The problem with cellphones are twofold: People use them where they aren't supposed to (ie, taking calls during a movie) and people forget to turn off their ringers. Why don't we solve THESE PROBLEMS instead of CREATING NEW ONES by eliminating this mode of communication all together?
How about an RFID chip which, based on its proximity to certain defined locations, would automatically switch your phone into vibrate mode, or display a message onscreen such as "Please leave this Quiet Area to receive this call" instead of this draconian jam-all-calls-but-"emergencies" sort of thing. I would like it if I'm in a movie and somebody is trying to alert me of, say, my mom having a heart attack (which *I* consider an emergency), and I could get that notification immediately. It is not too much trouble to step outside the theater, and all things considered, if it's an emergency I'm likely to be leaving the theater ASAP anyhow.
I'm all for making it mandatory that phones automatically switch into vibrate mode when they are carried into libraries, schools, theaters, and so forth. It doesn't necessarily have to be vibrate mode, it could be an RGB LED which flashes a given color (any given color, as it's an RGB LED) depending on incoming call / incoming call from XYZ person / incoming text message / you have new voicemail / whatever. Just as long as it's silent and not so bright as to make anyone freak out in a theater/school/whatever.
The point is: silence. People don't want to be bothered with others around them taking cellphone calls and they don't want to hear other peoples' cellphones ring, but only under certain circumstances. ADDRESS THESE ISSUES DIRECTLY, don't create a blanket which covers these issues and more, a blanket which creates more problems and more public unrest instead of relieving the public as intended.
In sum: this idea sucks and a better one could be had.
Well, I'd say that it's worse because we've been pumping hydrocarbons out of the earth for 50+ years now. Hydrocarbons are only hydrogen and carbon, and I imagine that's where all this extra carbon is coming from--it's been BURIED for millions of years, deeper than the first layer of soil, beneath a thick layer of rock, unable to escape due to mere heating. We've been introducing large amounts of carbon into our ecosystem which weren't ever there before all at once.
Why is it a problem this time and not last time?
Because humanity is the problem this time. Humanity's ignorance, arrogance, belief that they can do whatever they want come hell or high water. Humanity is the reason why this is a problem, and humanity will continue to be the reason as the problem begins its downward spiral.
We need to find a plant which grows rapidly and consumes large amounts of CO2. A plant like kudzu, or cannabis, or that variety of shrub that India is currently considering putting on its marginal scrublands. We need to find this plant, grow it, and then BURY it, deep within the earth. We need to do this and continue to do this until we've PUT BACK all the carbon we've TAKEN OUT. I like to think of the planet like a bank, you can take anything from it as long as you give it back. Take some water to drink, you'll return it later, etc. We're very overdrawn when it comes to carbon, and we need to get ourselves on a payment plan ASAP. Here's one way to look at it: If somebody drew a large amount of blood from you with the intent of giving it back, would you want them to pour it on your surface, or put it back exactly where it came from? We're doing the former to the planet right now, and we need to stop.
No need for a numeric keypad or fkeys? Never pressed F5 to refresh eh? F2 to open a new location in a browser? heh. Sounds like you need more tables instead of crappy keyboards. Keep in mind that a lot of people are comfortable with a certain kind of keyboard, and giving them laptop-like keyboards with small keys that are hard to type on may just deter their usage and make your whole computer lab project a giant waste of money.
Your computer is a physical piece of hardware. Unless somebody has locked the case and/or tied your hands behind your back, you retain full control over it... including the decision of which software to install, and which services you choose to use.
Browsers can be hijacked. It happens daily, Internet Explorer gets usurped by some naughty website. Let's say for instance that Jimbob Smith wants to check his bank balance so he goes to www.bankofamrica.com (note the lack of an E) and then a pop-up window jumps up onscreen. And then another, and another. The user goes to click "stop" to make the pages stop loading, but the remote site has put instructions in the HTML to DISABLE the stop button. One of these windows conducts and exploit and roots the box, installing a trojan of some kind. It all goes downhill from there, I'm afraid. Hell, just recently the bug in the JPEG decoder was found, that's an IDEAL way to sneak a virus into a computer. Just because you have physical control over it does not mean you are in control OF it.
The "you" of which you speak can be (and is often) a family of more than one person, all using the same single-user PC. Eighty year old Billy who cannot type worth a damn trying to go to toysrus.com may mistype it and find himself in the situation I have above described. The internet isn't populated solely with geeks who know the ins and outs of their browsers and how/why certain features may be disabled.
And this doesn't even consider the bugs that could arise or the other potential explots, like a page which downloads a piece of software that permanently disables your stop button and forces you to go to xxxlittleteenz.com every time you boot up. Everything outside the document should be user-controlled. The document itself is the only thing which the publisher should have control over. If they don't want the document copied, then THEY shouldn't publish it.
Take it one step further: What if the only applications that can open files are those that are AUTHORIZED to do so? No more opening up HTML in notepad, no, end-users may only BROWSE HTML files. Got a file with no extension? You don't get to open it! But you've still got physical control over your computer, y'know, so you retain full control.. (um, right..)
A publisher should not able to dictate how their publishings are used (within reason). The people at the newspaper don't mind if I take newspaper clippings and assemble them into a book or put them up on my wall, I don't see how saving one page of one book 300+ pages long is going to do any severe harm to anybody's business. Google should restrict the amount of information they release (ie, not let you read the whole book online, etc) thereby controlling the information which is published as it is published, instead of trying to publish everything and control it once it's onscreen. In my view, once it's on my screen, I can print it out if I feel like it. If you don't want it getting printed out, don't put it on my screen.
Applications should determine the behavior of documents, not the other way around.
I think your comment is narrow-minded, not insightful.
1. Flying cars don't need roads 2. Flying traffic can be layered both horizontally and vertically for a near-unlimited traffic bandwidth
#1: The cost (it's all about cost, you should know this by now) of surveying, constructing, maintaining and upgrading roadways is large both in terms of dollars and in terms of man-hours consumed. Not much of an issue here in the USA where we already have plenty of roads, but elsewhere in the world where they've got more dirt roads than cars to travel on them, those are the places that could benefit the most from flying cars.
That brings us to...
#2: These other nations with their explosive population growth are going to be experiencing a traffic nightmare unless something like flying cars comes along.
