The US has one of the strongest economies in the world, primarily because it uses force to back it up. Anything that could threaten US economic interests is either destroyed or knocked down with military power, or squeezed shut with trade embargos. It is just the way things are, right or wrong, but don't attribute everything to capitalism.
However, capitalism, while part of the puzzle that has helped the US end up where it is, has also caused the loss of their citizen's personal liberties and rights. Corporations make a joke of their election and parlimentary process, by the mere fact that they are allowed to influence it to the degree they can.
Furthermore, the US owes a lot to the fact that they lost so little in WWII compared to others involved in said conflict. This led to their dominace on the world stage, and they've used everything they can to remain there.
You've hit the nail on the head there. My purchasing plans for PDAs used to be "no keyboard, no sale". I never envisioned that someone would be so moronic as to go with something other than querty, so I guess I'll have to amend that.
Guys, I think you (both previous posts) really need to READ the article before you make the above comments. No, he didn't say "x is gone" as a way of expressing intent, for further in the paragraph he said (and, as I quoted.. so you aren't reading what I'm saying even) :
"No, don't worry, I deleted it voluntarily..."
Now, people don't say "x is gone" and then say "I got rid of it vountarily" to express a future intent.
Furthermore, the paragraph is written as if the entire paragraph is one phone call. Odd to say the least.
I will tell you one thing. As to "reporting".. you try to flush out things that don't jive like this, and ask the person you are interviewing for clairty. If this person interviewed his friend, and then slapped it all down on a paragraph, than his proof reading should have uncovered such strangeness.
Since it didn't, even at best his proof reading sucks, as I said before. What other things has he missed during proof reading, when such an obvious screwup makes it through? Technical mistakes? Others?
I guess you aren't putting much thought into this. If his "friend" had removed his windows parition after 10 days. How could his final words (or conclusions!) be:
but after a month, I have adjusted completely. I am removing Windows from my computer!
when:
The friend called me 10 days later: "My Windows partition is gone!"...No, don't worry, I deleted it voluntarily..." He continued, his voice full of excitement: "I don't need Windows any more.....
The point here is, is that the article _is_ untrue. Obviously his friend didn't say "I'm removing windows after a month!", because he apparently already did after 10 days.
Put another way, his friend either decided to remove windows after a month or 10 days, not both.
One of the two statements are false. If one of the statements are so obviously false and paper thin, how true is the rest of the article? How well was is proof read? If it wasn't proof read enough to sufficently take that above into account, what about important technical details?
The best case scenario is that it is a mistake on his part. This lends one to question how valid his reporting methods are, if he makes mistakes on so simple a point. The worst case scenario is that he made the story up completely. In either case, the story is untrue as it sits.
Why do people lie so much? Take a look at the "The Linux Distribution Game" on this link. Look at the first paragraph. In the first paragraph, the author states that :
Do everything you normally do with your computer and report back on your experience. You are not allowed to boot into Windows during that month." The friend called me 10 days later: "My Windows partition is gone!"
Then, later in the same paragraph :
"No, don't worry, I deleted it voluntarily..." He continued, his voice full of excitement: "I don't need Windows any more.....
Then, still later....
His final words were: "It is all in the way you work. Changing your routine is not easy at first, but after a month, I have adjusted completely. I am removing Windows from my computer!"
So, let me get this straight. His friend called him in 10 days, saying he had deleted windows from his computer. Later on in the phone conversation, he then said that "... after a month.. removing windows from my computer...".
You know, people are going to make up stories and post them on the web, and claim they are real, they should at least read their work to make sure it makes sense, and isn't filled with gibberish ravings. Its obvious this article isn't true, since the above statements aren't true. One of them have to be false. If one statement is false, than the article is false. What percentage of the article is false, I don't know, but at this point I have to throw it all away.
Once someone lies in an article, you can't trust the rest of it. Expecially when it starts with lies.
Love it or hate it, I'm sure everyone's got a love story or traumatic memory of the infamous MS-DOS.
I never used MS-DOS. Everyone I knew had Amigas at the time, since they were far, far superior to MessyDos of the day. I progressed from that, directly to Linux. This doesn't mean I never had the opportunity to type a command or two under MS-DOS, but it does mean that I never *used* it for anything, realistically. I don't have a fond memory, or traumatic memory of MS-DOS.
