutritional shake for our organic car?
Exactly! Anyway, Cisco does just fine in speaking with consumers: who doesn't remember the national TV spots? "Cisco, we're the Dot in dot com." Or was that Sun? Well it's not Microsoft, that's for sure.
Notes:
My Google query was "site:Halliburton.com contract emergency detention".
In case the Halliburton document is taken down, or if you'd like to see it with the search terms highlighted, see the page in Google's cache.
From the article: Reader jefu has produced (but not yet disclosed) a one-liner that gives the correct word-list in one second! Let's try to reproduce his results![1]
Slashdot Reader CONTEST
As an exercise to the slashdot reader, let's reproduce jefu's results, only this time noting total programming time as well. If you're interested, type:
$ echo 'started programming!'; date
at your bash prompt now! Ladies and gentleman, start your engines! Remember: post only your total programming time, and total execution time, not the actual one-liner you produce. (Don't ruin it for other readers.) May the power of script be with you!
[1] jefu, please refrain from disclosing your one-liner for generating the e-grep line above until the completion of the contest
I was born in 1983, but now I can re-experience even advances in computing that happened in the seventies and before! Cabinet-sized hard-drives that hold a couple of megabytes? Quantum computing is at A FEW QUBITS! I doubt many people here lived through the ENIAC (and realized what it meant at the time), but that's exactly what my grandchildren will be hearing from me. Granson, back in my day we had EIGHT QUBITS! Not qubytes, QUBITS, sonny boy, eight of 'em. Like this: one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. Total. And that was state of the art. It was a research demonstration! And we liked it!
"There is a world market for 4, maybe 5 quantum computers."
"512 kiloqubytes outta' be enough for anybody!"
Etc, etc, etc. WHOOOHOO!!! I was there at ground zero, baby!!! In ought six!!!!
What do you mean ought-six, grandpa? "I mean 2006, granson".
"Whoa! When were you born?"
"I was born in the LAST MILENNIUM, GRANSON"
"Did they have cars?"
"Just road ones."
"What about Google?"
"yeah, but it wasn't like today. Man I wish I'd have held on to that stock tho'..."
Instead of code, let's comment an obscure poem. (I work from here.)
Step one. The Code. The bare code. This is the code without comments:
If you've just run over it as quickly as I have, you won't understand it either on a textual level (what each sentence means) or the poem as a whole.
Now let's add comments (from that web page).
Step Two. Code with comments.
ha, I thought you were making a subtle point!
A very good source for some perspective is this Wikipedia page on atmospheric heights. Note that the troposphere (illustrated nicely with Mt. Everest just jutting into it, an airplane flying in this layer) only extends up to 17 km (at the equator, lowers as you near the poles - the figure at the right in the Wikipedia page is in miles though, so be careful) -- this guy flew well above that (21 km).
:
So this guy is in the stratosphere, where we see only weather balloons illustrated. The layer above (mesosphere, from about 50 km on) is practically space, it's apparently where meteors burn up. So I guess this guy reached the high stratosphere - for comparison check out that Mount Everest is at 8.84 km elevation!
It's no wonder, then, that from the article (which I actually read, just for you)
He travelled in a pressurised cabin attached to a balloon as high as a 22-storey building.
This "pressurized cabin" is just mentioned once more, in this "quick facts" table:
whoops, sorry, there's once more mention of this enclosure, here are a couple of more paragraphs quoted for you, the appropriate text in bold):
And what the hell, there's so little I didn't reproduce, you might as well have a mirror. (Although I find only the following other fact interesting: "During the ascent, air temperatures plummeted to around -93C (-135F)." And maybe a quote from his wife Asha telling of her relief and joy at the success of the trip: "When I heard that he had broken the record, I became numb in mind and heart". I'm sure there's a funny to be made about that.)
CAREFUL, THERE IS NOTHING ELSE INTERESTING BELOW!!
When I read "Cray Co-Founder Joins Microsoft" I immediately thought, "don't you mean joins Google" -- and anyway so what, it's not like they need him, I bet it's just for the business connections. Anyone else have this first reaction to the headline?
birth of the P-P-P-Powerbook
No more Gnome or no Moore no more.
okay,
Family of bears crashes
(...for the night? crashes the party?) Anyway every camper knows to shut the flaps against the bears.