So you're right, in a very single-minded way, that flying cars aren't really a big priority for us the Americans. But elsewhere, it may be the future because their past is nothing like ours.
...which gets onto your computer through some other spyware software that you agreed to install when you installed Kazaa, WinMX, any GAIN software, or weatherbug, or whatever. If there is plenty of spyware that can install itself without being attached to another program, how come I don't have any? Could it be that I read the EULA and understand the legal jargon because I'm not a dimwit? You know what, I'm going to go download WinMX right now so I can show you what it says.
Here's some:
THE USER AGREES THAT ANY USE OF THIS SOFTWARE OR ANY FILES DOWNLOADED WITH THIS SOFTWARE IS AT THE SOLE RISK OF THE USER.
Now, what's the qualifier for "downloaded with this software" ?? If the software phones home and downloads some spyware, is that "downloaded with this software" ? Well, if so, then that software is downloaded... AT THE SOLE RISK OF THE USER.
Let's continue:
This license shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the province of Ontario, Canada without reference to its conflict of law principles. In the event of any conflicts between foreign law, rules, and regulations, and Canadian law, rules, and regulations, Canadian law, rules and regulations shall prevail and govern. The United Nations convention on contracts for the international sale of goods shall not apply to this license.
Oh lookit that! They aren't even under American jurisdiction! Heck they're trying to skirt UN jurisdiction! Yeah, let's pass a law to fine people and later discover that we cannot even fine them because they fall outside of our jurisdiction.
I'm sure you get the idea, the wording may not be crystal clear but it's there and by being there it suffices as fair warning. It's right about now that I click "Decline Agreement" and not use WinMX, which is what I've done at every point in the past.
Yes, there are browser hijackers and naughty activex controls out there, the same way there are certain kinds of oil and ATF which are UNsuitable for putting in your car. You wouldn't fill your car's oil reservior with, oh, water, so why configure your browser to use any old activeX control it comes across, any of which could potentially be likened to water in your oil reservior? If you don't know how to configure the security settings of your browser, should you be using it? No, probably not, but it's people doing things they shouldn't by way of ignorance and carelessness that gets me paid. People who run their car engines into the ground and never change the fluids commit the same crime against their possessions as those who let their browser download any old activeX control.
Oh well, their loss and my gain.
Fines aren't going to change things (because as mentioned, you can't fine somebody in an american court if they aren't american or incorporated in america); the only thing that will change things is SMARTER COMPUTER USERS. Since 90% of people are stupid that will NEVER happen and I'm still getting paid and will be for the forseeable future.
I am serious. All of this spyware people have on their computers gets there because they don't read the license agreement (which is debatably legally binding, though is definitely a disclaimer of sorts) and that's it.
When you install one program (it all starts with Kazaa, WinMX, or one of those p2p apps. trust me. kids home from school, little kids downloading games from anywheretheycan.com whatever, they get onto the computer--and nobody makes use of user logins for their kids either, they're usually single-user PCs and it's all shot to hell a week after they plug the damn thing in. I digress)... when you install one program and click "next next ok yes next install here next next ok finish" without reading any of the dialogs, you're asking for trouble. I mean, people are nice enough to PUT this very nice and useful information about what's happening and what will happen in the future in YOUR NATIVE LANGUAGE right in front of you, and you're choosing to ignore it. Whoops, your loss, my gain, $45/hr please, I'll be out of here before dinnertime.
If your computer is set up to let anybody make this kind of bungling mistake, whoops, your loss, my gain. If you're dumb enough to give your kid the car keys before you've taught him to drive, whoops, your loss. A computer, as a valuable piece of machinery which can be easily ruined (data loss being quite a bit of ruination by most) by a bit of bungling, may not be above requiring certification/licensing in order to qualify for operation. Perhaps "licensing" is an extreme term, but the point is that not everyone who is using the computer should be using the computer. If only licensed computer operators could operate computers, the tech field would once again flourish--a pipe dream at best, but one worth pondering.
There isn't any spyware and there aren't any viruses on MY computer, I read the dialogs and I take the precautions necessary. The precautions are admittedly, as I've mentioned, esoteric yet simple.
Rescuing a pc with a fubar OS goes like this: Unplug internet, install windows xp, turn off xp firewall, install zonealarm (basic/free version), install a mcafee virus scanner (or your preferred. I like mcafee) and then hook up to the 'net, go immediately to windows update, and download everything except service pack 2 because it sucks. This takes about 2 hours on a modern-day PC, and I make $90, plus sometimes a good tip. One time, I got a couple cartons of smokes from a regional distributor for American Spirit but I gave them to a friend in exchange for a favor because I don't smoke.
I'm not an asshole, I'm making a living through other peoples' carelessness and ignorance, and I don't feel bad about it one bit.
About 90% of your clientele's computers are, by your own admission, afflicted by spyware. Supporting the making-illegal of spyware seems somewhat foolish: you're saying you can get by on only about 10% of your current business.
Yes it's bullshit. But you know what? Bulls SHIT! It's a natural fact of life! We need this particular bullshit in order to make money. If cars didn't break, you'd put ASE and everyone who gets certified by them out of business. We need computers to break, and we need it to be esoteric yet simple to fix, so that we can continue to make money in our industry capably and confidently.
I fix computers for a living too, and I like the challenge of removing a virus or piece of spyware, it provides a certain sense of satisfaction.
In war, you need to really know who your enemies are. I would fight for my freedom, but the questions are, today, this very moment: who is my enemy--who will I need to defeat in order to win my freedom? In this battle, what are the acceptable means for achieving victory?
You'd think the government could rework the budget somewhere and make some contributions towards a similar let's-go-to-space prize. It's not like they're ever gonna win the war on drugs anyhow, sparing $10M isn't going to make much of a difference. Hell, spend the whole $40B on space travel and maybe we'll finally go somewhere.
Your question is definitely the question that should be asked.
I've often thought that the FDA should be a regulatory and recommendations agency, not a restrictive agency. I think that all data relating to various drugs and their effects, side effects, potencies, risks, etc, should be publicly available. I think that people should be left to make their own decisions concerning what they put into their body in the privacy of their own home.
