I have several servers at home that were in PC cases on shelving, but recently moved to a 42U rack in the basement. Overall, it is has been very worthwhile and has dramatically reduced my floor space requirements.
My rack cost $23 at a nearby surplus store. It isn't cheap and flimsy either -- It weighs about 360 lbs empty and was in great condition. I have a pickup truck, so transportation was easy. At home a friend and I simply picked it up and carried it into the basement.
The cases cost a bit more, but are a small percentage of the total cost for the servers. The floor space and organization improvements make paying $50-60 more per case (including $20 rails) very worthwhile.
The fact that it looks a hell of a lot better is just an added bonus.
Sure, I don't NEED the rack, but saying it is automatically stupid to have one in a house is, well, pretty stupid.
I can think of so many ways to justify > 5GB per month that I really can't list them all here, but here are just a few that I have personally done:
1. Offsite backups. I've done frequent rsync backups of my cohosted webservers. This alone can take WAY more than 5GB. I've also backed up local files to offsite servers.
2. I work on robotic systems and have sometimes worked at home. This can involve working with HUGE amounts of recorded data (this could be something like four 60fps HD video streams, hyperspectral video, FLIR, RADAR, 3D LADAR, etc... and lossy compression is not acceptable). Typically, I'd only download a small sample data set to work on, but that could be easily WAY more than 5GB.
3. Photo uploads I do photography as a hobby. Sometimes I get > 5GB of photos I want to upload at one time.
4. Web design I do a bit of freelance web design on the side. Typically this involves modifying an existing site. I will typically set up a testing server at home and download the entire site to it, do my changes and testing there, then upload the final product. This can consume more than 5GB easily.
In practice I am currently averaging 160GB down, 80 up in a month.
This is beside the point though. If I had a 5GB cap, I'd probably not do these things. The fact that I don't is what allows me do do them.
If I had a 5GB cap, I might not even complain too much about it. After all, I wouldn't be doing anything that needed more bandwidth.
Sure, I don't need to use more than 5GB/month. I also don't need the internet at all. For that matter, I could probably just get rid of all my home computers since I don't really need them. I didn't always have them for that matter. Yet having them allows me to do things I could do otherwise.
My point is that deciding what people are allowed to use based on what they need right now is a bad idea. If we do that, we discourage additional development, we end up stuck with the internet as it is now. If we do that, in 20 years people will still be satisfied with their 5GB limits and they won't even know about all the great things that could have existed otherwise.
The excess bandwidth allows for innovation. The internet isn't just about E-Mail and web browsing. It is a general purpose communications network that can be used for whatever people need it for, including things that haven't even been thought of yet. That's what makes it so powerful.
Having some experience in this field, I would be surprised if a robotic Abrams tank didn't already exist in some form or other. There have been MANY unmanned retrofits done on things ranging from motorcycles to construction/mining vehicles.
This happens with several of my laptops. It stings a little if you touch it and are well grounded (i.e. barefoot, resting feet on a desktop computer case and an arm on the laptop case). It is understandable with the unpolarized, ungrounded, PSUs. I'm not an SMPS designer, but IIRC the situation is that the power supplies provide an RF ground through low value capacitors to reduce EMI since they can't have a real ground. This will result in some leakage current, which can be enough to be felt but shouldn't be dangerous. Personally I think it is really annoying.
Technically, that isn't an accurate comparison. Although the word "book" is often used to mean both the physical item and the written content, they should be thought of as different things. In both cases, you need some sort of device to view the written content. In one case, the required device consists of bound paper and ink. In the other case, it consists of a frame with a computer and display. In both cases, the content must be stored/printed on the device.
The electronic reader is more complicated than the paper book, but has a variety of advantages. Really, it is just a different viewer for the same content.
If he was having a seizure, what is the likelihood that his foot kept him going at 65 MPH?
I'm not familiar with that particular toll plaza so I don't know how likely this is, but it could have easily happened if he had been using cruise control. Personally, I've always been surprised that most cruise control systems don't have a dead man's switch, although it might not have helped in this case.
The first thing that came to mind was: <Dilbert>Well look who just got fancy new voice recognition software. Well, at least I won't work all day and then DELETE a FILE!</Dilbert>
Ive recently used both Photoshop and The GIMP, and they have their pros and cons.
