The time span of 25 years isn't too much a big deal, but if you want to avoid moisture problems, why not just chuck it all in a box in the back of a closet. The odds of survival are pretty good, given the current socioeconomic circumstances, even without mothballs. And if there's some sentimental significance, a museum shelf would do the trick.
After about 10 years, people would probably snicker how little information was stored, and backward compatible devices may exist to rip the entire contents in about 5 seconds.
For the paranoid, the technology to ensure the survival of data in the interval year n to n + 25 ought to include various measures to protect the earth against high energy gamma ray bursts, stray meteors, volcanoes, earthquakes, terrorists, locusts, and other perversions too numerous to mention.
Couldn't see anyone doing 'testing' in a town in the US without two very big teams of lawyers being involved
The lungs purify the air. Presumably, hHaving teams of lawyers in your neighborhood would purify the air there a little. So you can have an experiment in such a way.
Special for today, the cheapest laptop in bulk is being offered, for $25, a 486-66 in PC-AT form factor, complete with CD-ROM and 3 ISA expansion slots, as well as 17-inch CRT, designed to fit on your lap quite well as the case is to be laid flat rather than as a tower. The buyer must use this on the lap, or there is no deal! Priced to sell, boots to Windows 95, and has been tested with Linux.
Caveat, disclaimer: used rather than new, and as is.
ascending to the surface as fast as you can safely since you'll quickly run out of air
Could be a good time to call 911
BTW, plastic food wrap for making a laptop semiwaterproof is a bit less costly than 1 grand. Take care to not block the ventilation. How do waterproof laptops cool themselves? Do they have all the components except perhaps the heatsink covered?
I need someone to explain Apple to me. A long time ago, when I was in high school and Apple was about as good a choice for personal computing as anything else, Apple was recognized as force of great potential. Now, Apple hardware is Intel based and seems to be a PC in Apple's clothing. As a business, Apple diversified into relevant electronics, but all along, Apple has tried to be the individualist company like the original Apple computers that just didn't want to or even have to work along with anybody else's stuff.
Perhaps, that makes people fear staying with Apple products. They make some people happy for a short time, and the products make a statement about having a bit of class, but alternatives soon appear to make Apple a hard sell. Particularly, these days when prices are high and the economy is shaky, people are not so willing to risk their hard-earned wages on technology that will soon be overshadowed, Apple is relegated to toy status.
What Steve Jobs did was really good for the short term, and his success was unprecedented by his predecessors, a fact that bodes ill for his successors. One supposes that his strategies are surely revealed and copyable, but can Steve Jobs even persist in his current line of attack? Apple is a peculiarity in a world that can accommodate a bit of eccentricity. There are many different things that Apple can do even without Steve Jobs. The name Apple is itself very suggestive, especially now, though it suggests more about cuteness than about widespread utility, and that's a weakness.
Counting which 1/10 of my screen the cursor is on -- well that also leads to a higher probability of error. The law of diminishing returns indicates that at some point the error will be so bad that I wouldn't know which tenth to enough accuracy to be beneficial.
But if I was playing a game where it makes a big difference such as shooting blindfolded, I would learn fairly quickly. I'm sure 10 fingers were made for playing the piano and I've never lived up to that purpose of life.
And the research labs at Microsoft, IBM, HP, and Yahoo are all very good at this.
Here's a big but - what about the local gasket manufacturer or soda bottler? Businesses are so bottom-line oriented, especially these days with the high prices and people losing their homes. There's little motivation to do any research if it's left to the big-name companies. While it does take a certain level of training and inclination to get involved in research, our technological base should be making research a snap.
I want to be a consultant that helps the little-guy company get a foothold into structured research and make some small breakthroughs that may put that business ahead of the competition. What technological resources are available to make a research program successful on a budget?
And the next time wolf is heard (the third world war!) we'll just think it's a hoax. Those who want to start a world war (the wolves) could desensitize the victims to the news with a series of anonymous emails until the real news is ignored and people don't bother hiding in or even building bunkers. In the fable, at the end there's always a (war) wolf.