Spend the $50B/year on education; a couple years ago the average SAT score in my home state of Washington was 950. Spend the money on education, let those who want to fry their brains fry them, let those that like to party occasionally have their occasional parties, and let those that are willing to remain drug-free stay drug-free. For most people, whether or not they do drugs isn't mitigated by the law, it's mitigated by desire. Some people want it, some people don't, and that won't change even if the laws do.
I looked at the specs; 15 watts of cooling power at 77 Kelvin. To me that means it can cool a 15 watt heat load to 77 Kelvin. A 3.2 GHz P4 has a maximum heat dissipation of 100W; a 3.6 GHz 115 W; and upcoming Prescott II P4s working at 4.0+GHz will dissipate about 150W of heat.So I'd think that had to be dissipating 200W of heat in the article (at 6 GHz), most likely more.
So yes, you're right. But Do you need to hold it at 77K in order to achieve an overclock to 6 GHz? Would 100K work? 200K? 200K is still -73 deg C/-99.67 deg F, which is mighty damn cold. I don't know how linear the whole heat dissipation thing is. That is, if it'll do 15W of cooling at 77K, would it do 30W at 154K (-119 C/-182.47 F)? 45W at 231K (-42.15 C/-43.87 F)? etc. So it may be possible to do it with four or five instead of 10+, depending on where the sweet spot is for temperature vs processor stability.
I'm curious about the logistics of calculating pi. Would a 4-way 5.6 GHz (he couldn't get 6 GHz to boot; read the article) system be able to calculate pi with any greater precision than has already been done? I don't know quite how they approach the problem of "computing" pi.
I've had an NEC MultiSync 1760V-BK (the black model) on my desk for about a year and a half now, and I haven't had any problems with it what-so-ever. The reason I bought it is for the pixel refresh time: 16 milliseconds, the fastest of any LCD out there.
I agree with you completely. The contrast ratio is great (400:1 I think) and there is ZERO ghosting (I game daily at 60-90 frames per second; Shooters, RTS, etc).
The only thing that bothers me is the way it renders certain colors, how light cyan or grey will be closer to white at the bottom or top of the screen, but toward the middle (eye level) they will darken. I've found that for these lighter colors, the viewing angle is very important.
If I may ask: what video card / drivers are you using with your 1760V and what are your gamma settings?
I wonder why people are more inclined to use something temporary like a liquid nitrogen bath, instead of keeping the LN2 cool with a stirling cryocooler. I mean, sure, a 6 gigahertz computer is neat and all, but what use is it if you can't take it to a LAN party?
I'm not too familiar with the terminology used in the cooling world, but 15 watts of cooling power at 77 kelvin (-196 deg C / -321 deg F) sounds like quite a bit of cooling power to me. I've often wondered why Stirling technology isn't used in air conditioners.
Take away any major aspect of somebody's day to day activities and they'll suffer discomfort and anxiety. If an every-day commuter has his car taken away for two weeks, he can take the bus and still get where he needs to go, but it takes four times as long and is an utter waste of his time, which is frustrating. It's frustrating to go from being able to instantly satisfy one's curiosities on the internet to being unable to do so. It's frustrating to a runner when he gets into a car accident and is paralyzed from the waist down. It's frustrating to an (both professional and hobby) opera singer to get strep throat and be unable to sing for two weeks.
On the internet, you can find any piece of news or information INSTANTLY, whereas otherwise you have to go to the library, find the book it's in via the card catalog, hope that it isn't checked out, and then look up the information. It's frustrating to be confined to this method of information access, it feels very restrictive.
When it boils down, it's about freedom. Freedom to satisfy our desires and curiosities without inhibition or restriction. The information available on the internet is often unavailable anywhere else, and it is often made available FOR FREE.
- Slashdot covers news that will not end up in my local newspaper. I don't have to spend a dime to get that news either, it's FREE. (admittedly slashdot sells subscriptions, but they aren't required in order to read the news. Ever see a newspaper with no advertisements?) - When I hit up wikipedia because I want to read about antimatter, it's FREE. (admittedly they do ask for donations, but it isn't required. You are FREE to make donations as you see fit) - I don't have to concern myself with long distance charges so I can call my aunt and uncle in Pittsburgh (I'm in Seattle), because I can drop them an email with a voice attachment wishing them a happy anniversary, and IT IS FREE! - Or I can make a VOIP call FOR FREE and talk to friends and family for as long as I want. - When I want to see how my stocks are doing, I don't have to call my broker, wait on hold for 20 minutes, get told he's out at lunch and do I want to be transferred to his voicemail; all I have to do is go to yahoo's finance pages and enter the ticker symbol, and I will get a significantly greater amount of information than just the high and low of the day as my broker would tell me on the telephone--FOR FREE!
And so forth. It's about freedom, it's about empowerment. If you asked everyone to ditch their cars and go back to horses and carriages they'd laugh you out of the building. The internet brings a better way of life to us just as other improvements in technology have. The difference between the internet and other liberating technologies is that the internet empowers us on many levels instead of just one level; a coffee machine only makes coffee, a car is only useful for transporting yourself and your belongings, but the internet is a communications platform, a meeting place, a network of knowledge, a network of storage, a historical reference, and the list goes on. Taking away the internet today is the rough equivalent of saying the following 50 years ago: You may no longer write letters. You may no longer talk on the telephone. You may no longer ask questions of anybody you cannot meet face to face. You cannot seek knowledge without being instructed by a teacher.
I read this: "flash drives have suddenly become so commonplace that, as with cellphones" and it occured to me: has anyone integrated a USB flash drive into a cellphone yet? That'd make sharing contacts and address books and schedules and such pretty damn easy...
C:\>shutdown Usage: shutdown [-i | -l | -s | -r | -a] [-f] [-m \\computername] [-t xx] [-c "comment"] [-d up:xx:yy] No args Display this message (same as -?) -i Display GUI interface, must be the first option -l Log off (cannot be used with -m option) -s Shutdown the computer -r Shutdown and restart the computer -a Abort a system shutdown -m \\computername Remote computer to shutdown/restart/abort -t xx Set timeout for shutdown to xx seconds -c "comment" Shutdown comment (maximum of 127 characters) -f Forces running applications to close without warning -d [u][p]:xx:yy The reason code for the shutdown
u is the user code
p is a planned shutdown code
xx is the major reason code (positive integer less than 256)
yy is the minor reason code (positive integer less than 65536)
The above command, shutdown, is present in Windows XP and in Windows 2000 with the Resource Kit installed. Windows has supported Task Scheduling for quite a number of years now. If the technician's procedure is solely to shutdown the computer via the start menu without shutting down any extraneous applications pre-shutdown, then this is all he needs to do to restart instantly with the same effect, from the command line:
shutdown -t 0 -r
This says to reboot the computer and wait 0 seconds before doing so. Stick a -f in there to force a shutdown if you've got ornery apps. Piece of fucking cake, people. Shit like this makes me wonder why I'm still unemployed; I obviously have some skills that would be appreciated by the FAA. Just put the command in a task scheduler entry, set it to recur every 2 weeks, and you're golden. I mean, seriously, what the fuck?