For example, Photoshops layer effects are a lot better than anything The GIMP has to offer in that area, but then again, The GIMP has some nice filters and scripting functionality that Photoshop doesnt have.
A while ago, there was a function that GIMP had that I couldnt find in Photoshop. I think it may have been displacement mapping. Also, AFAIK, you cant write Perl scripts for Photoshop.
I have actually switched between Photoshop and The GIMP several times to work on a single image so that I could use the best features of both.
The features in Photoshop are generally better implemented than those in The GIMP.
(..and yes, my apostrophe key is, in fact, not working at the moment.)
The most likely-to-work method I can think of at the moment is:
You could bring some liquid nitrogen and drill a hole into the hard drive through the side of the computer. Quickly inject it with the LN. As a bonus, this will destroy the bearings, cause significant damage to the electronics, and probably stop any other protections. Take back to lab for analysis.
By the time it detected a temp change, the mist would be frozen.
It might also blow the chassis apart from the pressure if the holes were frozen over. You would need to quickly rip the drive out of the computer and put it in the dewar with LN to avoid this and to keep the mist frozen.
It would be difficult and somewhat dangerous, but still possible.
Here is the answer using the theory the article is about:
The idea is that you can't change the way an event in the past happened, but you could still be part of it, as long as you don't change it at all. Beyond that, there would be no restrictions. If you go back in time, the only difference in "free will" between you and the other people is that you will suddenly have some limited and possibly inaccurate knowledge of the future.
Some examples:
1) You go back in time and try to kill your (still living) father. You go to his house and shoot him through the window. You go forward in time to where you originally were. You go to your father's house, and he is still alive. A few weeks later, you are talking to him and he tells you a story of how an unknown criminal shot at him through the window and missed when he was young.
You couldn't have killed your father, because, well, you didn't. The probability that you would have missed, even with repeated shots, may be small, but the probability that what happened is what happened is 100% by definition.
2) You go back in time and try to kill your great-great-great-grandmother. You don't have a picture of her, but you go to their house and see a woman. You stab her with a knife and make sure that he is dead before leaving. When you get back to the present, you and your parents still exist. You don't know what happened.
Later, you find out that your great-great-great-grandfather married a second woman after the first was killed in an unsolved stabbing.
3) Here's one for the conspiracy theorists:) Thousands of years from now, someone thinks people in the 1900s were stupid and goes back in time to kill one of their leaders. They pick a data at random. November 20, 1963, ok. They spend two days walking around and decide to assasinate the president of the US. They mount a rifle on a remote controlled drone they brought with them. They shoot the president during a parade using this then return home. Nothing changes.
Now, in that kind of case, you might say, "but they found that the bullet came from a gun we found with someone else!" Well, it is possible that the barrel of both guns produced markings that were similar enough to be indistinguishable with past technology. When the time traveller fires the gun, even though the odds are extremely low that the marks will be the same as the other gun, we have a future knowledge that the markings were the same.
It isn't a matter of the time traveller having some sort of magical restriction where things dissapear/reappear (like in Back to the Future), but more like the time traveller knowing what the eventual outcome will be. To the time traveller, once they are in the past, the problem would be knowing what will happen in the future. It would be a whole "You can't change your destiny" situation. Of course, as the above situations describe, that would be still fairly flexible.
So, the moral is: "If you are going to travel into the past, your life will be/was much less stressful if you don't learn and history before travelling. It will help maintain the illusion of free will.", at least according to this theory.
There is no point to a Linux vs. BSD war. This kind of thing is seriously hurting open source as a whole.
I've used many different OSes, and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Yes, even Windows has better overall hardware compatibility than any other system.
I use Gentoo Linux on my main workstation simply because it does the job well. It works for what I want. Of course it has flaws, any system will. BSD doesn't have enough hardware/software support I want, and Windows doesn't have a development friendly environment in addition to other problems. Sure, there are plenty of bugs, some of them are pretty annoying, but it is the best thing I've found for the job. It isn't a server, so security isn't a big issue.