Even if they're from different providers, they're running over the same phone network (esp. since smaller providers are just resellers). A backhoe, lightning storm, or major power blackout doesn't give a sh*t that you went through two different providers
There are a few sides to this coin.
Side 1: If ISPs get wind of the idea that people are (a) concerned about reliability and (b) building their own failovers, ISPs can keep even lower standards for service because that will (c) sell more connections and (d) save money. Businesses are catching on to the phenomenon of "people will pay more if they think they need more". Oil is a good example. OPEC is now saying _we_ can't control the price of oil. How can _we_ have anything to do with it? Well, if I bring to OPEC 10 empty barrels and say "Here's a $140 US. Turn on the taps." So it happens, the taps will come on briefly and close when one barrel is filled. OPEC has so much oil that if brought 10 swimming pools, and they filled them, they could care less but they wouldn't give so much as a squirt in the other 9 barrels. It's all about businesspeople taking what they can, if we so much as hint that we don't mind.
Side 2: Consumers giving pressure to ISPs by switching to the ISP that offers more speed and reliability, and none of the claptrap about long-term contracts. The price difference between the highest speed and the medium speed is very little, so how much gain is there in subscribing to two accounts? Also, if the backbone can support two or n accounts at the highest modem speed, why do we not have modems that are even faster for just a bit more charge?
Side 3: If many households are so hungry for bandwidth that they need more than one channel, they are likely to be downloading multiple items at once much of the time. The architecture of the Internet is inefficient for such traffic because it means, for popular things, the same thing is being downloaded again and again from a server. Instead, the most popular things should be automatically mirrored to be within range of a wireless connection.
Side 4: What's the next level up from ADSL? If someone wants 2 or n ADSL connections, maybe it's just as costly as going to the next level, which is sure to provide more service.
As far as software is concerned, one of the effective techniques of copy protection is bloat. Want a copy? Get a new hard disk and CPU upgrade. So buy a new computer with bundled software.
What I'm doing on my 2 Gb computer with dual core is marginally more featuresome than what I did with my 4 Mb 486. Sure, I do more in less time, but not really more complicated, most of the time, aside from games and media playback. However, task manager tells me I need 200 Mb of RAM to write code. It seems I don't have enough disk space left now to run the next edition of the development environment.
As hardware prices come down, bundled software is more economical to pay for in a new-computer purchase. So, software makers using this technique of "copy protection" do profit, though there wouldn't be any protection on a downgrade version.
Obama has a good chance. The publicity of the prolonged campaign and eventual victory over Billary is a very clear evidence of how much support he has within a party that ought to believe it has the best chance of winning. Bush has made the Republicans quite a forgettable party for the next election, so if the Democrats are particularly certain of winning, wouldn't they put their best forward? Well, it happens that Obama is their best, and if the Democrats believed they could have found someone better, they would have.
Does it matter that Obama's name is a reminder of notoriety? Some of us may believe in conspiracy theories, supersition, astrology, or outlandish prophesies. Is there anything in the coincidences of names? Doubtless, much will be made of it.
I thought particles are for the most part pieces of matter, regardable as uniform in structure. I do not work with viruses--are individual viruses referred to as particles?
There is something about the theory of fractal similarity at different scales--HIV gathering on a cell resembles flies assembling on dead meat.
The video caption is "individual HIV particles (white spots) assembling on the surface of an infected cell" but the article is titled "single HIV particle". That's fishy.
Well, the lyrics "But I am resolute / to Lagrange and substitute /...carry the psi... / what's the square root of minus i!? / I will derive!" show a good deal of knowledge about math, but the song in the video this article is based on seems to be aimed more at pre-university students. Each syllable is enunciated, and the concepts are totally elementary. It may be quite the mnemonic for morons.
I'm the kind that hates to memorize lists, and life is full of them. One thing I liked to do in solving problems, particularly on exams, is to remember the reasoning involved to obtain lists or formulas. Doing so was more interesting. If I used a list or methodology for a number of instances, I wouldn't forget, but that sometimes is more time consuming than can be done when I had to learn a number of new details in a few short hours.