I use task scheduler to make backups of my current Opera session and to run periodic defrags and clean temporary folders and so forth. The system provides a way to maintain itself at scheduled intervals, why rely upon a technical lackey who can (and obviously did) screw up?
Tangentially, when the blaster worm came out and was giving everyone the NT Authority you-must-shutdown-now message, I discovered that a quick shutdown -a would abort the shutdown process and allow you to continue working with the (albeit unstable) system, to install a patch or the like.
Well, magazines have some stuff going for them that other mediums do not.
The weekly newspaper covers a broad range of topics, and these topics are easily diveded into sections. I do not see any reason to prevent the collection of various projects under an arbitrary set of "topics" in order to sequester the attention of those interested in, say, mechanical engineering, to only the brown-tabbed pages. Just because it's all bound up together doesn't mean that you can't divide it up.
But the question is: do you want to divide it up?
It depends on what you're making. I've always wanted to know how to get the iron out of iron ores. I could search it up on wikipedia, but what if I'm on a bus on my way across the country and don't have access to the handy-dandy wikipedia? It would be nice if it were in a magazine that I could fit in my backpack. But what use is knowing about smelting if you can't build your own smelter? Once you know how to refine iron and make steel (in your own smelter!), what use is it unless you're making things with these materials, from scratch? Sandcasting is a great way to make objects from molten metals; you could find yourself making all kinds of things. As an aside, possessing this kind of DIY know-how would make for much more interesting episodes of DIY-theme gameshows.
You need to make the information accessible, is the thing. The internet is great and all, but it's nothing for disseminating information like a magazine. For about 8 to 14 hours a day while the sun is up, you can read any book or magazine you like. The internet is down when my cable modem is out, when there's a hurricane, when I'm not at the computer. I can't pass my computer to the person next to me and say "read this article" without first presuming that they know how to use my computer. But with a magazine or a book, you hand it over, you point your finger on the place that they should begin reading, and whammo! Your information has been shared!
Mentioning hurricanes in my previous paragraph prompted this perfect example: There's nothing but junk all over the southeast right now. Knowing how to turn junk into things like nails and hammerheads and axe blades and so forth is fairly valuable knowledge in the midst of a terrible disaster, no?
Actually, the seed oils in drug type cannabis contain more compounds which can be extracted and turned into Biodiesel fuel. The traditional "hemp" seeds of the lesser-potency non-drug types of cannabis have about 30% fewer oils under identical growing conditions because they just have smaller seeds.
Also, hemp IS the greatest thing for the world. It is one plant from which you can get the ingredients for: - Paper - Oils (both lubricating and fuel such as Biodiesel) - Textiles and clothing (Up to four times as soft as cotten when properly processed) - Rope (One of the big uses of hemp in WW2. Read about how domestic farmers were able to grow hemp during WW2 under the "hemp for victory" label, in order to supply the US government with the fiber it needed for uniforms and ropes and tents because the main hemp supply from the phillipenes was cut off) - Omega-3 fatty acids are contained within the seeds, and the derived seed oil is extremely good for you. (From the American Heart Association's website: "Omega-3 fatty acids benefit the heart of healthy people, and those at high risk of or who have cardiovascular disease.")
And let us not forget the boon of farmland aeration and hillside retention. Cannabis plants can grow their roots up to six feet outwards laterally and up to two feet in depth over the course of ONE SEASON. This is THE MOST root growth of any plant known to man and makes cannabis perfect for holding up the ground in temporary landslide zones and aerating cropland. As it is an annual plant it would not serve much purpose as more than a temporary solution to a given problem.
And the coolest thing is that you can get it all from ONE PLANT! One plant that grows in every state of the country unattended (it's a WEED!) and could solve all of our domestic energy needs, our domestic textile and paper needs, our domestic lubrication needs, and so on. Using the fiber of the stalks for textiles and paper doesn't take away from the oil production you get from the seeds and vice-versa, so the potential diversity of product from the first crop is very great.
There are more reasons to legalize cannabis cultivation and processing than simply getting high. It holds benefits for mankind that far surpass the selfish moment of being totally stoned off your ass.
People forget how much we need to support programs like this in order to advance mankind.
They haven't forgotten; they just don't care.
The times leading up to putting a man on the moon were times of arrogance and pride. The only reason we even PUT a man on the moon is so we could do it before the Russians and say "neener" on a global scale. At that time it was not about advancing mankind but about advancing the USA in the eyes of the global community. Kind of like little kids on the playground trying to swing higher than one another or do the monkey bars faster or whatever. There's nobody left to compete with us, and without the spirit of competition we aren't going to be able to get the kind of advancement you're talking about. The ISS hosts representatives of the Chinese, Russian, and other governments. They are our scientific allies, not our competitors.
The Ansari X-Prize is the first good step towards re-igniting the competition, although it is somewhat disgusting that money is the only thing that we are really willing to compete for. Although when you really think about it critically, it does all come down to money: sending people to Mars is not cost-effective. The returns just aren't there. Until a camera spots a critter skittering across the surface of the planet or dewdrops form on the lens, there will not be a compelling enough reason to make Mars a top priority because of how financially unrewarding it is. Until the day comes that we discover something more universally encouraging than money, money will unfortunately be the rule by which we live.
If there were a $1B prize to put a man on Mars, I bet there'd be a little bit more competition. Any major government could put up that amount of money, or possibly all major governments could pool together their monies into a global prize pool. Put a five-year time frame on it; 3 for R&D and 2 for the trip itself. Even world governments could stand to use their space programs to compete. I mean if 5 nations put up $200 million and it costs $400M to get a man on Mars, the winner would still make back their initial investments and then some.