On the other hand, I run Windows on my gaming system because of the software compatibility. I don't like the fact that it is closed source, and I hate the various restrictions the software has, but it provides the best overall value.
On my web server, I run Debian, because it is more stable than Gentoo, and I don't need the latest packages. Yes, I also tried BSD, but it wouldn't support the SCSI card I had on it at that time. Yes, I could spend days of effort getting it to work anyway, but the benefits did not warrant that. Debian simply worked best at the time. I'm actually upgrading my web server this weekend and, yes, I am going to try BSD on it.
I consider price, compatibility, openness, performance, support, familiarity, ease of use, and several other factors when I pick an OS. It's all about what works best for the job based on the strengths and weaknesses. Nothing will be perfect, but doing this will get you the best solution.
It is stupid and childish to insist one thing is better than another without considering the application and its requirements. I could say that Mack dump trucks are better than any other vehicles and they should be used for everything because of their power and carrying capacity. Sure, that's great if you're carrying gravel from point A to B, but you wouldn't go on a vacation with one and you definitely wouldn't take a girl on a date with one.
The loosers are those who become so fixated on one thing that they feel they need to make everyone know that it is the solution to everything. Those people need to get some social skills, learn a bit of diplomacy, and realize that it is an operating system, not a religion.
That's the X12B at Brookhaven National Laboratory, not a storage place. Its used for X-ray crystallography. It's apparently scheduled for conditioning until next weekend though.
Most HeNe lasers are definitelyred, although some are yellow. (The dot in the first pic is purple/white, since the brightness overexposed the camera. The reflection on the table is much closer to the real color.)
I think the in-counter supermarket checkout scanners often use a HeNe laser.
Green would most likely be a DPSS(the green laser pointers), dye, or YAG laser.
I understand the situation the LaserShoppe guy is in. As someone planning to start selling a 50-100 watt CO2 laser kit this summer(should be good for laser engraving and lightweight cutting of wood/plastic/cloth with a CNC table), this kind of news really worries me. A CO2 laser under several KW would pose very little threat to aircraft since regular glass blocks the beam, but if these incidents became bad enough to become "top stories", I doubt most people would make the distinction(including police/FBI).
The problem is that no matter how responsible 99% of the buyers are, there is still that idiot who does something stupid and gets hurt. I don't want to be at the center of any media/legal feeding frenzy. For the safety information, I'm thinking some "raw meat vs. laser" photos and a very clear safety description should help get the point across, but after reading some of the posts on the Amazing1.com forums, my faith in people's judgement is pretty low. Of course, that also assumes that nobody buys it FOR irresponsible/illegal purposes.
The CO2 laser is hundreds of times as powerful as the little LaserShoppe one and putting your hand in the beam is a big no-no(the above videos from Synrad.com probably make that clear enough). On the positive side, eye protection isn't as big a problem, since most materials will absorb the 1060nm infrared light. Regular safety goggles work fine.
I guess the biggest problem with selling lasers is that most people are nearly 100% clueless about them. A lot of people think lasers are something they aren't, don't understand what they do, and/or are just plain stupid.
It looks like there is an extension cord on the left side, but it isn't plugged in. Its hard to tell in the photo, but I'm guessing there are deep-cycle batteries in the bottom shelf. You could probably fit at least 250AH worth in there without a problem. That should be enough to run the computer for several hours between charges.
I did a quick enhancement of that picture. Yes, I know I should have used feather around Linus' head, but whatever. You can see the three screens a little better with the color levels adjusted.
The left(behind Linus) laptop looks like it has a terminal or something open in the front, and might be running Windows or something configured to look like it.
Linus' laptop has Frozen Bubble, what looks like the pico editor, and some other stuff. I can't tell what GUI it is, but it's not Windows.
The one on the right(with the picture of the girl) is running GKrellm, and the guy is either staring at his wallpaper picture or getting ready to run a program.
Re:You already have several robots in your home
on
The Robots are Coming
·
· Score: 1
Good point, but newer devices are more complex that you think. First of all, any automatic device is covered by the dictionary definition of a robot, but for this, I'll use a much less general definition. It must use sensor feedback.