So, fellow slashdotters, what do you do to help yourself remember or approach a problem?
BTW, the slashdot page for this article is really messed up. There are no REPLY buttons, and when I click on the article number to reply, the buttons are still not intuitive. Finally this comment has to be entered in a little box that is narrower than its height.
Digital files can be copied without depriving the original owner of theirs, be it software or music. Your money was taken from you leaving you with less (I hope your insurance covered it).
Eh... duh? The issue isn't that "copying" a work deprives the original author of his or her copy. See the definition of "copy". You'll find that it's a very old word.
The issue is that in so doing, you destroy the merchantability of the work in question. Since economics require a balance of supply and demand, and since copying can be done infinitely (killing any such balance) then economic restrictions are in place so that economic activity can continue.
Another poster has commented on the scarcity of good creativity.
But surely there is something flawed because after all, copies are next to free labor and materialwise and if you listen to a good song or look at a nice picture, you have a copy in your frickin head. If you can sing or draw, you can reproduce with a bit of labor what you experienced. Then what's so bad about having a machine do the recording especially when BILLIONS have been invested in advancing technology to the point where high fidelity copies are affordable by the masses? This technology is good for us and should be something we use and enjoy to its fullest extent.
To balance things out, there's a downside, though only a small one. If a good artist produces something easily copied, the solution is not to clamp down on the copying. The old business model depended on copies being difficult. In that business model, each copy sold for peanuts to individuals. Well, it's a no brainer to dump the old business model.
The new business model will be sell the first copy for what it's worth, by way of auction or expert opinion. So an organization can pay the artist the big bucks up front and let everyone have a copy for free. It works out to the same thing but with less ranting and more perceived fairness. It's a lot more user friendly too.
Then it's up to people, as it always is, to pay into the organization, which in turn makes art widely available. Aside from the rampant willingness of some politicians to give grants, people should recognize the value of art and fork out money to keep good artists producing--there is a willingness to contribute, from what I see of Wikipedia donations.
What any artist receives is a matter of subjectivity and debate, but the amount could be paid over a period of time based on how people respond. The main thing is to ensure that the cash is flowing and keeping everything smooth. Is that win win or what?
When I bought a 486 the power supply had a fan, and the fans in those days were noisy as hell. I bought a name brand of sorts P4 that made way less noise, but I have to hand to the electronics of today as far as laptops are concerned. My laptop is really quiet and cool--even the DVDs don't heat up. I had an old 1GHz laptop that really heated the DVDs, and the fan was noisier, especially on a hot day when it revs right up.
I don't like noisy computers, since the noise is very distracting.
BTW, why all the hubbub about burning out a CPU with no heatsink? We all know it would if it requires enough power.
When it comes to nanotubes, what is more effective as a filter - a mask or a cigarette filter? In analogy to the derivation of electrical resistance, a long path has more resistance than a path with a large surface area, so a cigarette filter is a better filter.
Maybe the recyclable look is Darth Vader. Tin foil hats, gas masks, and chain mail on runway models will start this ball rolling off the good old slippery slope.
When I think of detail, I think of zoom. Multiple pictures can help define some fuzzy areas, and assuming the subject doesn't change, correct for atmospheric distortion. However, as the naked eye staring at a distant object can't quite make out what is being seen, a whole bunch of fuzzy snapshots aren't going to give any big confidence improvement.
Aperture synthesis involves simultaneous processing of light to zoom by adding light that is in the same phase. A digital camera cannot match this kind of zooming by redundant images, which basically contain much of the same information, thus eating up a hard drive for no real gain.
I haven't read about the theory behind the digital camera used to make the multiple pictures so this may be what they're doing. If the camera is used to take many pictures over a prolonged time where the angle of the sun gradually varies, a kind of zoom may be achieved. The robot arm is intriguing--if the light source is constant and a static subject is only a few arm's lengths away, a magnified view of sorts might be achievable. I'm skeptical.