Mars is a little ambitious though, even for us. I like that nobody has died in space yet, and I'd like to keep it that way for as long as possible. Long-distance journeys require sophisticated radiation shielding and very reliable life support systems. I think we should start with the moon as a testbed, offer maybe a $5M prize for a robotic moon landing and a $50M prize for a manned landing.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with cellphones are twofold: People use them where they aren't supposed to (ie, taking calls during a movie) and people forget to turn off their ringers. Why don't we solve THESE PROBLEMS instead of CREATING NEW ONES by eliminating this mode of communication all together?
How about an RFID chip which, based on its proximity to certain defined locations, would automatically switch your phone into vibrate mode, or display a message onscreen such as "Please leave this Quiet Area to receive this call" instead of this draconian jam-all-calls-but-"emergencies" sort of thing. I would like it if I'm in a movie and somebody is trying to alert me of, say, my mom having a heart attack (which *I* consider an emergency), and I could get that notification immediately. It is not too much trouble to step outside the theater, and all things considered, if it's an emergency I'm likely to be leaving the theater ASAP anyhow.
I'm all for making it mandatory that phones automatically switch into vibrate mode when they are carried into libraries, schools, theaters, and so forth. It doesn't necessarily have to be vibrate mode, it could be an RGB LED which flashes a given color (any given color, as it's an RGB LED) depending on incoming call / incoming call from XYZ person / incoming text message / you have new voicemail / whatever. Just as long as it's silent and not so bright as to make anyone freak out in a theater/school/whatever.
The point is: silence. People don't want to be bothered with others around them taking cellphone calls and they don't want to hear other peoples' cellphones ring, but only under certain circumstances. ADDRESS THESE ISSUES DIRECTLY, don't create a blanket which covers these issues and more, a blanket which creates more problems and more public unrest instead of relieving the public as intended.
In sum: this idea sucks and a better one could be had.
Well, I'd say that it's worse because we've been pumping hydrocarbons out of the earth for 50+ years now. Hydrocarbons are only hydrogen and carbon, and I imagine that's where all this extra carbon is coming from--it's been BURIED for millions of years, deeper than the first layer of soil, beneath a thick layer of rock, unable to escape due to mere heating. We've been introducing large amounts of carbon into our ecosystem which weren't ever there before all at once.
Why is it a problem this time and not last time?
Because humanity is the problem this time. Humanity's ignorance, arrogance, belief that they can do whatever they want come hell or high water. Humanity is the reason why this is a problem, and humanity will continue to be the reason as the problem begins its downward spiral.
We need to find a plant which grows rapidly and consumes large amounts of CO2. A plant like kudzu, or cannabis, or that variety of shrub that India is currently considering putting on its marginal scrublands. We need to find this plant, grow it, and then BURY it, deep within the earth. We need to do this and continue to do this until we've PUT BACK all the carbon we've TAKEN OUT. I like to think of the planet like a bank, you can take anything from it as long as you give it back. Take some water to drink, you'll return it later, etc. We're very overdrawn when it comes to carbon, and we need to get ourselves on a payment plan ASAP. Here's one way to look at it: If somebody drew a large amount of blood from you with the intent of giving it back, would you want them to pour it on your surface, or put it back exactly where it came from? We're doing the former to the planet right now, and we need to stop.
No need for a numeric keypad or fkeys? Never pressed F5 to refresh eh? F2 to open a new location in a browser? heh. Sounds like you need more tables instead of crappy keyboards. Keep in mind that a lot of people are comfortable with a certain kind of keyboard, and giving them laptop-like keyboards with small keys that are hard to type on may just deter their usage and make your whole computer lab project a giant waste of money.
Browsers can be hijacked. It happens daily, Internet Explorer gets usurped by some naughty website. Let's say for instance that Jimbob Smith wants to check his bank balance so he goes to www.bankofamrica.com (note the lack of an E) and then a pop-up window jumps up onscreen. And then another, and another. The user goes to click "stop" to make the pages stop loading, but the remote site has put instructions in the HTML to DISABLE the stop button. One of these windows conducts and exploit and roots the box, installing a trojan of some kind. It all goes downhill from there, I'm afraid. Hell, just recently the bug in the JPEG decoder was found, that's an IDEAL way to sneak a virus into a computer. Just because you have physical control over it does not mean you are in control OF it.
The "you" of which you speak can be (and is often) a family of more than one person, all using the same single-user PC. Eighty year old Billy who cannot type worth a damn trying to go to toysrus.com may mistype it and find himself in the situation I have above described. The internet isn't populated solely with geeks who know the ins and outs of their browsers and how/why certain features may be disabled.
And this doesn't even consider the bugs that could arise or the other potential explots, like a page which downloads a piece of software that permanently disables your stop button and forces you to go to xxxlittleteenz.com every time you boot up. Everything outside the document should be user-controlled. The document itself is the only thing which the publisher should have control over. If they don't want the document copied, then THEY shouldn't publish it.
Take it one step further: What if the only applications that can open files are those that are AUTHORIZED to do so? No more opening up HTML in notepad, no, end-users may only BROWSE HTML files. Got a file with no extension? You don't get to open it! But you've still got physical control over your computer, y'know, so you retain full control.. (um, right..)
A publisher should not able to dictate how their publishings are used (within reason). The people at the newspaper don't mind if I take newspaper clippings and assemble them into a book or put them up on my wall, I don't see how saving one page of one book 300+ pages long is going to do any severe harm to anybody's business. Google should restrict the amount of information they release (ie, not let you read the whole book online, etc) thereby controlling the information which is published as it is published, instead of trying to publish everything and control it once it's onscreen. In my view, once it's on my screen, I can print it out if I feel like it. If you don't want it getting printed out, don't put it on my screen.
Applications should determine the behavior of documents, not the other way around.
I think your comment is narrow-minded, not insightful.
I see two advantages:
1. Flying cars don't need roads
2. Flying traffic can be layered both horizontally and vertically for a near-unlimited traffic bandwidth
#1: The cost (it's all about cost, you should know this by now) of surveying, constructing, maintaining and upgrading roadways is large both in terms of dollars and in terms of man-hours consumed. Not much of an issue here in the USA where we already have plenty of roads, but elsewhere in the world where they've got more dirt roads than cars to travel on them, those are the places that could benefit the most from flying cars.