Anyways, A bit more about the thermostat: Our thermostat(a pretty basic digital one) reads the temperature of the room and looks up the proper temperature for the current time of day and day of week in its memeory. Then it compares the two and runs through a set startup sequence for the heater or a/c. Once its turned the heater and fan on, it monitors the room temperature, and times how long it takes for the room to heat up. Then it adjusts the data in memory to improve its efficiency on the next cycle. There are also a whole bunch of other processes going on at the same time, like reading data from the keypad, updating the display, checking which mode(heat/off/cool) its is, etc...
Meanwhile at the high-efficiency furnace(I am not a HVAC guy, so I might have some details off): The furnace gets the signal to start. It starts the inducer motor and monitors its current draw. If the current draw is too high, it will shut down. It then uses a pressure switch to make sure that the inducer is actually pulling air. Again, if its not, the furnace shuts down. Next, it releases gas into the burner assembly, and checks with a sensor to see if it is ignited by the pilot. If it isn't, the controller uses the electronic ignition to try to light the burner. It checks for flame again, and if it fails, the furnace shuts down. Otherwise, it will continus. This is done by a logic controller.
A lot of equipment like that has feedback devices for safety and control.
Our washer uses an electronic pressure sensor to measure the water level. Some new ones have a touch screen display, and various configurable programs.
Some dryers have electronic moisture sensors that determine the degree of dryness.
We don't use a dishwasher right now, so I'll use another one for this example. It had a keypad on the front, where you could enter temperature and cycle information. There was an LED display that told the current status and temperature. It would monitor the temperature, and control a heater in response. It also used an electronic sensor to measure the water level and maintain it. It had a built in microprocessor to do this. It looked like it also did some calculations to improve efficiency.
Most new cars are also partly a robot. The engine control computer does countless calculations to optimize fuel efficiency based on data from several sensors. It controls exactly how much fuel is injected, among other things. It will monitor systems and give you a warning if something isn't right. It might log data for later diagnostics. Then there's also the traction control system and anti-lock brakes on some cars.
In other news, parents seek to ban the use of dihydrogen monoxide in schools because it may cause serious health effects in large enough quantities.
"We are outraged at the irresponsibility of these school officials," said plantiff Rebecca Gilmore, "countless studies have PROVEN that prolonged exposure to large quantities of dihydrogen monoxide without proper protection is almost always fatal!"
We interviewed Gary Richardson, a self proclaimed expert on the subject. "Thousands of people have already been killed due to dihydrogen monoxide inhalation! Now we are letting this deadly chemical into our schools and putting out children at risk? It takes less than a gallon of dihydrogen monoxide to kill an adult, and these schools are using thousands of gallons of it, enough to kill everyone at the school!"
Another man remarked, "I think its terrible that this has gone unnoticed for so long. Its time the parents step up to protect our children from this stuff."
Would their definition not include server's too? Lets take Apache for example:
(A) enable a computer on which such software is used to transmit files or data to another such computer;
This is Apache's main purpose.
(B) enable the user of one such computer to request the transmission of files or data from another such computer; and
HTTP is a two way thing, not broadcast. The "client" needs to be able to send data to a server to request files. If not GET, the POST directive meets this. I'm using it to send this post.
(C) enable the user of one such computer to designate files or data available for transmission to another such computer, but which definition excludes, to the extent otherwise included, software products legitimately marketed and distributed primarily for the operation of business and home networks, the networks of Internet access providers, or the Internet itself;
Okay, this part is kind of vague. Designation of the files is program specific, but but Apache and most P2P software do something along the lines of "you put the files in a shared dir". The excluded part is REALLY vague. P2P software IS legitimately marketed and distributed. It only fails to meet that part is it is already illegal by this bill.
The actual exclusions seem to be written by someone who has no clue about networking. Lets see... Home(non-business) and business networks are excluded. Government networks are about the only thing that isn't excluded. ISP networks, which are yet another business network, are then specifically excluded.
Of course, if that isn't enough, the internet itself is excluded. WTF do they think "the Internet itself" is??? Some palpable item? The internet is formed OF the other types of networks(most of which were excluded). They either include the application layer in these exclusions, or they don't. P2P is excluded if the other servers are excluded. For that matter, it's possible to use Apache FOR P2P type things. P2P is just another service on the internet.
