There are like X varieties and they are are all about same price per quanity (+-20%). That is a monopoly...
hahaha. Perhaps you should look up the meaning of 'monopoly'. Pricing things similarly does not equal 'monopoly'. 20% off? That's huge for such common items especially in an arena like disposable consumer goods where profit margins are razor thin. (that pun is COMPLETELY intended)
But I'm going to guess that since you don't know what a monopoly is, you don't know what a profit margin is either, or the nature of consumer goods manufacturing.
an autofocus system would deal with that problem quite nicely. There are a couple of ways AF works on cameras, one is to evaluate the image itself looking for constrasting lines and measuring the gradient. Too much gradient means a blur, so it adjusts until sharpened.
The other method is active focus which bounces an infrared beam off the object and measures the distance.
Neither is perfect, but in a controlled manufacturing setting it would be easy to create 'focus points' on objects which would allow the system to focus the right distance. Heck, with that you could probably build the system to focus specifically on the correct part, further eliminating confusion.
There's a reason for this. They don't just sell fossil fuels. They are quite well aware that oil resources are limited, expensive, dirty and a pain in the ass to extract.
The largest source of hydrogen today is the very same companies that sell you gas. You will still be filling your hydrogen car at a Shell station.
I had an economics professor who researched the costs (both economic and environmental) of recycling glassware.
Turns out its far better to simply bury it. When you recycle it, first it has to be cleaned with highly caustic and dangerous chemicals which must be barrelled after their use (toxic waste).
When you melt it down, it requires alot of heat. The energy to create that heat has to come from somewhere - most often natural gas burners. So recycling glass actually consumes large amounts of fossil fuels.
And why not bury it? Glass is made from melted sand, something we're not likely to run out of soon, and doesn't harm the environment as you're simply putting the sand back into the earth.
Crushed glass makes an excellent landscaping material for constructing terrain like golf courses, then cover it with topsoil.
I just did, and the only thing you enter is your 10 digit phone number. Have to call it from that number though.
Like others mentioned, telephone numbers are easily verified as valid through public information. E-Mail addresses are more difficult. Therefore, if you do not want to give out your e-mail address, don't use the web form and call the 888 number instead.
consider a cost benefit analysis of it. Few home users would pay for fixes. The cost of developing fixes is pretty enormous as it takes away other tasks.
With so little likely return, no sense is spending the resources on it when the next home OS will have long been out already.
Home users upgrade much more often than business users.
electric *assisted* steering.
on
42-Volt Autos
·
· Score: 1
several cars have electric assist, which is just like hydraulic power steering but replacing the hydraulics with an electric motor.
The poster is talking about fully electric steering which dispenses with the mechanics entirely, except for an emergency linkage.
There is nothing Microsoft can do to make OpenOffice.org go away. It will just keep getting better, and better, and better....
Reverse microsoft and openoffice.org in that sentence. Do you think microsoft will stop moving forward as well?
I've been hearing this 'linux/open source will overtake microsoft in 3 years'...that was 4 years ago. Utter nonsense. It will be a continual game of catch-up.
even a middle income person would be charged an arm and a leg for the service. Building services to rural areas requires miles of infrastructure - lots of pipes. And thats expensive.
the idea behind the universal service fee was originally to provide basic telephone service to those areas at a similar cost to those who live in cities. highspeed internet is quickly becoming a almost-necessary service. Certainly by the time this tax actually starts getting levied it will be.
MS Research is a totally different entity than the rest of microsoft. MS Research is Microsoft only in name for the most part. Its essentially the best funded and staffed computer science research center in the world.
They employ people with the likes of Tony Hoare (invented quicksort and the 'hoare triple'). They also hired most of the core developers of the functional language Haskell. And many other brilliant minds.
Most universities could only dream of the funding that MS research has. And they're completely free to research whatever they want. And of course they use Linux, BSD and whatever other tools are right for the job. They're researchers, not software politicans.
The normal way to generate hydrogen is to crack it out of natural gas. I've read of hydrogen 'appliances' under development that are hooked up to a home's gas main as a way of refueling various hydrogen vehicles until real hydrogen filling stations becomes a reality.
powered landing is a long way away. Simple reason being: Aero Engines weigh alot.
And pounds you put in for aero engines is that much less weight you can carry to orbit (or edge of space, as is the case here). For small craft, putting in a single aero engine would mean ditching the crew and all their luggage entirely.
I always thought it was odd the kilo was based on a metal bar. Unless the bar is perfectly clean - no dust, and no fingerprints - you will face weight discrepancies from year to year.