I feel like someone who managed to live through a war without any emotional scars. The thing is, I know many, MANY people that NEVER used a Windows or DOS box, yet lived through the DOS era. These are owners of Amiga, Apple, Atari or other boxes of the era. They commanded a significant market share in the beginning of things, and only later on did their number wane to insignificance. You dishonour them by implying that they never existed, and that there was no other option at the time.
This is supposed to be a place where people realise the significance of computers in history, and know a little of that history. Please keep that in mind.
All this shows is a motherboard with sufficent onboard temperature monitoring, shutting down because the CPU is over heating. It has nothing to do with the CPU having any sort of built in temperature throttle like the P4 has (or even the 68040 had). Tom's Hardware and this video are showing two completely different and seperate things. One shows how a motherboard reacts in order to save an amd cpu (this current video), and the other shows what happens if the cpu is left to cope with a heat problem on its own (Tom's tests) without the motherboard stepping in to rescue it.
I wish people would at least FILTER some of these posts. Its seems that/. just doesn't care some days... or maybe its just on slow days;).
I actually read a book (of course like any other, not authorized by paramount) that explained the change, with fairly good reasoning. It was about 15 years ago, but I do recall that it had something to do with the Klingons travelling back in time, and monkeying with their genetics in order to make themselves more agressive, and war like... because they were about to loose completely and totally in a war with the Federation. They also intended to take back some advanced technology at the same time, but Kirk, Spock and Bones (who else) managed to stop them before they pass on the technology, but after the genetic changes were done (I believe by a virus).
In the new time line the war didn't happen, because the Klingons who travelled back in time were partially successful in introducing the genetic change some time after the original series, but before the movies in the time line. The new time line took effect, and after the virus was introduced, the Klingon's appearance changed. They were also aware of why it changed.
Anyhow, the entire concept was rather entertaining, and if someone was up on Trek lore to an insane amount, Worf's explanation made sense in the context of that novel.
This "study" by whomever it was in Britian seems to be flawed. Its the chicken and the egg syndrome as it is many times in these cases, and it seems the researchers are so slow that they don't even catch on to this.
Are these kids doing better in school then their peers because they play video games, or are the kids just more intelligent, better able to concentrate, and have better dexterity than their peers? Obviously if they are, they _would_ be better at playing video games.
It doesn't take a genius to realise that if you study 100 kids who enjoy doing math problems, that you will find most of those kids are better at doing math problems. Likewise, if you take 100 kids that love to play video games, and study them, you will find that those kids are better in hand-eye reflexes, concentration and problem solving. Its not because they are playing video games that they get this way, its because they were this way to start off with that they like to play video games.
What fun is it to play something that you can never win, rarely improve at, and you don't even understand? None! The children that don't play video games are either less intelligent, or unable to manipulate the interface they are using (mouse, joystick, etc) in order to find the game amusing.
What this study really needed was 1000 random kids from England, and 1000 random kids from a country that is identical in every way to England (including diet, vitamin intake, clean water and good food, good schooling), but have a low or no computer count. This way the study actually has a control group.
Ever heard of those?
Its quite obvious that all people are not genetically identical. Some are morons, some have weak bodies or minds. These kids don't. Simple.
This isn't going to fix anything. Most clerks couldn't care less why you don't buy cds. Most are stuck in a lame low paying job, and all they want to do is work, and then get out of there as quick as possible.
They aren't going to call the record company, the only person they would speak to is their boss about it. What if the person you complain to is the boss? Well, the boss doesn't care, unless it reaches extreme numbers. Even then, he'll complain to his distributor's rep, who has a manager above him, and who has absolutely no contact with the label company except through the guy who does the buying across the hall or on another floor, or even in another building or town!
If the distributor cares enough to tell the record label, then of course they are only speaking to another rep., in a long line of reps., three or four people (at least) removed from the decision makers in the company.
What's my point? My point is that if you follow the chain of people back to the source, you end up going through 10 to 15 people who have to repeat what you said, in order for you to get heard. Do you have any idea how distorted your complaint will be by then, unless its written down or recorded somewhere? Even people reading it off of a piece of a paper over the phone to the next guy in the line will end up with massive distortions in meaning.
No, the only real solution is to talk to the source directly. The thing is, companies have purposefully enshrouded themselves in a veil of protection. Its purpose it two-fold.