Or is there something I'm missing and I need to RTFA better next time?
HAM radio is nothing special, without those car batteries and other backup power sources it would have been as useless as a pair of tits on a bull.
No offense, but thats kind of pointless. Its like saying that without radios, they couldn't have done what they did. True, but so what?
The thing is, they DO have backups, will still have backups, and they aren't likely to all fail at once. They even solar to keep the batteries charged if needed. Antenna, radio, and a power source are all thats needed for communication, and those aren't likely to all fail at once either. A major aspect of ham radio is independence of infrastructure. A few stations will have equipment failure, but that's why its a "distributed network".
Actually, by "chatting", I mean non-emergency/non-critical communications, which includes: practice contacting people, efficient communication, net operations, traffic nets, etc. in a non-formal manner. It allows you to practice operating skills and is fun too(offers a reason to become a ham).
Basically, chatting give operators experience and practice in ham radio operation. Without that, nobody would be able to do much in a real emergency, since efficiency is important for emergency communications.
If you read books about computers but had never actually USED a computer before, would you be able to just sit down, configure a network, and E-Mail someone quickly? Probably not.
A lot of people seem to say "Its much more valuable to have thousands of people get broadband internet access than to have ham radio. After all, most of the time, hams just chat and aren't helping with emergencies. Plus, powerline broadband would only affect HF."
However, the general chit-chat that ham operators do IS valuable. Without it, ham radio would become worthless. People aren't going to buy thousand dollar radios "just in case" if they have huge amounts of interference to deal with so they can't chat. Similarly, would YOU pay for internet service that had 99% downtime? Furthermore, current operators will be less willing to keep an operational station if theres nothing to do with it. That radio will just sit in the attic, and if there's an emergency, too bad. Also, people aren't going to be able to do anything even if they have a working station if they haven't ever been able to practice.
Its not that ham-radio is old and more reliable than newer technologies, its that nothing yet can easily replace ham-radio(try to think of something that really can), and seeing how the internet has been turned into a marketing/media tool, there may not be anything for a while. Ham radio is simple, long-range, portable, versatile/flexible, and most importantly, independant of other services.
Cell-phone nets get overloaded with callers. The internet has no long range portability, and is dependent on physical networks. Sattelite phones are WAY too expensive and limited. Etc...
Slashdot Mirror
I have several servers at home that were in PC cases on shelving, but recently moved to a 42U rack in the basement. Overall, it is has been very worthwhile and has dramatically reduced my floor space requirements.
My rack cost $23 at a nearby surplus store. It isn't cheap and flimsy either -- It weighs about 360 lbs empty and was in great condition. I have a pickup truck, so transportation was easy. At home a friend and I simply picked it up and carried it into the basement.
The cases cost a bit more, but are a small percentage of the total cost for the servers. The floor space and organization improvements make paying $50-60 more per case (including $20 rails) very worthwhile.
The fact that it looks a hell of a lot better is just an added bonus.
Sure, I don't NEED the rack, but saying it is automatically stupid to have one in a house is, well, pretty stupid.
I can think of so many ways to justify > 5GB per month that I really can't list them all here, but here are just a few that I have personally done:
1. Offsite backups.
I've done frequent rsync backups of my cohosted webservers. This alone can take WAY more than 5GB. I've also backed up local files to offsite servers.
2. I work on robotic systems and have sometimes worked at home. This can involve working with HUGE amounts of recorded data (this could be something like four 60fps HD video streams, hyperspectral video, FLIR, RADAR, 3D LADAR, etc... and lossy compression is not acceptable). Typically, I'd only download a small sample data set to work on, but that could be easily WAY more than 5GB.
3. Photo uploads
I do photography as a hobby. Sometimes I get > 5GB of photos I want to upload at one time.
4. Web design
I do a bit of freelance web design on the side. Typically this involves modifying an existing site. I will typically set up a testing server at home and download the entire site to it, do my changes and testing there, then upload the final product. This can consume more than 5GB easily.
In practice I am currently averaging 160GB down, 80 up in a month.
This is beside the point though. If I had a 5GB cap, I'd probably not do these things. The fact that I don't is what allows me do do them.