Basically you would have to keep the bar in a hermetically sealed vacuum where it couldn't accumulate any dust or outgassing from its container. This is probably why its 'losing' weight. Perhaps it had some fingerprints or other smudges on it that have eventually evaporated away.
you can throttle liquid fuel engines, but the plumbing and mechanics behind them are really quite complicated. Many points of failure. You need turbopumps and other things to make it work. Also, the fuel components themselves are terribly corrosive, toxic, and difficult to store.
Solid rocket motors are fairly easy to store (just don't accidentally light one). However, once they're lit, they burn until they're gone.
This hybrid seems to use to use the better elements of the two, though I don't believe it is throttleable. At least thats my impression from scaled.com's write up.
they have more details about the engine. Pretty interesting stuff. Like a liquid fueled engine, it has the 2 components, the nitrous and the rubber. Unlike most liquid rocket fuel, these elements are benign and easy to store.
Apparently when you mix these 2 together, and combine it with a significant heat source, you get quite alot of thrust.
Unlike a liquid though, you can't throttle the thrust. I wonder if its possible to stop the thrust though if you remove the heat source, or is it self-sustaining once you get ignition?
the type of code necessary for safety critical systems is really unsuited to open source. safety code is built with formal verification, then scientific lab testing. These 2 things are ill suited to the open source development model, for 2 reasons.
1. they're boring. I find it unlikely there are many scuba diving programmers with a specialty in algorithm verification willing to devote the months of formal verification necessary. Even less likely is one with a decent test lab.
2. They require specialized expertise. Especially when it comes to developing a test methodology. Since every combination of variables cannot be tested in any system of complexity, one must pick and choose the likeliest combinations and extrapolate behaviors from those. Again, people who are good at that tend to be rare and very well paid for doing it (its tedious). Not something someone is simply going to volunteer their time on.
Safety critical systems are one of those things where you simply cannot give the code out and expect that to make a difference. It's less about the code itself than about experience in designing and validating safety systems. The code is merely a means to the end.
all modern compilers are optimizing compilers, and they reorganize code completely to suit themselves in the most efficient manner. The compiler will reorganize modules and rewrite lines of code in order to make better use of registers, processor features/limitations that
You cannot really see a programmer's style as a result. When you decompile, you'll get it returned as whatever the compiler shifted the code around as.
Except for a restricted set of cases, you can't prove that a given piece of code works or doesn't work. A truly exhaustive set of tests would be impractical to perform, and formal proofs of correctness place strong limits on the type of code you can write and the environment in which you can write it.
Incorrect. Formal proofs can be done on ANY code, with the exception of the halting problem. The whole existance of computers is based on this very fact. The problem is, formal proofs are difficult and time consuming to do. On life-critical systems however, they are done routinely.
As the other poster stated, most BBSes were single-user and not networked together. Those that were 'networked' usually were just message networked.
The best comparison is to the old VideoTel network that was in the late 80s/early 90s. The machines used were dedicated cheap terminals that a person could buy and then with a subscription, access the videotel network which was a collection of BBSes and services around the country.
They used a special modem (I think it was a 1200 baud, but it couldn't connected with a normal 1200) and has special command keys.
VTel boxes are still being used in some places. A few years ago I had a relative who took a take-home defensive driving class that required you to log on to a VAX server using a VTel box to take the required tests.
Slashdot Mirror
For shame! Who do they think they are?
There are like X varieties and they are are all about same price per quanity (+-20%). That is a monopoly...
hahaha. Perhaps you should look up the meaning of 'monopoly'. Pricing things similarly does not equal 'monopoly'. 20% off? That's huge for such common items especially in an arena like disposable consumer goods where profit margins are razor thin. (that pun is COMPLETELY intended)
But I'm going to guess that since you don't know what a monopoly is, you don't know what a profit margin is either, or the nature of consumer goods manufacturing.
The other method is active focus which bounces an infrared beam off the object and measures the distance.
Neither is perfect, but in a controlled manufacturing setting it would be easy to create 'focus points' on objects which would allow the system to focus the right distance. Heck, with that you could probably build the system to focus specifically on the correct part, further eliminating confusion.
The DMCA only deals with copyright and copyright protection. Once again, copyright and copyright protection. Nothing else.
Please, for the love of god, stop using 'ooh dmca violation!' in ridiculous contexts. You sound like a fool.
The largest source of hydrogen today is the very same companies that sell you gas. You will still be filling your hydrogen car at a Shell station.
Turns out its far better to simply bury it. When you recycle it, first it has to be cleaned with highly caustic and dangerous chemicals which must be barrelled after their use (toxic waste).
When you melt it down, it requires alot of heat. The energy to create that heat has to come from somewhere - most often natural gas burners. So recycling glass actually consumes large amounts of fossil fuels.