Pope is accused of defecating in forested areas
Hey, when you gotta' go, you gotta' go. Nature calls.
But this?
Microsoft discovered to be Catholic
I call bullshit - don't let the tithing (MS tax) / real charity done by the Foundation throw you off. No way Gates would let his workers wear his crucified corpse around their neck. (Though I'm sure Balmer has thought of it...)
Also 0 hits on this search.
Holy shit, your comment began with
Yeah... I think maybe you're wrong.
Lumbergh, is that you....???
yes, since the time I wrote the anonymous comment above, asking my post to get modded back down, it went from a 3 to a 4! I guess I can just add here logged in with +1:
MOD MY POST BACK DOWN -1 WRONG!
Because I wrote 20 (feet^3) instead of (20 feet)^3, my calculations are off by a factor of 400! The first reply has correct numbers:
for an 8 foot x 8 foot x 20 foot box, that's ~8% of the available space.
And one more time:
MOD MY POST BACK DOWN -1 WRONG!
The specifications [see footnote for a few other sites] state 146 mm) x (101.6 mm) x (25.4 mm) x 7 340 = 2.76551705 m^3,
and, running with the article's numbers, let's see how much of 20 feet cubed that is... (article: the most storage, memory and power support into a 20...foot box -- note that a BOX of course is less cubic area than a 20-foot cube)....
((146 mm) x (101.6 mm) x (25.4 mm) x 7 340) / (20 (feet^3)) = 4.88316565...
WHAT? it's not a fraction, but larger by a factor of 4+??? Just for the hard-drives? Even when we assumed a CUBE???
Man, I want some of the shit that guy's smoking. I was expecting to debunk with just the hard-drives taking an impossibly large percentage of the proposed 20-foot "box". But....man. Cringely must not have done even a basic sanity check. (And remember, I'm pretty sure he didn't have a 20 foot high, 20 foot wide box in mind, or he would have said cube. To a writer, a "20-foot box" sounds like an elongated storage container, e.g. 8x8x20 feet.... BTW that's the first hit for 20 foot storage container, I can only assume a writer would have such a thing in mind...)
English and math, people, English AND math.
Footnote:
Other sources for specifications:
Wrong. We'll know from Google's search results. Mark my words, one day the following search result will cease to be returned forever:
That's when we'll know.
Well, Google says $65000 per year = $0.123586182 per minute.
For people "worth" $65,000/year there are three cases:
Why would someone invest work in a negative hourly wage? Because they don't know that they don't have enough savings / can't take on enough debt to reach their next job on that investment!
I think this is a nice way of showing the different cases someone could be in who is "worth $65,000/yr" (interestingly I think the first case works for a completely passive income too, like if you live off of interest. You're still salaried, you just never have to come in to work "in order not to get fired". If you invest time, however, in making sure you get that interest, then that's what coming into work consists of. (Or think of absentee landlords, who must "come into work" for their salary only very rarely if at all.)
I can very well imagine someone is "worth 65,000/yr" whose "job" consists of reading the Wall Street Journal in the morning and making sure they don't have to head for the hills (the $65,000 is from the interest on "very safe" bonds). The rest of their day is as in case 1.
Also, please think about case 3, because I could be wrong and maybe there is a better way to analyze this one.
I am interested in how your analysis changes if you consider Google attempting to leverage the cash into retaining a search monopoly amidst new competition, and securing a monopoly in semantically relevant text advertising (the other half of their income.) I don't know how (literally corner the market on developers smart enough -- the last few are expensive -- to create service as good as theirs, unlikely but for example buy very key patents, deploy massive infrastructure to tie web hosts or users into somehow (remember Google's Internet Accelerator... why does it say you can't download it right now?), whatever you want to imagine.) Please analyze from that perspective.
Do you mean the image had no depth values? (Was a hovering plane?)
Here is the article text (with links):
For a citation that has probably very much relevance to the researcher's phrase "adaptive immune system (like mammals)" in response to your post, look at the research behind a Nobel Prize given not long ago for "The Generative Grammar of the Immune System"..