This is a great deal. I use a board almost like that (smaller that uATX, though) as a file/web/database server. It runs Ubuntu 6.06. I think I paid about $80 for mine. I think I put 256 MB in mine plus 80+400GB of disk. I have a Gb-E NIC waiting to go in it at some point.
The only thing I would change is to put a bigger heatsink on the CPU to eliminate the 40mm fan. My fan crapped out and getting a good replacement for those is always a pain.
On a more serious note, there are advances in treating diabetes. Twenty years ago, diabetics had to use insulin from pigs or cows. Cancer survival rates are WAY up. You lump cancer into one disease when it is really hundreds. Those are the ones I know just a bit about, but the fact of the matter is that there IS plent of progress on a whole raft of diseases, but there is no magic "take and live forever" pill.
As for your last comment, two points: 1) one expects that the oldest sciences make the slowest progress because the lowest hanging fruit has been picked. 2) Modern medicine is not that old. One could reasonably pick the 1930's (penicillin) or the 1960's (DNA) as the beginning of modern medicine. A lot of what went on before that was science in the same way that alchemy is science.
Yeah, not exactly Britishisms, but the Inquirer, a British tech journal, is written the same way. All tongue in cheek, inside jokes and puns to the point where it can be really difficult to figure out what the heck they are talking about if you don't read it regularly. They must think this style of writing is clever.
DocDB (http://docdb-v.sourceforge.net/) can interface to the search engines others are suggesting, but organizing your documents with decent meta-data in the first place (and not on a Wiki that is allowed to rot) is also important. That's what DocDB does.
As the other commenters have alluded to, businesses go to court with other businesses all the time over these types of issues. The fact that no company, to date, has been willing to take on a bunch of long haired hippies with scant resources over their commie license would suggest that either the terms of the license are benign to them or they know they don't have a leg to stand on. Also, there have been a few companies that have gotten to the stage Monsoon has and they've folded their hand when lawyers get involved. That says something.
You are just plain wrong on this. Go read the original/. "article." There is no such right for the store. If they have reason to suspect you of stealing, they can search you or call the police. Entering their store and purchasing something is NOT grounds to suspect you of shoplifting. So they can ask, but not demand, that you submit to a search.
Apparently club stores, like Costco, operate under different rules, but public stores like Circuit City are as described above.
These books were kind of like the literary version of Zeno's Paradox. In every book, less happened than in the previous book. And extra plot lines were introduced all the time. At that rate it would have never finished. Things started to pick up a bit later, but I too stopped reading. And when I heard he was sick I vowed I wouldn't read anything else until he was done with it.
And as for VNC and friends, well, if they didn't change that code they don't need to give you the source either.
Simply not true. If you distribute GPL'd code, you have to distribute the source (in a manner prescribed by the GPL). Whether you modified it or not does not matter one bit and if you offer your product for download, you have to host the source on your own servers. A link to the source code at some other location is NOT good enough.
There have been smaller linux distributions that get burned over this, but it is the rule under the license.
Well, they should care, because if they make me angry at the company that hired them, it's less likely that company will hire them again.
These rebate companies bid for the original company's business by emphasizing their low payout rates. If the finances work the way the OP suggests, then the company that rejects the most can underbid the competition. If the manufacture pays the rebate plus processing fee, it's also less expensive for the manufacturer.
I buy things with rebates, notably Canon camera gear where the rebate can be hundreds of dollars. But, I always make sure I'll be happy with my purchase if I get bupkis. And, for these large rebates save all the documentation and fight like hell if they try to deny you. You will get it eventually.
Well, here's one person that would rather be in a plane for 18 hours if that's what it took. My last super-long haul was Chicago to Tokyo, sit in Toyko for 3 hours. Then Tokyo to Bangkok, leave the airport for 7(?) hours. Subtract shuttles, re-clearing security, and such and I got 4 hours of sleep in a hotel. Then another 2 hour flight to Phuket, Thailand. Getting out of the airport and into a city for half a day (each time) adds two days to a long trip. That's two days more I have to take off work (and can't take later) or two days cut off my time at my final destination (which is where I wanted to be in the first place).
Yeah, people don't like long plane flights. They also don't like taking forever to get there (or they'd take a boat). Nor do they want to pay thousands of dollars to get there (or the Concorde would still be flying).
We should start cataloging them and marking the ones that have necessary things like water, iron, gold, etc. Once we know what's out there, it won't be long before someone figures out how to get it and bring it back.
Right....
Water: We've got a lot of here, if you haven't noticed. Salt water can be distilled pretty easily compared to launching a rocket and diverting a comet.
Iron: Well, our whole planet is made of it...
Gold: Fill the entire cargo capacity of the space shuttle with 24K gold and bring it back. The value is still not enough to pay for the cost ($500 million) of the mission.
Right....