First, you have to go through 3 or 4 people in a company tree before you get from the outside point of contact (like a phone call) to someone that can actually respond to your comments meaningfully. This generally eliminates people who are only slightly pissed off, and these people will probably still buy the product anyhow. Speaking with said person doesn't really help though, because of the second reason the veil exists. Companies don't WANT to hear your complaints. They want to sell to the 95% of the population that is too stupid to give a flying fuck about what is happening to the world, and where it is going. They don't care if you complain, they don't care if you are upset, they don't care if you won't buy their product! All they care about is their agenda, and if you are going to disturb this.
The only way to do so is with a national campain. Sadly, this is one of the few things spam could be used for that would actually be beneficial. Sending mass emails about the current state of corporate affairs, and how they indend to rip us off.
"There's even a refrigerator that has a display which projects an image of whats inside without opening the doors."
For fuck sakes, anyone ever hear of glass?
But if you want to stream data (video) to the screen, then the data rate to the Graphics card will be significantly higher than PCI can handle, and the data rate from the disc array will require multiple fibre channel.On top of this the banwidth of the cable that actually gets the data to the screen will have to be enormous. I really don't think that it makes sense to think about using one of these with a conventional PC setup.
No perky, no. That's what AGP is for. 4x the transfer speed of PCI, because its 4X the bus speed of PCI.
As for the cable... erm, you don't understand monitors too well, I guess. The monitor doesn't show a static image, its _ALWAYS_ showing an image on the screen, refreshed at your refresh rate (today 75 is quite common). It doesn't refresh faster or slower, unless you change the refresh rate, and that's generally only done when you change video resolutions;).
In other words, if you are displaying an image on the monitor, then you are displaying an image at that rate, and that's it. You don't need to display more data for moving video, over a snapshot of someone. Why? Because the monitor is ALWAYS REFRESHING THE SCREEN with data from the video card (yes, through the video cable).
Lastly, as for your hard drive being able to keep up, well, I hate to break it to you, but video images are static. Most dixv's are 640x480 sized... and there's a good reason for that. The TV shows that were ripped to make them have that screen size. Even movies are only slightly larger. You're simply NOT GOING TO GET A 3200xWHATEVER divx video. That's just plain silly, because nothing could be captured in that format.
I hope you understand that:
1) AGP is different than PCI
2) the data going through the analoge cable doesn't increase or decrease, its constant
3) video isn't a big as you think
Er, the problem isn't PCI bus speed. The card is fed data, not raw images or pictures. The GPU does the work of creating the picture and pumping it to the monitor. Furthermore, data doesn't need to be constantly fed to the PCI card to keep the picture on the screen, the graphics card will do that itself, buffering info on its onboard ram.
Secondly, AGP is out, and its a hell of a lot faster than PCI. The real problem is that we don't have GPU's capable of supporting a screen of that size. What did they say, 800x600 or so, 16 screens? If that's 4X4, that's still 3200.. and I think the upper limit right now on the average new card is about 2200xwhatever.
Still, its not like its a big deal to make a GPU that can support 3200xwhatever.. they've just never bothered to try.. who the hell would need that;)
While people living in the US are Americian, calling someone Americian doesn't make you a citizen of the United States. It just means you live on one of two continents.
The quote you have listed isn't an Asimov quote.. its a quote from one of the characters in one of his books.
This isn't the same as him saying it.. not at all. The characters in his books have personalities and traits imagined by him, some of them good, some of them evil.
Are you going to look through other parts of Asimov's books, looking for other statements his characters made, and then attribute those to him, as if he said them? Why don't you start with evil characters first, and see how that goes...
1) Not true. Ballard has made smaller units for distribution in China, using the same technology. They've heavily patented this technology, years and years ago. Powerplug most like is licensing this from Ballard then.
2) This system doesn't make hydrogen on the fly. It extracts if from natural gas. Natural gas costs money. One of the benefits of Solar cells + wind power on a tower, producing power to split water, and using a compressor to store it, is that its much more effecient than batteries. Mass production of a small power producing station like this would result in a foolproof, quality system. If you've ever used rows of industrial strength batteries to store power, you'd know that the above solution is very desirable. Once the gas is stored, the power available doesn't degrade like a battery charge.