But is jet kerosene actually released? I suppose a bit might be, but isn't the fuel burned? The chemtrails ahem contrails that we see are supposed to be carbon dioxide and water, for the most part aren't they? Then again, if you sit in a plane while it's idling, something sure smells funky.
Some theories define peak oil as the moment of the highest rate of oil production, but I've always defined peak oil as the time when alternative energy sources to oil become less expensive. We're definitely getting to this point.
Transporting one's butt from place to place is very energy inefficient for a lot of people, but the silver lining may be increased availability of local services, and the use of technology to do a lot of lightweight work over the Internet. The Internet shopping dream could not compete with the touchy-feely presentation of threatened retailers but if people can't afford gas, retail owners will just have to either wait for alternative energy to become affordable or go online.
BTW, on another note, I had 15 mod points today to play with. I used to have just 5 ata time, and didn't get those too often. Now I have to actually sift through all these posts, and maybe actually learn something from the Internet.
Naw, you need Cat D6, 3rd gear forward, rabbit mode and lower the blade.... ^_^
To tell tales out of school, my design prof., who was working for this company a long time ago, told us that when the company finished a part of a project, it took their electronic gear out into the field and flattened them with a bulldozer, to prevent industrial espionage. A lot of the destroyed equipment was new and in those days had no nonvolatile storage anyways. Is this paranoia widespread at all? Makes you wonder how companies can overcharge so much as to afford the wanton destruction.
I wonder if tracked vehicles would be required to mount a Macbook Air.
I'm paying for bandwidth, I should be able to use 100% of what I paid for. If their infrastructure can't handle it - maybe they should go back to selling tv
tv? not just infrastructure, but conflict of interest
Slashdot Mirror
... underground ... welded shut ...
The time span of 25 years isn't too much a big deal, but if you want to avoid moisture problems, why not just chuck it all in a box in the back of a closet. The odds of survival are pretty good, given the current socioeconomic circumstances, even without mothballs. And if there's some sentimental significance, a museum shelf would do the trick.
After about 10 years, people would probably snicker how little information was stored, and backward compatible devices may exist to rip the entire contents in about 5 seconds.
For the paranoid, the technology to ensure the survival of data in the interval year n to n + 25 ought to include various measures to protect the earth against high energy gamma ray bursts, stray meteors, volcanoes, earthquakes, terrorists, locusts, and other perversions too numerous to mention.
but if I don't know what the hole looks like, I can't carve a peg to fit it
There are some I know who will put their pegs into any hole
Couldn't see anyone doing 'testing' in a town in the US without two very big teams of lawyers being involved
The lungs purify the air. Presumably, hHaving teams of lawyers in your neighborhood would purify the air there a little. So you can have an experiment in such a way.
Special for today, the cheapest laptop in bulk is being offered, for $25, a 486-66 in PC-AT form factor, complete with CD-ROM and 3 ISA expansion slots, as well as 17-inch CRT, designed to fit on your lap quite well as the case is to be laid flat rather than as a tower. The buyer must use this on the lap, or there is no deal! Priced to sell, boots to Windows 95, and has been tested with Linux.
Caveat, disclaimer: used rather than new, and as is.
ascending to the surface as fast as you can safely since you'll quickly run out of air
Could be a good time to call 911
BTW, plastic food wrap for making a laptop semiwaterproof is a bit less costly than 1 grand. Take care to not block the ventilation. How do waterproof laptops cool themselves? Do they have all the components except perhaps the heatsink covered?
I need someone to explain Apple to me. A long time ago, when I was in high school and Apple was about as good a choice for personal computing as anything else, Apple was recognized as force of great potential. Now, Apple hardware is Intel based and seems to be a PC in Apple's clothing. As a business, Apple diversified into relevant electronics, but all along, Apple has tried to be the individualist company like the original Apple computers that just didn't want to or even have to work along with anybody else's stuff.
Perhaps, that makes people fear staying with Apple products. They make some people happy for a short time, and the products make a statement about having a bit of class, but alternatives soon appear to make Apple a hard sell. Particularly, these days when prices are high and the economy is shaky, people are not so willing to risk their hard-earned wages on technology that will soon be overshadowed, Apple is relegated to toy status.