And why not bury it? Glass is made from melted sand, something we're not likely to run out of soon, and doesn't harm the environment as you're simply putting the sand back into the earth.
Crushed glass makes an excellent landscaping material for constructing terrain like golf courses, then cover it with topsoil.
Like others mentioned, telephone numbers are easily verified as valid through public information. E-Mail addresses are more difficult. Therefore, if you do not want to give out your e-mail address, don't use the web form and call the 888 number instead.
With so little likely return, no sense is spending the resources on it when the next home OS will have long been out already.
Home users upgrade much more often than business users.
The poster is talking about fully electric steering which dispenses with the mechanics entirely, except for an emergency linkage.
Reverse microsoft and openoffice.org in that sentence. Do you think microsoft will stop moving forward as well?
I've been hearing this 'linux/open source will overtake microsoft in 3 years'...that was 4 years ago. Utter nonsense. It will be a continual game of catch-up.
the idea behind the universal service fee was originally to provide basic telephone service to those areas at a similar cost to those who live in cities. highspeed internet is quickly becoming a almost-necessary service. Certainly by the time this tax actually starts getting levied it will be.
What in the world is possibly 'less worthy' about providing affordable broadband to rural areas? The fiber pipes don't build themselves you know.
with DSL you need phone and thus you already have the universal service tax added on.
They employ people with the likes of Tony Hoare (invented quicksort and the 'hoare triple'). They also hired most of the core developers of the functional language Haskell. And many other brilliant minds.
Most universities could only dream of the funding that MS research has. And they're completely free to research whatever they want. And of course they use Linux, BSD and whatever other tools are right for the job. They're researchers, not software politicans.
The normal way to generate hydrogen is to crack it out of natural gas. I've read of hydrogen 'appliances' under development that are hooked up to a home's gas main as a way of refueling various hydrogen vehicles until real hydrogen filling stations becomes a reality.
Yes how dare they. Its like trying to prosecute a burglar because you didn't have strong enough doors on your house! Shame on them indeed.
And pounds you put in for aero engines is that much less weight you can carry to orbit (or edge of space, as is the case here). For small craft, putting in a single aero engine would mean ditching the crew and all their luggage entirely.
Basically you would have to keep the bar in a hermetically sealed vacuum where it couldn't accumulate any dust or outgassing from its container. This is probably why its 'losing' weight. Perhaps it had some fingerprints or other smudges on it that have eventually evaporated away.
it says it is not throttleable. The pilot is given 2 controls, an Arm switch, and then a final ignite button to do the burn.
Solid rocket motors are fairly easy to store (just don't accidentally light one). However, once they're lit, they burn until they're gone.
This hybrid seems to use to use the better elements of the two, though I don't believe it is throttleable. At least thats my impression from scaled.com's write up.
Apparently when you mix these 2 together, and combine it with a significant heat source, you get quite alot of thrust.
Unlike a liquid though, you can't throttle the thrust. I wonder if its possible to stop the thrust though if you remove the heat source, or is it self-sustaining once you get ignition?
1. they're boring. I find it unlikely there are many scuba diving programmers with a specialty in algorithm verification willing to devote the months of formal verification necessary. Even less likely is one with a decent test lab.
2. They require specialized expertise. Especially when it comes to developing a test methodology. Since every combination of variables cannot be tested in any system of complexity, one must pick and choose the likeliest combinations and extrapolate behaviors from those. Again, people who are good at that tend to be rare and very well paid for doing it (its tedious). Not something someone is simply going to volunteer their time on.
Safety critical systems are one of those things where you simply cannot give the code out and expect that to make a difference. It's less about the code itself than about experience in designing and validating safety systems. The code is merely a means to the end.
all modern compilers are optimizing compilers, and they reorganize code completely to suit themselves in the most efficient manner. The compiler will reorganize modules and rewrite lines of code in order to make better use of registers, processor features/limitations that
You cannot really see a programmer's style as a result. When you decompile, you'll get it returned as whatever the compiler shifted the code around as.
millions of simple transactions every second. No PC farm on the planet can handle that kind of I/O.
Incorrect. Formal proofs can be done on ANY code, with the exception of the halting problem. The whole existance of computers is based on this very fact. The problem is, formal proofs are difficult and time consuming to do. On life-critical systems however, they are done routinely.
The best comparison is to the old VideoTel network that was in the late 80s/early 90s. The machines used were dedicated cheap terminals that a person could buy and then with a subscription, access the videotel network which was a collection of BBSes and services around the country.
They used a special modem (I think it was a 1200 baud, but it couldn't connected with a normal 1200) and has special command keys.
VTel boxes are still being used in some places. A few years ago I had a relative who took a take-home defensive driving class that required you to log on to a VAX server using a VTel box to take the required tests.