That brings us to...
#2: These other nations with their explosive population growth are going to be experiencing a traffic nightmare unless something like flying cars comes along.
So you're right, in a very single-minded way, that flying cars aren't really a big priority for us the Americans. But elsewhere, it may be the future because their past is nothing like ours.
I believe you mean 900913.
...which gets onto your computer through some other spyware software that you agreed to install when you installed Kazaa, WinMX, any GAIN software, or weatherbug, or whatever. If there is plenty of spyware that can install itself without being attached to another program, how come I don't have any? Could it be that I read the EULA and understand the legal jargon because I'm not a dimwit? You know what, I'm going to go download WinMX right now so I can show you what it says.
... AT THE SOLE RISK OF THE USER.
Here's some:
THE USER AGREES THAT ANY USE OF THIS SOFTWARE OR ANY FILES DOWNLOADED WITH THIS SOFTWARE IS AT THE SOLE RISK OF THE USER.
Now, what's the qualifier for "downloaded with this software" ?? If the software phones home and downloads some spyware, is that "downloaded with this software" ? Well, if so, then that software is downloaded
Let's continue:
This license shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the province of Ontario, Canada without reference to its conflict of law principles. In the event of any conflicts between foreign law, rules, and regulations, and Canadian law, rules, and regulations, Canadian law, rules and regulations shall prevail and govern. The United Nations convention on contracts for the international sale of goods shall not apply to this license.
Oh lookit that! They aren't even under American jurisdiction! Heck they're trying to skirt UN jurisdiction! Yeah, let's pass a law to fine people and later discover that we cannot even fine them because they fall outside of our jurisdiction.
I'm sure you get the idea, the wording may not be crystal clear but it's there and by being there it suffices as fair warning. It's right about now that I click "Decline Agreement" and not use WinMX, which is what I've done at every point in the past.
Yes, there are browser hijackers and naughty activex controls out there, the same way there are certain kinds of oil and ATF which are UNsuitable for putting in your car. You wouldn't fill your car's oil reservior with, oh, water, so why configure your browser to use any old activeX control it comes across, any of which could potentially be likened to water in your oil reservior? If you don't know how to configure the security settings of your browser, should you be using it? No, probably not, but it's people doing things they shouldn't by way of ignorance and carelessness that gets me paid. People who run their car engines into the ground and never change the fluids commit the same crime against their possessions as those who let their browser download any old activeX control.
Oh well, their loss and my gain.
Fines aren't going to change things (because as mentioned, you can't fine somebody in an american court if they aren't american or incorporated in america); the only thing that will change things is SMARTER COMPUTER USERS. Since 90% of people are stupid that will NEVER happen and I'm still getting paid and will be for the forseeable future.
I am serious. All of this spyware people have on their computers gets there because they don't read the license agreement (which is debatably legally binding, though is definitely a disclaimer of sorts) and that's it.
... when you install one program and click "next next ok yes next install here next next ok finish" without reading any of the dialogs, you're asking for trouble. I mean, people are nice enough to PUT this very nice and useful information about what's happening and what will happen in the future in YOUR NATIVE LANGUAGE right in front of you, and you're choosing to ignore it. Whoops, your loss, my gain, $45/hr please, I'll be out of here before dinnertime.
When you install one program (it all starts with Kazaa, WinMX, or one of those p2p apps. trust me. kids home from school, little kids downloading games from anywheretheycan.com whatever, they get onto the computer--and nobody makes use of user logins for their kids either, they're usually single-user PCs and it's all shot to hell a week after they plug the damn thing in. I digress)
If your computer is set up to let anybody make this kind of bungling mistake, whoops, your loss, my gain. If you're dumb enough to give your kid the car keys before you've taught him to drive, whoops, your loss. A computer, as a valuable piece of machinery which can be easily ruined (data loss being quite a bit of ruination by most) by a bit of bungling, may not be above requiring certification/licensing in order to qualify for operation. Perhaps "licensing" is an extreme term, but the point is that not everyone who is using the computer should be using the computer. If only licensed computer operators could operate computers, the tech field would once again flourish--a pipe dream at best, but one worth pondering.
There isn't any spyware and there aren't any viruses on MY computer, I read the dialogs and I take the precautions necessary. The precautions are admittedly, as I've mentioned, esoteric yet simple.
Rescuing a pc with a fubar OS goes like this: Unplug internet, install windows xp, turn off xp firewall, install zonealarm (basic/free version), install a mcafee virus scanner (or your preferred. I like mcafee) and then hook up to the 'net, go immediately to windows update, and download everything except service pack 2 because it sucks. This takes about 2 hours on a modern-day PC, and I make $90, plus sometimes a good tip. One time, I got a couple cartons of smokes from a regional distributor for American Spirit but I gave them to a friend in exchange for a favor because I don't smoke.
I'm not an asshole, I'm making a living through other peoples' carelessness and ignorance, and I don't feel bad about it one bit.
About 90% of your clientele's computers are, by your own admission, afflicted by spyware. Supporting the making-illegal of spyware seems somewhat foolish: you're saying you can get by on only about 10% of your current business.
Yes it's bullshit. But you know what? Bulls SHIT! It's a natural fact of life! We need this particular bullshit in order to make money. If cars didn't break, you'd put ASE and everyone who gets certified by them out of business. We need computers to break, and we need it to be esoteric yet simple to fix, so that we can continue to make money in our industry capably and confidently.
I fix computers for a living too, and I like the challenge of removing a virus or piece of spyware, it provides a certain sense of satisfaction.
Chrysler's 2001 Sebring has door panels made of 25% hemp, 25% kenaf, and 50% polypropylene.
Where's the oil? Polypropylene can be sourced via organic methods: soy oils, hempseed oils, canola oils, etc.
yeah right, he'll flip-flop on that shit in two shakes when the Pope gives him the nod.
(I jest)
In war, you need to really know who your enemies are. I would fight for my freedom, but the questions are, today, this very moment: who is my enemy--who will I need to defeat in order to win my freedom? In this battle, what are the acceptable means for achieving victory?
Annual war on drugs: $40B
X-Prize: $10M
You'd think the government could rework the budget somewhere and make some contributions towards a similar let's-go-to-space prize. It's not like they're ever gonna win the war on drugs anyhow, sparing $10M isn't going to make much of a difference. Hell, spend the whole $40B on space travel and maybe we'll finally go somewhere.