If I had a 5GB cap, I might not even complain too much about it. After all, I wouldn't be doing anything that needed more bandwidth.
Sure, I don't need to use more than 5GB/month. I also don't need the internet at all. For that matter, I could probably just get rid of all my home computers since I don't really need them. I didn't always have them for that matter. Yet having them allows me to do things I could do otherwise.
My point is that deciding what people are allowed to use based on what they need right now is a bad idea. If we do that, we discourage additional development, we end up stuck with the internet as it is now. If we do that, in 20 years people will still be satisfied with their 5GB limits and they won't even know about all the great things that could have existed otherwise.
The excess bandwidth allows for innovation. The internet isn't just about E-Mail and web browsing. It is a general purpose communications network that can be used for whatever people need it for, including things that haven't even been thought of yet. That's what makes it so powerful.
Having some experience in this field, I would be surprised if a robotic Abrams tank didn't already exist in some form or other. There have been MANY unmanned retrofits done on things ranging from motorcycles to construction/mining vehicles.
Anyway, there are plenty of robots bigger than SWORDS (and Ripsaw too). Here are just a couple:
BAE's Black Knight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRDs__6dFsE&feature=related
GDRS Vehicle Retrofits: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhDdTomh2xg&feature=related
This happens with several of my laptops. It stings a little if you touch it and are well grounded (i.e. barefoot, resting feet on a desktop computer case and an arm on the laptop case). It is understandable with the unpolarized, ungrounded, PSUs. I'm not an SMPS designer, but IIRC the situation is that the power supplies provide an RF ground through low value capacitors to reduce EMI since they can't have a real ground. This will result in some leakage current, which can be enough to be felt but shouldn't be dangerous. Personally I think it is really annoying.
I was surprised to see it with some of my supposedly grounded Dell PSUs though. I still don't know the reason for that. Here's the laptop case voltage as seen on one of my scopes.
Technically, that isn't an accurate comparison. Although the word "book" is often used to mean both the physical item and the written content, they should be thought of as different things. In both cases, you need some sort of device to view the written content. In one case, the required device consists of bound paper and ink. In the other case, it consists of a frame with a computer and display. In both cases, the content must be stored/printed on the device.
The electronic reader is more complicated than the paper book, but has a variety of advantages. Really, it is just a different viewer for the same content.
The first thing that came to mind was:
<Dilbert>Well look who just got fancy new voice recognition software. Well, at least I won't work all day and then DELETE a FILE!</Dilbert>
Script-Fu->Decor->Add bevel...
Ive recently used both Photoshop and The GIMP, and they have their pros and cons.
For example, Photoshops layer effects are a lot better than anything The GIMP has to offer in that area, but then again, The GIMP has some nice filters and scripting functionality that Photoshop doesnt have.
A while ago, there was a function that GIMP had that I couldnt find in Photoshop. I think it may have been displacement mapping. Also, AFAIK, you cant write Perl scripts for Photoshop.
I have actually switched between Photoshop and The GIMP several times to work on a single image so that I could use the best features of both.
The features in Photoshop are generally better implemented than those in The GIMP.
(..and yes, my apostrophe key is, in fact, not working at the moment.)
Even the chemical mist can be defeated.
The most likely-to-work method I can think of at the moment is:
You could bring some liquid nitrogen and drill a hole into the hard drive through the side of the computer. Quickly inject it with the LN. As a bonus, this will destroy the bearings, cause significant damage to the electronics, and probably stop any other protections. Take back to lab for analysis.
By the time it detected a temp change, the mist would be frozen.
It might also blow the chassis apart from the pressure if the holes were frozen over. You would need to quickly rip the drive out of the computer and put it in the dewar with LN to avoid this and to keep the mist frozen.
It would be difficult and somewhat dangerous, but still possible.
Here is the answer using the theory the article is about:
:)
The idea is that you can't change the way an event in the past happened, but you could still be part of it, as long as you don't change it at all. Beyond that, there would be no restrictions. If you go back in time, the only difference in "free will" between you and the other people is that you will suddenly have some limited and possibly inaccurate knowledge of the future.