3) I didn't say NASA was building single air vehicles. I did wonder how the vehicle THEY HAVE AN INTEREST IN was coming along, and since they ARE involved in its design, its a valid statement.
4) Heh. You're living in the past. Electric engines are LIGHTER than gas engines that produce the same torque! The problem in the past has been the battery weight, which hydrogren/fuel cell technology solves.
This is obviously a Ballard fuel cell, repackaged as a GE product. This isn't suprising, since Ballard is licensing its technology to everyone, for the right price.
I do see using natural gas for something like this as a big waste, but these fuel cells do have a definate advantage. With the addition of some solar panels, and a proper gas tank / compressor and a fresh water source, people will be able to generate electricity constantly, and save the energy as hydrogren. Its much more effecient than batteries, and you can store up large amounts of energy when the weather is good, and when its poor you can draw on weeks and weeks of stores, without the usual power leakage that standard batteries employ.
I see a time in the future where cities will eventually start to decentralize. Even now, aside from power issues, people could live 1000 kms from anyone, and have a full compliment of high speed internet, satelite phone, television and so on. Working from home in many of the newer high tech positions is a reality. Power is really the missing key, and with a small tower that is a combination wind and solar collector, one could completely seperate themselves from all of the utilities.
Even fuel for mechanicized electric vehicles can be generated by the same technology that will be used to split water and store the hydrogen. Simply draw some off of the house's main power supply, and away you go.
What's the last key for something like this to become reality? Faster transportation. Most people I know would love to live 1000 kms from anyone, if at a whim they could be in the city. I wonder how NASA's new single person air vehicle is coming along? This thing should definately be hydrogen / electric engine based.
Erm. Are you all on drugs?;) The purpose of this technology with REMOVABLE MAGNETIC OPTICAL DISKS only (that's all fujitsu has designed it for) is to prevent piracy. Each FO disk (not drive, disk) will have a specific ID, so that when you buy copyrighted software or what not, they can do a check on the disk to make sure that you are using the original, and not a backup.
This is NOT about identifying you.
This is NOT about mp3's or anything you are going to put on the equivilant of a floppy.
This is NOT about hard drives at ALL!
I wonder how many people actually read the article that was linked, and how many people just read the summary? Apparently not many...
Well, I don't really want it;) Well, maybe I do.. heh. Let me put it another way. I don't want it, but I want Linux to have it...
You see, I love gentoo, and filerunner. They both have what I want, which is point, click, copy.. etc. Two panes, and not like GMC, but a real set of two panes, with real scriptability like gentoo and filerunner have for each pane.
Now, as for your comments on the icon info, it does definately present problem. I mean, you can't do #1 really, because you don't have write access to every directory, even though you may have read access. #3 isn't viable either.. I don't think anyone will accept that, and its problematic because of the write access to each dir once again. Obviously #4 isn't what you want, otherwise why even bring the subject up?;)
That being the case, you're probably stuck with #2. I suppose you could use this to set individual icons for every single file on the system if you wanted to. Sounds cool, but it might slow down things quite a bit. Then again, I suppose you could always allow someone to turn said option off, or if they never used it I guess the database would remain empty, and queries would be almost instant to it. I suppose you could have default for icons, like gnome and other apps do, but have anything in the database override those default. Would work quite well, I guess.
Anyhow, the big thing here is that we do need something LIKE gmc for the new users that want the purdy icons, and if we're gonna have it, it should at least be good, like Dopus5 (no, I hate dopus 5, and prefer dopus 4 to it.. in fact I prefered DirWorks2 on the amiga.. since it was so customizable). The point is, DOpus 5 would be great on Linux. It would get icon based access to the file tree, and tons of power to boot.
One last thing. I know that you don't want to gnomify Gentoo, but have you thought about allowing a user to import or use the mime.types file from gnome? I would speed up configuration, and allow the user to edit one file, instead of 10...
Anyhow, Gentoo rocks, so keep up the good work!!;)
Slashdot Mirror
The US has one of the strongest economies in the world, primarily because it uses force to back it up. Anything that could threaten US economic interests is either destroyed or knocked down with military power, or squeezed shut with trade embargos. It is just the way things are, right or wrong, but don't attribute everything to capitalism.
However, capitalism, while part of the puzzle that has helped the US end up where it is, has also caused the loss of their citizen's personal liberties and rights. Corporations make a joke of their election and parlimentary process, by the mere fact that they are allowed to influence it to the degree they can.