Water: We've got a lot of here, if you haven't noticed. Salt water can be distilled pretty easily
Iron: Well, our whole planet is made of it...
Gold: Fill the entire cargo capacity of the space shuttle with 24K gold and bring it back. The value is still not enough to pay for the cost ($500 million) of the mission.
The pixel is not transparent, the filter on top of it is. If a sensor has 4M pixels, the current design has 1M of them with little red filters on them, 1M with little blue filters, and 2M with green (our eyes are most sensitive to green). This new design, as I understand it, just replaces half of the green filters with "clear" filters. The sensor underneath is sensitive to whatever light makes it through.
Many of the people the GP is referring to work for Fermilab. They are paid by Fermilab to work on one of the CERN experiments. In fact, after CERN itself, I suspect Fermilab is the single largest contributor to the CERN experiments. Fermilab is going to do this kind of physics whether it is done using their own accelerator or not. Of course, they would rather it be done with their own accelerator, but some time (say a year) after the LHC turns on that's not really feasible anymore.
1) These are rumors of rumors. Even IF there is something there, it will not be possible to fully understand what is going on at the Tevatron. And rumors like this have come and gone many times. LEP discovered the Higgs, or not. Fermilab discovered the top quark at a lower energy, or not. Fermilab discovered sub-structure in quarks, or not.
2) Most of the scientists involved in the two big Fermilab experiments are also members of one of the two big CERN experiments.
3) Even IF Fermilab discovers the Higgs and CERN verifies that it really is the SM Higgs, that is not the end of the story. There are strong suggestions that there must be more new physics (Higgs not withstanding) at the edge of the Tevatron's reach or beyond (i.e. in the LHC range). Supersymmetry (SUSY) is probably the leading explanation, but by no means certain. Sure, there is some extremely tiny chance that the new physics is at a quadrillion times the LHC energy, but almost no theorists believe this. (The author states/suggests that most do which is patently false.)
As a good indicator, look at how many people on the LHC experiments are gearing up to look at various physics aspects of the LHC data. You'd probably find a mix something like 20-30% looking at Standard Model physics (not Higgs, but including top). 20-30% looking at the Higgs, 30-40% looking at SUSY, and 10-20% looking at other new physics models: extra-dimensions, black-holes, compositeness, 4th generation.
Yes, I realize that. However, since I live in a state which has decided to get all its income from sales taxes, I've never filled out a state tax form.
You can see what you are buying, hold it in your hands, try it on, and take it home with you that day. Those are a few reasons. Or you could be a bastard, go to your local brick and mortar store, see it, try it on, and then buy it online.
When I need a new hard drive, I'm going to still get it online since I know exactly what I want, don't need the hassle of going to a store, and will save money. But if sales tax is collected on on-line purchases, that narrows the price gap by about 10% in my case, so online will have a smaller advantage.
Also, consider this: State governments are losing revenue to online purchases. If they don't collect it by taxing online purchases, they need to collect it some other way. Do you want to see 15% taxes on things you buy locally?
More like 6 or more extra zeros, actually. There seems to be a lot of confusion about this, so let me try to explain.
Generally the data coming out of these experiments is filtered in two or more stages. It has to run in real time since the data volume is enormous. A detector like this can easily spew out several TB a second of raw data. The first layer of filtering will look at very small portions of the data and make very loose requirements on it, but can run very fast in dedicated electronics. This might discard 99.99% of the events and keep 90% of the interesting stuff, for instance. Now you have a much smaller volume of data, so you can afford to spend more time on it. So maybe you run a pared down version of the full reconstruction software. This is much more sophisticated software, so maybe you can get rid of 99% of what remains and only toss out 10% of the interesting interactions. This stage might be done on a cluster of 1000 computers or more. At the end, you've kept one out a million events and only thrown away 20% of what might be useful. But you need both steps. Skip the first step and you need a network with 10,000 times as much bandwidth and a computer cluster of 10 million computers. Skip the second step and instead of 100 PB of storage, you need 10,000. And you need to deal with all that data in the next step.
The initial filtering is not the end of the story. The one event in a million that passes will be reconstructed with the full, best software available along with the other billion events that pass. Then those will be filtered again based on different types of physics signatures and sent to the researchers looking at that one particular type of interaction. This process also requires thousands of CPUs. The big LHC experiments will have 40 million interactions/second and each interaction might contain 25 collisions. The vast majority of these are understood (not interesting) but the challenge is to sort through those 1 billion interactions a second in a finite amount of time to find the interesting ones. The two stages I've described are called "triggering" and "offline event reconstruction and filtering" if you want to try to find out more.
There go the mod points I assigned earlier in this discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a great deal. I use a board almost like that (smaller that uATX, though) as a file/web/database server. It runs Ubuntu 6.06. I think I paid about $80 for mine. I think I put 256 MB in mine plus 80+400GB of disk. I have a Gb-E NIC waiting to go in it at some point.