What Steve Jobs did was really good for the short term, and his success was unprecedented by his predecessors, a fact that bodes ill for his successors. One supposes that his strategies are surely revealed and copyable, but can Steve Jobs even persist in his current line of attack? Apple is a peculiarity in a world that can accommodate a bit of eccentricity. There are many different things that Apple can do even without Steve Jobs. The name Apple is itself very suggestive, especially now, though it suggests more about cuteness than about widespread utility, and that's a weakness.
The whole issue is a little cloudy to me.
Counting which 1/10 of my screen the cursor is on -- well that also leads to a higher probability of error. The law of diminishing returns indicates that at some point the error will be so bad that I wouldn't know which tenth to enough accuracy to be beneficial.
But if I was playing a game where it makes a big difference such as shooting blindfolded, I would learn fairly quickly. I'm sure 10 fingers were made for playing the piano and I've never lived up to that purpose of life.
And the research labs at Microsoft, IBM, HP, and Yahoo are all very good at this.
Here's a big but - what about the local gasket manufacturer or soda bottler? Businesses are so bottom-line oriented, especially these days with the high prices and people losing their homes. There's little motivation to do any research if it's left to the big-name companies. While it does take a certain level of training and inclination to get involved in research, our technological base should be making research a snap.
I want to be a consultant that helps the little-guy company get a foothold into structured research and make some small breakthroughs that may put that business ahead of the competition. What technological resources are available to make a research program successful on a budget?
And the next time wolf is heard
(the third world war!)
we'll just think it's a hoax. Those who want to start a world war
(the wolves)
could desensitize the victims to the news with a series of anonymous emails until the real news is ignored and people don't bother hiding in or even building bunkers. In the fable, at the end there's always a
(war)
wolf.
Even if they're from different providers, they're running over the same phone network (esp. since smaller providers are just resellers). A backhoe, lightning storm, or major power blackout doesn't give a sh*t that you went through two different providers
There are a few sides to this coin.
Side 1: If ISPs get wind of the idea that people are (a) concerned about reliability and (b) building their own failovers, ISPs can keep even lower standards for service because that will (c) sell more connections and (d) save money. Businesses are catching on to the phenomenon of "people will pay more if they think they need more". Oil is a good example. OPEC is now saying _we_ can't control the price of oil. How can _we_ have anything to do with it? Well, if I bring to OPEC 10 empty barrels and say "Here's a $140 US. Turn on the taps." So it happens, the taps will come on briefly and close when one barrel is filled. OPEC has so much oil that if brought 10 swimming pools, and they filled them, they could care less but they wouldn't give so much as a squirt in the other 9 barrels. It's all about businesspeople taking what they can, if we so much as hint that we don't mind.
Side 2: Consumers giving pressure to ISPs by switching to the ISP that offers more speed and reliability, and none of the claptrap about long-term contracts. The price difference between the highest speed and the medium speed is very little, so how much gain is there in subscribing to two accounts? Also, if the backbone can support two or n accounts at the highest modem speed, why do we not have modems that are even faster for just a bit more charge?
Side 3: If many households are so hungry for bandwidth that they need more than one channel, they are likely to be downloading multiple items at once much of the time. The architecture of the Internet is inefficient for such traffic because it means, for popular things, the same thing is being downloaded again and again from a server. Instead, the most popular things should be automatically mirrored to be within range of a wireless connection.
Side 4: What's the next level up from ADSL? If someone wants 2 or n ADSL connections, maybe it's just as costly as going to the next level, which is sure to provide more service.
Just like Twinkle Twinkle Little Star and The Alphabet song are the same
Weird Al's parody of ABCDEFG, no doubt.
So instead of making the videos on earth and saying they went to the moon, they're now just saying they did it all on terra firma.
OK, I believe they did go to the moon, but if they didn't I wonder why the hoaxing stopped.