Furthermore, the US owes a lot to the fact that they lost so little in WWII compared to others involved in said conflict. This led to their dominace on the world stage, and they've used everything they can to remain there.
I said, no QUERTY, no sale! NO QUERTY!!!!!!!! What's the matter, you don't know what a QUERTY is? Go here!
P CW /dvorak.htm
;)
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/aig/staff/toby/writing/
Seriously though, it was just a pronunciation -> typing thing
You've hit the nail on the head there. My purchasing plans for PDAs used to be "no keyboard, no sale". I never envisioned that someone would be so moronic as to go with something other than querty, so I guess I'll have to amend that.
YOPY designers, listen to me. NO QUERTY, NO SALE!
Guys, I think you (both previous posts) really need to READ the article before you make the above comments. No, he didn't say "x is gone" as a way of expressing intent, for further in the paragraph he said (and, as I quoted.. so you aren't reading what I'm saying even) :
"No, don't worry, I deleted it voluntarily..."
Now, people don't say "x is gone" and then say "I got rid of it vountarily" to express a future intent.
Furthermore, the paragraph is written as if the entire paragraph is one phone call. Odd to say the least.
I will tell you one thing. As to "reporting".. you try to flush out things that don't jive like this, and ask the person you are interviewing for clairty. If this person interviewed his friend, and then slapped it all down on a paragraph, than his proof reading should have uncovered such strangeness.
Since it didn't, even at best his proof reading sucks, as I said before. What other things has he missed during proof reading, when such an obvious screwup makes it through? Technical mistakes? Others?
I guess you aren't putting much thought into this. If his "friend" had removed his windows parition after 10 days. How could his final words (or conclusions!) be :
but after a month, I have adjusted completely. I am removing Windows from my computer!
when:
The friend called me 10 days later: "My Windows partition is gone!"...No, don't worry, I deleted it voluntarily..." He continued, his voice full of excitement: "I don't need Windows any more.....
The point here is, is that the article _is_ untrue. Obviously his friend didn't say "I'm removing windows after a month!", because he apparently already did after 10 days.
Put another way, his friend either decided to remove windows after a month or 10 days, not both.
One of the two statements are false. If one of the statements are so obviously false and paper thin, how true is the rest of the article? How well was is proof read? If it wasn't proof read enough to sufficently take that above into account, what about important technical details?
The best case scenario is that it is a mistake on his part. This lends one to question how valid his reporting methods are, if he makes mistakes on so simple a point. The worst case scenario is that he made the story up completely. In either case, the story is untrue as it sits.
Why do people lie so much? Take a look at the "The Linux Distribution Game" on this link. Look at the first paragraph. In the first paragraph, the author states that :
.. removing windows from my computer...".
Do everything you normally do with your computer and report back on your experience. You are not allowed to boot into Windows during that month." The friend called me 10 days later: "My Windows partition is gone!"
Then, later in the same paragraph :
"No, don't worry, I deleted it voluntarily..." He continued, his voice full of excitement: "I don't need Windows any more.....
Then, still later....
His final words were: "It is all in the way you work. Changing your routine is not easy at first, but after a month, I have adjusted completely. I am removing Windows from my computer!"
So, let me get this straight. His friend called him in 10 days, saying he had deleted windows from his computer. Later on in the phone conversation, he then said that "... after a month
You know, people are going to make up stories and post them on the web, and claim they are real, they should at least read their work to make sure it makes sense, and isn't filled with gibberish ravings. Its obvious this article isn't true, since the above statements aren't true. One of them have to be false. If one statement is false, than the article is false. What percentage of the article is false, I don't know, but at this point I have to throw it all away.
Once someone lies in an article, you can't trust the rest of it. Expecially when it starts with lies.
Love it or hate it, I'm sure everyone's got a love story or traumatic memory of the infamous MS-DOS.
I never used MS-DOS. Everyone I knew had Amigas at the time, since they were far, far superior to MessyDos of the day. I progressed from that, directly to Linux. This doesn't mean I never had the opportunity to type a command or two under MS-DOS, but it does mean that I never *used* it for anything, realistically. I don't have a fond memory, or traumatic memory of MS-DOS.