The only thing I would change is to put a bigger heatsink on the CPU to eliminate the 40mm fan. My fan crapped out and getting a good replacement for those is always a pain.
Poor spelling? Nope.
On a more serious note, there are advances in treating diabetes. Twenty years ago, diabetics had to use insulin from pigs or cows. Cancer survival rates are WAY up. You lump cancer into one disease when it is really hundreds. Those are the ones I know just a bit about, but the fact of the matter is that there IS plent of progress on a whole raft of diseases, but there is no magic "take and live forever" pill.
As for your last comment, two points: 1) one expects that the oldest sciences make the slowest progress because the lowest hanging fruit has been picked. 2) Modern medicine is not that old. One could reasonably pick the 1930's (penicillin) or the 1960's (DNA) as the beginning of modern medicine. A lot of what went on before that was science in the same way that alchemy is science.
I just tried this. In Krita you can tear off any tool you want except for the top toolbar/menu.
I don't have a dual monitor setup at the moment, but I assume you can relocate those to a different screen.
Knowing the answer to that is a "presumed level of expertise by the author" I guess.
I believe the Inquirer was a "fork" of the Register. Don't know anything about the personalities.
Yeah, not exactly Britishisms, but the Inquirer, a British tech journal, is written the same way. All tongue in cheek, inside jokes and puns to the point where it can be really difficult to figure out what the heck they are talking about if you don't read it regularly. They must think this style of writing is clever.
DocDB (http://docdb-v.sourceforge.net/) can interface to the search engines others are suggesting, but organizing your documents with decent meta-data in the first place (and not on a Wiki that is allowed to rot) is also important. That's what DocDB does.
As the other commenters have alluded to, businesses go to court with other businesses all the time over these types of issues. The fact that no company, to date, has been willing to take on a bunch of long haired hippies with scant resources over their commie license would suggest that either the terms of the license are benign to them or they know they don't have a leg to stand on. Also, there have been a few companies that have gotten to the stage Monsoon has and they've folded their hand when lawyers get involved. That says something.
You are just plain wrong on this. Go read the original /. "article." There is no such right for the store. If they have reason to suspect you of stealing, they can search you or call the police. Entering their store and purchasing something is NOT grounds to suspect you of shoplifting. So they can ask, but not demand, that you submit to a search.
Apparently club stores, like Costco, operate under different rules, but public stores like Circuit City are as described above.
Any of his WOT stuff, obviously.
These books were kind of like the literary version of Zeno's Paradox. In every book, less happened than in the previous book. And extra plot lines were introduced all the time. At that rate it would have never finished. Things started to pick up a bit later, but I too stopped reading. And when I heard he was sick I vowed I wouldn't read anything else until he was done with it.
Simply not true. If you distribute GPL'd code, you have to distribute the source (in a manner prescribed by the GPL). Whether you modified it or not does not matter one bit and if you offer your product for download, you have to host the source on your own servers. A link to the source code at some other location is NOT good enough.
There have been smaller linux distributions that get burned over this, but it is the rule under the license.
Well, they should care, because if they make me angry at the company that hired them, it's less likely that company will hire them again.
These rebate companies bid for the original company's business by emphasizing their low payout rates. If the finances work the way the OP suggests, then the company that rejects the most can underbid the competition. If the manufacture pays the rebate plus processing fee, it's also less expensive for the manufacturer.
I buy things with rebates, notably Canon camera gear where the rebate can be hundreds of dollars. But, I always make sure I'll be happy with my purchase if I get bupkis. And, for these large rebates save all the documentation and fight like hell if they try to deny you. You will get it eventually.
Well, here's one person that would rather be in a plane for 18 hours if that's what it took. My last super-long haul was Chicago to Tokyo, sit in Toyko for 3 hours. Then Tokyo to Bangkok, leave the airport for 7(?) hours. Subtract shuttles, re-clearing security, and such and I got 4 hours of sleep in a hotel. Then another 2 hour flight to Phuket, Thailand. Getting out of the airport and into a city for half a day (each time) adds two days to a long trip. That's two days more I have to take off work (and can't take later) or two days cut off my time at my final destination (which is where I wanted to be in the first place).
Yeah, people don't like long plane flights. They also don't like taking forever to get there (or they'd take a boat). Nor do they want to pay thousands of dollars to get there (or the Concorde would still be flying).
Personally, I can't wait for my first 787 flight.
Right....
Water: We've got a lot of here, if you haven't noticed. Salt water can be distilled pretty easily compared to launching a rocket and diverting a comet.
Iron: Well, our whole planet is made of it...
Gold: Fill the entire cargo capacity of the space shuttle with 24K gold and bring it back. The value is still not enough to pay for the cost ($500 million) of the mission.
Why this is marked insightful is beyond me.