Your question is definitely the question that should be asked.
I've often thought that the FDA should be a regulatory and recommendations agency, not a restrictive agency. I think that all data relating to various drugs and their effects, side effects, potencies, risks, etc, should be publicly available. I think that people should be left to make their own decisions concerning what they put into their body in the privacy of their own home.
Spend the $50B/year on education; a couple years ago the average SAT score in my home state of Washington was 950. Spend the money on education, let those who want to fry their brains fry them, let those that like to party occasionally have their occasional parties, and let those that are willing to remain drug-free stay drug-free. For most people, whether or not they do drugs isn't mitigated by the law, it's mitigated by desire. Some people want it, some people don't, and that won't change even if the laws do.
I looked at the specs; 15 watts of cooling power at 77 Kelvin. To me that means it can cool a 15 watt heat load to 77 Kelvin. A 3.2 GHz P4 has a maximum heat dissipation of 100W; a 3.6 GHz 115 W; and upcoming Prescott II P4s working at 4.0+GHz will dissipate about 150W of heat.So I'd think that had to be dissipating 200W of heat in the article (at 6 GHz), most likely more.
So yes, you're right. But Do you need to hold it at 77K in order to achieve an overclock to 6 GHz? Would 100K work? 200K? 200K is still -73 deg C/-99.67 deg F, which is mighty damn cold. I don't know how linear the whole heat dissipation thing is. That is, if it'll do 15W of cooling at 77K, would it do 30W at 154K (-119 C/-182.47 F)? 45W at 231K (-42.15 C/-43.87 F)? etc. So it may be possible to do it with four or five instead of 10+, depending on where the sweet spot is for temperature vs processor stability.
I'm curious about the logistics of calculating pi. Would a 4-way 5.6 GHz (he couldn't get 6 GHz to boot; read the article) system be able to calculate pi with any greater precision than has already been done? I don't know quite how they approach the problem of "computing" pi.
I've had an NEC MultiSync 1760V-BK (the black model) on my desk for about a year and a half now, and I haven't had any problems with it what-so-ever. The reason I bought it is for the pixel refresh time: 16 milliseconds, the fastest of any LCD out there.
I agree with you completely. The contrast ratio is great (400:1 I think) and there is ZERO ghosting (I game daily at 60-90 frames per second; Shooters, RTS, etc).
The only thing that bothers me is the way it renders certain colors, how light cyan or grey will be closer to white at the bottom or top of the screen, but toward the middle (eye level) they will darken. I've found that for these lighter colors, the viewing angle is very important.
If I may ask: what video card / drivers are you using with your 1760V and what are your gamma settings?
I wonder why people are more inclined to use something temporary like a liquid nitrogen bath, instead of keeping the LN2 cool with a stirling cryocooler. I mean, sure, a 6 gigahertz computer is neat and all, but what use is it if you can't take it to a LAN party?
I'm not too familiar with the terminology used in the cooling world, but 15 watts of cooling power at 77 kelvin (-196 deg C / -321 deg F) sounds like quite a bit of cooling power to me. I've often wondered why Stirling technology isn't used in air conditioners.
Take away any major aspect of somebody's day to day activities and they'll suffer discomfort and anxiety. If an every-day commuter has his car taken away for two weeks, he can take the bus and still get where he needs to go, but it takes four times as long and is an utter waste of his time, which is frustrating. It's frustrating to go from being able to instantly satisfy one's curiosities on the internet to being unable to do so. It's frustrating to a runner when he gets into a car accident and is paralyzed from the waist down. It's frustrating to an (both professional and hobby) opera singer to get strep throat and be unable to sing for two weeks.
On the internet, you can find any piece of news or information INSTANTLY, whereas otherwise you have to go to the library, find the book it's in via the card catalog, hope that it isn't checked out, and then look up the information. It's frustrating to be confined to this method of information access, it feels very restrictive.
When it boils down, it's about freedom. Freedom to satisfy our desires and curiosities without inhibition or restriction. The information available on the internet is often unavailable anywhere else, and it is often made available FOR FREE.
- Slashdot covers news that will not end up in my local newspaper. I don't have to spend a dime to get that news either, it's FREE. (admittedly slashdot sells subscriptions, but they aren't required in order to read the news. Ever see a newspaper with no advertisements?)
- When I hit up wikipedia because I want to read about antimatter, it's FREE. (admittedly they do ask for donations, but it isn't required. You are FREE to make donations as you see fit)
- I don't have to concern myself with long distance charges so I can call my aunt and uncle in Pittsburgh (I'm in Seattle), because I can drop them an email with a voice attachment wishing them a happy anniversary, and IT IS FREE!
- Or I can make a VOIP call FOR FREE and talk to friends and family for as long as I want.
- When I want to see how my stocks are doing, I don't have to call my broker, wait on hold for 20 minutes, get told he's out at lunch and do I want to be transferred to his voicemail; all I have to do is go to yahoo's finance pages and enter the ticker symbol, and I will get a significantly greater amount of information than just the high and low of the day as my broker would tell me on the telephone--FOR FREE!
And so forth. It's about freedom, it's about empowerment. If you asked everyone to ditch their cars and go back to horses and carriages they'd laugh you out of the building. The internet brings a better way of life to us just as other improvements in technology have. The difference between the internet and other liberating technologies is that the internet empowers us on many levels instead of just one level; a coffee machine only makes coffee, a car is only useful for transporting yourself and your belongings, but the internet is a communications platform, a meeting place, a network of knowledge, a network of storage, a historical reference, and the list goes on. Taking away the internet today is the rough equivalent of saying the following 50 years ago: You may no longer write letters. You may no longer talk on the telephone. You may no longer ask questions of anybody you cannot meet face to face. You cannot seek knowledge without being instructed by a teacher.
I read this: "flash drives have suddenly become so commonplace that, as with cellphones" and it occured to me: has anyone integrated a USB flash drive into a cellphone yet? That'd make sharing contacts and address books and schedules and such pretty damn easy...
shutdown -t 0 -r
This says to reboot the computer and wait 0 seconds before doing so. Stick a -f in there to force a shutdown if you've got ornery apps. Piece of fucking cake, people. Shit like this makes me wonder why I'm still unemployed; I obviously have some skills that would be appreciated by the FAA. Just put the command in a task scheduler entry, set it to recur every 2 weeks, and you're golden. I mean, seriously, what the fuck?