I feel like someone who managed to live through a war without any emotional scars. The thing is, I know many, MANY people that NEVER used a Windows or DOS box, yet lived through the DOS era. These are owners of Amiga, Apple, Atari or other boxes of the era. They commanded a significant market share in the beginning of things, and only later on did their number wane to insignificance. You dishonour them by implying that they never existed, and that there was no other option at the time.
This is supposed to be a place where people realise the significance of computers in history, and know a little of that history. Please keep that in mind.
All this shows is a motherboard with sufficent onboard temperature monitoring, shutting down because the CPU is over heating. It has nothing to do with the CPU having any sort of built in temperature throttle like the P4 has (or even the 68040 had). Tom's Hardware and this video are showing two completely different and seperate things. One shows how a motherboard reacts in order to save an amd cpu (this current video), and the other shows what happens if the cpu is left to cope with a heat problem on its own (Tom's tests) without the motherboard stepping in to rescue it.
/. just doesn't care some days... or maybe its just on slow days ;).
I wish people would at least FILTER some of these posts. Its seems that
I actually read a book (of course like any other, not authorized by paramount) that explained the change, with fairly good reasoning. It was about 15 years ago, but I do recall that it had something to do with the Klingons travelling back in time, and monkeying with their genetics in order to make themselves more agressive, and war like... because they were about to loose completely and totally in a war with the Federation. They also intended to take back some advanced technology at the same time, but Kirk, Spock and Bones (who else) managed to stop them before they pass on the technology, but after the genetic changes were done (I believe by a virus).
In the new time line the war didn't happen, because the Klingons who travelled back in time were partially successful in introducing the genetic change some time after the original series, but before the movies in the time line. The new time line took effect, and after the virus was introduced, the Klingon's appearance changed. They were also aware of why it changed.
Anyhow, the entire concept was rather entertaining, and if someone was up on Trek lore to an insane amount, Worf's explanation made sense in the context of that novel.
Just a FYI.
This "study" by whomever it was in Britian seems to be flawed. Its the chicken and the egg syndrome as it is many times in these cases, and it seems the researchers are so slow that they don't even catch on to this.
Are these kids doing better in school then their peers because they play video games, or are the kids just more intelligent, better able to concentrate, and have better dexterity than their peers? Obviously if they are, they _would_ be better at playing video games.
It doesn't take a genius to realise that if you study 100 kids who enjoy doing math problems, that you will find most of those kids are better at doing math problems. Likewise, if you take 100 kids that love to play video games, and study them, you will find that those kids are better in hand-eye reflexes, concentration and problem solving. Its not because they are playing video games that they get this way, its because they were this way to start off with that they like to play video games.
What fun is it to play something that you can never win, rarely improve at, and you don't even understand? None! The children that don't play video games are either less intelligent, or unable to manipulate the interface they are using (mouse, joystick, etc) in order to find the game amusing.
What this study really needed was 1000 random kids from England, and 1000 random kids from a country that is identical in every way to England (including diet, vitamin intake, clean water and good food, good schooling), but have a low or no computer count. This way the study actually has a control group.
Ever heard of those?
Its quite obvious that all people are not genetically identical. Some are morons, some have weak bodies or minds. These kids don't. Simple.
This isn't going to fix anything. Most clerks couldn't care less why you don't buy cds. Most are stuck in a lame low paying job, and all they want to do is work, and then get out of there as quick as possible.
They aren't going to call the record company, the only person they would speak to is their boss about it. What if the person you complain to is the boss? Well, the boss doesn't care, unless it reaches extreme numbers. Even then, he'll complain to his distributor's rep, who has a manager above him, and who has absolutely no contact with the label company except through the guy who does the buying across the hall or on another floor, or even in another building or town!
If the distributor cares enough to tell the record label, then of course they are only speaking to another rep., in a long line of reps., three or four people (at least) removed from the decision makers in the company.
What's my point? My point is that if you follow the chain of people back to the source, you end up going through 10 to 15 people who have to repeat what you said, in order for you to get heard. Do you have any idea how distorted your complaint will be by then, unless its written down or recorded somewhere? Even people reading it off of a piece of a paper over the phone to the next guy in the line will end up with massive distortions in meaning.
No, the only real solution is to talk to the source directly. The thing is, companies have purposefully enshrouded themselves in a veil of protection. Its purpose it two-fold.