Right.... Water: We've got a lot of here, if you haven't noticed. Salt water can be distilled pretty easily Iron: Well, our whole planet is made of it... Gold: Fill the entire cargo capacity of the space shuttle with 24K gold and bring it back. The value is still not enough to pay for the cost ($500 million) of the mission.
The pixel is not transparent, the filter on top of it is. If a sensor has 4M pixels, the current design has 1M of them with little red filters on them, 1M with little blue filters, and 2M with green (our eyes are most sensitive to green). This new design, as I understand it, just replaces half of the green filters with "clear" filters. The sensor underneath is sensitive to whatever light makes it through.
Many of the people the GP is referring to work for Fermilab. They are paid by Fermilab to work on one of the CERN experiments. In fact, after CERN itself, I suspect Fermilab is the single largest contributor to the CERN experiments. Fermilab is going to do this kind of physics whether it is done using their own accelerator or not. Of course, they would rather it be done with their own accelerator, but some time (say a year) after the LHC turns on that's not really feasible anymore.
So they won't lose the brainpower.
Let us count the ways:
1) These are rumors of rumors. Even IF there is something there, it will not be possible to fully understand what is going on at the Tevatron. And rumors like this have come and gone many times. LEP discovered the Higgs, or not. Fermilab discovered the top quark at a lower energy, or not. Fermilab discovered sub-structure in quarks, or not.
2) Most of the scientists involved in the two big Fermilab experiments are also members of one of the two big CERN experiments.
3) Even IF Fermilab discovers the Higgs and CERN verifies that it really is the SM Higgs, that is not the end of the story. There are strong suggestions that there must be more new physics (Higgs not withstanding) at the edge of the Tevatron's reach or beyond (i.e. in the LHC range). Supersymmetry (SUSY) is probably the leading explanation, but by no means certain. Sure, there is some extremely tiny chance that the new physics is at a quadrillion times the LHC energy, but almost no theorists believe this. (The author states/suggests that most do which is patently false.)
As a good indicator, look at how many people on the LHC experiments are gearing up to look at various physics aspects of the LHC data. You'd probably find a mix something like 20-30% looking at Standard Model physics (not Higgs, but including top). 20-30% looking at the Higgs, 30-40% looking at SUSY, and 10-20% looking at other new physics models: extra-dimensions, black-holes, compositeness, 4th generation.
Yes, I realize that. However, since I live in a state which has decided to get all its income from sales taxes, I've never filled out a state tax form.
You can see what you are buying, hold it in your hands, try it on, and take it home with you that day. Those are a few reasons. Or you could be a bastard, go to your local brick and mortar store, see it, try it on, and then buy it online.
When I need a new hard drive, I'm going to still get it online since I know exactly what I want, don't need the hassle of going to a store, and will save money. But if sales tax is collected on on-line purchases, that narrows the price gap by about 10% in my case, so online will have a smaller advantage.
Also, consider this: State governments are losing revenue to online purchases. If they don't collect it by taxing online purchases, they need to collect it some other way. Do you want to see 15% taxes on things you buy locally?
A hat with ten thin swords sticking out of it? I imagine that could hurt quite a few people.
More like 6 or more extra zeros, actually. There seems to be a lot of confusion about this, so let me try to explain.
Generally the data coming out of these experiments is filtered in two or more stages. It has to run in real time since the data volume is enormous. A detector like this can easily spew out several TB a second of raw data. The first layer of filtering will look at very small portions of the data and make very loose requirements on it, but can run very fast in dedicated electronics. This might discard 99.99% of the events and keep 90% of the interesting stuff, for instance. Now you have a much smaller volume of data, so you can afford to spend more time on it. So maybe you run a pared down version of the full reconstruction software. This is much more sophisticated software, so maybe you can get rid of 99% of what remains and only toss out 10% of the interesting interactions. This stage might be done on a cluster of 1000 computers or more. At the end, you've kept one out a million events and only thrown away 20% of what might be useful. But you need both steps. Skip the first step and you need a network with 10,000 times as much bandwidth and a computer cluster of 10 million computers. Skip the second step and instead of 100 PB of storage, you need 10,000. And you need to deal with all that data in the next step.
The initial filtering is not the end of the story. The one event in a million that passes will be reconstructed with the full, best software available along with the other billion events that pass. Then those will be filtered again based on different types of physics signatures and sent to the researchers looking at that one particular type of interaction. This process also requires thousands of CPUs. The big LHC experiments will have 40 million interactions/second and each interaction might contain 25 collisions. The vast majority of these are understood (not interesting) but the challenge is to sort through those 1 billion interactions a second in a finite amount of time to find the interesting ones. The two stages I've described are called "triggering" and "offline event reconstruction and filtering" if you want to try to find out more.
There go the mod points I assigned earlier in this discussion.
IAAPP and I would call it atomic physics, not a chemical anything.