As far as software is concerned, one of the effective techniques of copy protection is bloat. Want a copy? Get a new hard disk and CPU upgrade. So buy a new computer with bundled software.
What I'm doing on my 2 Gb computer with dual core is marginally more featuresome than what I did with my 4 Mb 486. Sure, I do more in less time, but not really more complicated, most of the time, aside from games and media playback. However, task manager tells me I need 200 Mb of RAM to write code. It seems I don't have enough disk space left now to run the next edition of the development environment.
As hardware prices come down, bundled software is more economical to pay for in a new-computer purchase. So, software makers using this technique of "copy protection" do profit, though there wouldn't be any protection on a downgrade version.
Obama has a good chance. The publicity of the prolonged campaign and eventual victory over Billary is a very clear evidence of how much support he has within a party that ought to believe it has the best chance of winning. Bush has made the Republicans quite a forgettable party for the next election, so if the Democrats are particularly certain of winning, wouldn't they put their best forward? Well, it happens that Obama is their best, and if the Democrats believed they could have found someone better, they would have.
Does it matter that Obama's name is a reminder of notoriety? Some of us may believe in conspiracy theories, supersition, astrology, or outlandish prophesies. Is there anything in the coincidences of names? Doubtless, much will be made of it.
I thought particles are for the most part pieces of matter, regardable as uniform in structure. I do not work with viruses--are individual viruses referred to as particles?
There is something about the theory of fractal similarity at different scales--HIV gathering on a cell resembles flies assembling on dead meat.
The video caption is "individual HIV particles (white spots) assembling on the surface of an infected cell" but the article is titled "single HIV particle". That's fishy.
Well, the lyrics "But I am resolute / to Lagrange and substitute / ...carry the psi... / what's the square root of minus i!? / I will derive!" show a good deal of knowledge about math, but the song in the video this article is based on seems to be aimed more at pre-university students. Each syllable is enunciated, and the concepts are totally elementary. It may be quite the mnemonic for morons.
I'm the kind that hates to memorize lists, and life is full of them. One thing I liked to do in solving problems, particularly on exams, is to remember the reasoning involved to obtain lists or formulas. Doing so was more interesting. If I used a list or methodology for a number of instances, I wouldn't forget, but that sometimes is more time consuming than can be done when I had to learn a number of new details in a few short hours.
So, fellow slashdotters, what do you do to help yourself remember or approach a problem?
BTW, the slashdot page for this article is really messed up. There are no REPLY buttons, and when I click on the article number to reply, the buttons are still not intuitive. Finally this comment has to be entered in a little box that is narrower than its height.
Here's how the argument has been going.
Digital files can be copied without depriving the original owner of theirs, be it software or music. Your money was taken from you leaving you with less (I hope your insurance covered it).
Eh... duh? The issue isn't that "copying" a work deprives the original author of his or her copy. See the definition of "copy". You'll find that it's a very old word.
The issue is that in so doing, you destroy the merchantability of the work in question. Since economics require a balance of supply and demand, and since copying can be done infinitely (killing any such balance) then economic restrictions are in place so that economic activity can continue.
Another poster has commented on the scarcity of good creativity.
But surely there is something flawed because after all, copies are next to free labor and materialwise and if you listen to a good song or look at a nice picture, you have a copy in your frickin head. If you can sing or draw, you can reproduce with a bit of labor what you experienced. Then what's so bad about having a machine do the recording especially when BILLIONS have been invested in advancing technology to the point where high fidelity copies are affordable by the masses? This technology is good for us and should be something we use and enjoy to its fullest extent.
To balance things out, there's a downside, though only a small one. If a good artist produces something easily copied, the solution is not to clamp down on the copying. The old business model depended on copies being difficult. In that business model, each copy sold for peanuts to individuals. Well, it's a no brainer to dump the old business model.
The new business model will be sell the first copy for what it's worth, by way of auction or expert opinion. So an organization can pay the artist the big bucks up front and let everyone have a copy for free. It works out to the same thing but with less ranting and more perceived fairness. It's a lot more user friendly too.