First, you have to go through 3 or 4 people in a company tree before you get from the outside point of contact (like a phone call) to someone that can actually respond to your comments meaningfully. This generally eliminates people who are only slightly pissed off, and these people will probably still buy the product anyhow. Speaking with said person doesn't really help though, because of the second reason the veil exists. Companies don't WANT to hear your complaints. They want to sell to the 95% of the population that is too stupid to give a flying fuck about what is happening to the world, and where it is going. They don't care if you complain, they don't care if you are upset, they don't care if you won't buy their product! All they care about is their agenda, and if you are going to disturb this.
The only way to do so is with a national campain. Sadly, this is one of the few things spam could be used for that would actually be beneficial. Sending mass emails about the current state of corporate affairs, and how they indend to rip us off.
Ah well.
"There's even a refrigerator that has a display which projects an image of whats inside without opening the doors." For fuck sakes, anyone ever hear of glass?
But if you want to stream data (video) to the screen, then the data rate to the Graphics card will be significantly higher than PCI can handle, and the data rate from the disc array will require multiple fibre channel.On top of this the banwidth of the cable that actually gets the data to the screen will have to be enormous. I really don't think that it makes sense to think about using one of these with a conventional PC setup.
;).
No perky, no. That's what AGP is for. 4x the transfer speed of PCI, because its 4X the bus speed of PCI.
As for the cable... erm, you don't understand monitors too well, I guess. The monitor doesn't show a static image, its _ALWAYS_ showing an image on the screen, refreshed at your refresh rate (today 75 is quite common). It doesn't refresh faster or slower, unless you change the refresh rate, and that's generally only done when you change video resolutions
In other words, if you are displaying an image on the monitor, then you are displaying an image at that rate, and that's it. You don't need to display more data for moving video, over a snapshot of someone. Why? Because the monitor is ALWAYS REFRESHING THE SCREEN with data from the video card (yes, through the video cable).
Lastly, as for your hard drive being able to keep up, well, I hate to break it to you, but video images are static. Most dixv's are 640x480 sized... and there's a good reason for that. The TV shows that were ripped to make them have that screen size. Even movies are only slightly larger. You're simply NOT GOING TO GET A 3200xWHATEVER divx video. That's just plain silly, because nothing could be captured in that format.
I hope you understand that:
1) AGP is different than PCI
2) the data going through the analoge cable doesn't increase or decrease, its constant
3) video isn't a big as you think
Er, the problem isn't PCI bus speed. The card is fed data, not raw images or pictures. The GPU does the work of creating the picture and pumping it to the monitor. Furthermore, data doesn't need to be constantly fed to the PCI card to keep the picture on the screen, the graphics card will do that itself, buffering info on its onboard ram.
;)
Secondly, AGP is out, and its a hell of a lot faster than PCI. The real problem is that we don't have GPU's capable of supporting a screen of that size. What did they say, 800x600 or so, 16 screens? If that's 4X4, that's still 3200.. and I think the upper limit right now on the average new card is about 2200xwhatever.
Still, its not like its a big deal to make a GPU that can support 3200xwhatever.. they've just never bothered to try.. who the hell would need that
You don't own all of North and South America.
While people living in the US are Americian, calling someone Americian doesn't make you a citizen of the United States. It just means you live on one of two continents.
The "rivatv" project is working on this.. and its _almost_ there. Try http://drama.obuda.kando.hu/~fero/cgi-bin/rivatv.p hp.
What moron moderated this up? Its not interesting, its just another form of trolling.
The quote you have listed isn't an Asimov quote.. its a quote from one of the characters in one of his books.
This isn't the same as him saying it.. not at all. The characters in his books have personalities and traits imagined by him, some of them good, some of them evil.
Are you going to look through other parts of Asimov's books, looking for other statements his characters made, and then attribute those to him, as if he said them? Why don't you start with evil characters first, and see how that goes...
!!!!!!!!
Its the goatsex.cx sicko! Beware!
What the hell is a package fanny?! Is this a polite way of saying "turd" in some weird country?!
1) Not true. Ballard has made smaller units for distribution in China, using the same technology. They've heavily patented this technology, years and years ago. Powerplug most like is licensing this from Ballard then.