I use task scheduler to make backups of my current Opera session and to run periodic defrags and clean temporary folders and so forth. The system provides a way to maintain itself at scheduled intervals, why rely upon a technical lackey who can (and obviously did) screw up?
Tangentially, when the blaster worm came out and was giving everyone the NT Authority you-must-shutdown-now message, I discovered that a quick shutdown -a would abort the shutdown process and allow you to continue working with the (albeit unstable) system, to install a patch or the like.
Well, magazines have some stuff going for them that other mediums do not.
The weekly newspaper covers a broad range of topics, and these topics are easily diveded into sections. I do not see any reason to prevent the collection of various projects under an arbitrary set of "topics" in order to sequester the attention of those interested in, say, mechanical engineering, to only the brown-tabbed pages. Just because it's all bound up together doesn't mean that you can't divide it up.
But the question is: do you want to divide it up?
It depends on what you're making. I've always wanted to know how to get the iron out of iron ores. I could search it up on wikipedia, but what if I'm on a bus on my way across the country and don't have access to the handy-dandy wikipedia? It would be nice if it were in a magazine that I could fit in my backpack. But what use is knowing about smelting if you can't build your own smelter? Once you know how to refine iron and make steel (in your own smelter!), what use is it unless you're making things with these materials, from scratch? Sandcasting is a great way to make objects from molten metals; you could find yourself making all kinds of things. As an aside, possessing this kind of DIY know-how would make for much more interesting episodes of DIY-theme gameshows.
You need to make the information accessible, is the thing. The internet is great and all, but it's nothing for disseminating information like a magazine. For about 8 to 14 hours a day while the sun is up, you can read any book or magazine you like. The internet is down when my cable modem is out, when there's a hurricane, when I'm not at the computer. I can't pass my computer to the person next to me and say "read this article" without first presuming that they know how to use my computer. But with a magazine or a book, you hand it over, you point your finger on the place that they should begin reading, and whammo! Your information has been shared!
Mentioning hurricanes in my previous paragraph prompted this perfect example: There's nothing but junk all over the southeast right now. Knowing how to turn junk into things like nails and hammerheads and axe blades and so forth is fairly valuable knowledge in the midst of a terrible disaster, no?
just my $0.02.
They're Texans--they's fightin' folk. Surely you know this by now.
Since the majority are the "little guys" I believe you mean: if people had more character the world would be a better place.
I'll drink to that.
Actually, the seed oils in drug type cannabis contain more compounds which can be extracted and turned into Biodiesel fuel. The traditional "hemp" seeds of the lesser-potency non-drug types of cannabis have about 30% fewer oils under identical growing conditions because they just have smaller seeds.
Also, hemp IS the greatest thing for the world. It is one plant from which you can get the ingredients for:
- Paper
- Oils (both lubricating and fuel such as Biodiesel)
- Textiles and clothing (Up to four times as soft as cotten when properly processed)
- Rope (One of the big uses of hemp in WW2. Read about how domestic farmers were able to grow hemp during WW2 under the "hemp for victory" label, in order to supply the US government with the fiber it needed for uniforms and ropes and tents because the main hemp supply from the phillipenes was cut off)
- Omega-3 fatty acids are contained within the seeds, and the derived seed oil is extremely good for you. (From the American Heart Association's website: "Omega-3 fatty acids benefit the heart of healthy people, and those at high risk of or who have cardiovascular disease.")
And let us not forget the boon of farmland aeration and hillside retention. Cannabis plants can grow their roots up to six feet outwards laterally and up to two feet in depth over the course of ONE SEASON. This is THE MOST root growth of any plant known to man and makes cannabis perfect for holding up the ground in temporary landslide zones and aerating cropland. As it is an annual plant it would not serve much purpose as more than a temporary solution to a given problem.
And the coolest thing is that you can get it all from ONE PLANT! One plant that grows in every state of the country unattended (it's a WEED!) and could solve all of our domestic energy needs, our domestic textile and paper needs, our domestic lubrication needs, and so on. Using the fiber of the stalks for textiles and paper doesn't take away from the oil production you get from the seeds and vice-versa, so the potential diversity of product from the first crop is very great.
There are more reasons to legalize cannabis cultivation and processing than simply getting high. It holds benefits for mankind that far surpass the selfish moment of being totally stoned off your ass.
People forget how much we need to support programs like this in order to advance mankind.
They haven't forgotten; they just don't care.
The times leading up to putting a man on the moon were times of arrogance and pride. The only reason we even PUT a man on the moon is so we could do it before the Russians and say "neener" on a global scale. At that time it was not about advancing mankind but about advancing the USA in the eyes of the global community. Kind of like little kids on the playground trying to swing higher than one another or do the monkey bars faster or whatever. There's nobody left to compete with us, and without the spirit of competition we aren't going to be able to get the kind of advancement you're talking about. The ISS hosts representatives of the Chinese, Russian, and other governments. They are our scientific allies, not our competitors.
The Ansari X-Prize is the first good step towards re-igniting the competition, although it is somewhat disgusting that money is the only thing that we are really willing to compete for. Although when you really think about it critically, it does all come down to money: sending people to Mars is not cost-effective. The returns just aren't there. Until a camera spots a critter skittering across the surface of the planet or dewdrops form on the lens, there will not be a compelling enough reason to make Mars a top priority because of how financially unrewarding it is. Until the day comes that we discover something more universally encouraging than money, money will unfortunately be the rule by which we live.
If there were a $1B prize to put a man on Mars, I bet there'd be a little bit more competition. Any major government could put up that amount of money, or possibly all major governments could pool together their monies into a global prize pool. Put a five-year time frame on it; 3 for R&D and 2 for the trip itself. Even world governments could stand to use their space programs to compete. I mean if 5 nations put up $200 million and it costs $400M to get a man on Mars, the winner would still make back their initial investments and then some.
Mars is a little ambitious though, even for us. I like that nobody has died in space yet, and I'd like to keep it that way for as long as possible. Long-distance journeys require sophisticated radiation shielding and very reliable life support systems. I think we should start with the moon as a testbed, offer maybe a $5M prize for a robotic moon landing and a $50M prize for a manned landing.