Then it's up to people, as it always is, to pay into the organization, which in turn makes art widely available. Aside from the rampant willingness of some politicians to give grants, people should recognize the value of art and fork out money to keep good artists producing--there is a willingness to contribute, from what I see of Wikipedia donations.
What any artist receives is a matter of subjectivity and debate, but the amount could be paid over a period of time based on how people respond. The main thing is to ensure that the cash is flowing and keeping everything smooth. Is that win win or what?
When I bought a 486 the power supply had a fan, and the fans in those days were noisy as hell. I bought a name brand of sorts P4 that made way less noise, but I have to hand to the electronics of today as far as laptops are concerned. My laptop is really quiet and cool--even the DVDs don't heat up. I had an old 1GHz laptop that really heated the DVDs, and the fan was noisier, especially on a hot day when it revs right up.
I don't like noisy computers, since the noise is very distracting.
BTW, why all the hubbub about burning out a CPU with no heatsink? We all know it would if it requires enough power.
When it comes to nanotubes, what is more effective as a filter - a mask or a cigarette filter? In analogy to the derivation of electrical resistance, a long path has more resistance than a path with a large surface area, so a cigarette filter is a better filter.
Maybe the recyclable look is Darth Vader. Tin foil hats, gas masks, and chain mail on runway models will start this ball rolling off the good old slippery slope.
Incredible detail or incredible redundancy?
When I think of detail, I think of zoom. Multiple pictures can help define some fuzzy areas, and assuming the subject doesn't change, correct for atmospheric distortion. However, as the naked eye staring at a distant object can't quite make out what is being seen, a whole bunch of fuzzy snapshots aren't going to give any big confidence improvement.
Aperture synthesis involves simultaneous processing of light to zoom by adding light that is in the same phase. A digital camera cannot match this kind of zooming by redundant images, which basically contain much of the same information, thus eating up a hard drive for no real gain.
I haven't read about the theory behind the digital camera used to make the multiple pictures so this may be what they're doing. If the camera is used to take many pictures over a prolonged time where the angle of the sun gradually varies, a kind of zoom may be achieved. The robot arm is intriguing--if the light source is constant and a static subject is only a few arm's lengths away, a magnified view of sorts might be achievable. I'm skeptical.
jet kerosene released into the atmosphere
But is jet kerosene actually released? I suppose a bit might be, but isn't the fuel burned? The chemtrails ahem contrails that we see are supposed to be carbon dioxide and water, for the most part aren't they? Then again, if you sit in a plane while it's idling, something sure smells funky.
Some theories define peak oil as the moment of the highest rate of oil production, but I've always defined peak oil as the time when alternative energy sources to oil become less expensive. We're definitely getting to this point.
Transporting one's butt from place to place is very energy inefficient for a lot of people, but the silver lining may be increased availability of local services, and the use of technology to do a lot of lightweight work over the Internet. The Internet shopping dream could not compete with the touchy-feely presentation of threatened retailers but if people can't afford gas, retail owners will just have to either wait for alternative energy to become affordable or go online.
BTW, on another note, I had 15 mod points today to play with. I used to have just 5 ata time, and didn't get those too often. Now I have to actually sift through all these posts, and maybe actually learn something from the Internet.
Naw, you need Cat D6, 3rd gear forward, rabbit mode and lower the blade.... ^_^
To tell tales out of school, my design prof., who was working for this company a long time ago, told us that when the company finished a part of a project, it took their electronic gear out into the field and flattened them with a bulldozer, to prevent industrial espionage. A lot of the destroyed equipment was new and in those days had no nonvolatile storage anyways. Is this paranoia widespread at all? Makes you wonder how companies can overcharge so much as to afford the wanton destruction.
I wonder if tracked vehicles would be required to mount a Macbook Air.
I'm paying for bandwidth, I should be able to use 100% of what I paid for. If their infrastructure can't handle it - maybe they should go back to selling tv
tv? not just infrastructure, but conflict of interest
It should cross over today as well.
And the number of cross dressers will exceed 666,666 at any given day.