2) This system doesn't make hydrogen on the fly. It extracts if from natural gas. Natural gas costs money. One of the benefits of Solar cells + wind power on a tower, producing power to split water, and using a compressor to store it, is that its much more effecient than batteries. Mass production of a small power producing station like this would result in a foolproof, quality system. If you've ever used rows of industrial strength batteries to store power, you'd know that the above solution is very desirable. Once the gas is stored, the power available doesn't degrade like a battery charge.
3) I didn't say NASA was building single air vehicles. I did wonder how the vehicle THEY HAVE AN INTEREST IN was coming along, and since they ARE involved in its design, its a valid statement.
4) Heh. You're living in the past. Electric engines are LIGHTER than gas engines that produce the same torque! The problem in the past has been the battery weight, which hydrogren/fuel cell technology solves.
This is obviously a Ballard fuel cell, repackaged as a GE product. This isn't suprising, since Ballard is licensing its technology to everyone, for the right price.
I do see using natural gas for something like this as a big waste, but these fuel cells do have a definate advantage. With the addition of some solar panels, and a proper gas tank / compressor and a fresh water source, people will be able to generate electricity constantly, and save the energy as hydrogren. Its much more effecient than batteries, and you can store up large amounts of energy when the weather is good, and when its poor you can draw on weeks and weeks of stores, without the usual power leakage that standard batteries employ.
I see a time in the future where cities will eventually start to decentralize. Even now, aside from power issues, people could live 1000 kms from anyone, and have a full compliment of high speed internet, satelite phone, television and so on. Working from home in many of the newer high tech positions is a reality. Power is really the missing key, and with a small tower that is a combination wind and solar collector, one could completely seperate themselves from all of the utilities.
Even fuel for mechanicized electric vehicles can be generated by the same technology that will be used to split water and store the hydrogen. Simply draw some off of the house's main power supply, and away you go.
What's the last key for something like this to become reality? Faster transportation. Most people I know would love to live 1000 kms from anyone, if at a whim they could be in the city. I wonder how NASA's new single person air vehicle is coming along? This thing should definately be hydrogen / electric engine based.
Erm. Are you all on drugs? ;) The purpose of this technology with REMOVABLE MAGNETIC OPTICAL DISKS only (that's all fujitsu has designed it for) is to prevent piracy. Each FO disk (not drive, disk) will have a specific ID, so that when you buy copyrighted software or what not, they can do a check on the disk to make sure that you are using the original, and not a backup.
This is NOT about identifying you.
This is NOT about mp3's or anything you are going to put on the equivilant of a floppy.
This is NOT about hard drives at ALL!
I wonder how many people actually read the article that was linked, and how many people just read the summary? Apparently not many...
Well, I don't really want it ;) Well, maybe I do.. heh. Let me put it another way. I don't want it, but I want Linux to have it...
;)
;)
You see, I love gentoo, and filerunner. They both have what I want, which is point, click, copy.. etc. Two panes, and not like GMC, but a real set of two panes, with real scriptability like gentoo and filerunner have for each pane.
Now, as for your comments on the icon info, it does definately present problem. I mean, you can't do #1 really, because you don't have write access to every directory, even though you may have read access. #3 isn't viable either.. I don't think anyone will accept that, and its problematic because of the write access to each dir once again. Obviously #4 isn't what you want, otherwise why even bring the subject up?
That being the case, you're probably stuck with #2. I suppose you could use this to set individual icons for every single file on the system if you wanted to. Sounds cool, but it might slow down things quite a bit. Then again, I suppose you could always allow someone to turn said option off, or if they never used it I guess the database would remain empty, and queries would be almost instant to it. I suppose you could have default for icons, like gnome and other apps do, but have anything in the database override those default. Would work quite well, I guess.
Anyhow, the big thing here is that we do need something LIKE gmc for the new users that want the purdy icons, and if we're gonna have it, it should at least be good, like Dopus5 (no, I hate dopus 5, and prefer dopus 4 to it.. in fact I prefered DirWorks2 on the amiga.. since it was so customizable). The point is, DOpus 5 would be great on Linux. It would get icon based access to the file tree, and tons of power to boot.
One last thing. I know that you don't want to gnomify Gentoo, but have you thought about allowing a user to import or use the mime.types file from gnome? I would speed up configuration, and allow the user to edit one file, instead of 10...
Anyhow, Gentoo rocks, so keep up the good work!!