Some examples:
1) You go back in time and try to kill your (still living) father. You go to his house and shoot him through the window. You go forward in time to where you originally were. You go to your father's house, and he is still alive. A few weeks later, you are talking to him and he tells you a story of how an unknown criminal shot at him through the window and missed when he was young.
You couldn't have killed your father, because, well, you didn't. The probability that you would have missed, even with repeated shots, may be small, but the probability that what happened is what happened is 100% by definition.
2) You go back in time and try to kill your great-great-great-grandmother. You don't have a picture of her, but you go to their house and see a woman. You stab her with a knife and make sure that he is dead before leaving. When you get back to the present, you and your parents still exist. You don't know what happened.
Later, you find out that your great-great-great-grandfather married a second woman after the first was killed in an unsolved stabbing.
3) Here's one for the conspiracy theorists
Thousands of years from now, someone thinks people in the 1900s were stupid and goes back in time to kill one of their leaders. They pick a data at random. November 20, 1963, ok. They spend two days walking around and decide to assasinate the president of the US. They mount a rifle on a remote controlled drone they brought with them. They shoot the president during a parade using this then return home. Nothing changes.
Now, in that kind of case, you might say, "but they found that the bullet came from a gun we found with someone else!" Well, it is possible that the barrel of both guns produced markings that were similar enough to be indistinguishable with past technology. When the time traveller fires the gun, even though the odds are extremely low that the marks will be the same as the other gun, we have a future knowledge that the markings were the same.
It isn't a matter of the time traveller having some sort of magical restriction where things dissapear/reappear (like in Back to the Future), but more like the time traveller knowing what the eventual outcome will be. To the time traveller, once they are in the past, the problem would be knowing what will happen in the future. It would be a whole "You can't change your destiny" situation. Of course, as the above situations describe, that would be still fairly flexible.
So, the moral is: "If you are going to travel into the past, your life will be/was much less stressful if you don't learn and history before travelling. It will help maintain the illusion of free will.", at least according to this theory.
There is no point to a Linux vs. BSD war. This kind of thing is seriously hurting open source as a whole.
I've used many different OSes, and they all have their strengths and weaknesses. Yes, even Windows has better overall hardware compatibility than any other system.
I use Gentoo Linux on my main workstation simply because it does the job well. It works for what I want. Of course it has flaws, any system will. BSD doesn't have enough hardware/software support I want, and Windows doesn't have a development friendly environment in addition to other problems. Sure, there are plenty of bugs, some of them are pretty annoying, but it is the best thing I've found for the job. It isn't a server, so security isn't a big issue.
On the other hand, I run Windows on my gaming system because of the software compatibility. I don't like the fact that it is closed source, and I hate the various restrictions the software has, but it provides the best overall value.
On my web server, I run Debian, because it is more stable than Gentoo, and I don't need the latest packages. Yes, I also tried BSD, but it wouldn't support the SCSI card I had on it at that time. Yes, I could spend days of effort getting it to work anyway, but the benefits did not warrant that. Debian simply worked best at the time. I'm actually upgrading my web server this weekend and, yes, I am going to try BSD on it.
I consider price, compatibility, openness, performance, support, familiarity, ease of use, and several other factors when I pick an OS. It's all about what works best for the job based on the strengths and weaknesses. Nothing will be perfect, but doing this will get you the best solution.
It is stupid and childish to insist one thing is better than another without considering the application and its requirements. I could say that Mack dump trucks are better than any other vehicles and they should be used for everything because of their power and carrying capacity. Sure, that's great if you're carrying gravel from point A to B, but you wouldn't go on a vacation with one and you definitely wouldn't take a girl on a date with one.
The loosers are those who become so fixated on one thing that they feel they need to make everyone know that it is the solution to everything. Those people need to get some social skills, learn a bit of diplomacy, and realize that it is an operating system, not a religion.
That's the X12B at Brookhaven National Laboratory, not a storage place. Its used for X-ray crystallography. It's apparently scheduled for conditioning until next weekend though.
see here:
http://www.px.nsls.bnl.gov/x12b_info.html
The webcams are to check on it remotely.
I want one of... whatever this thing is!
http://phys9901.campus.tue.nl:50080/remote6/
Most HeNe lasers are definitely red, although some are yellow. (The dot in the first pic is purple/white, since the brightness overexposed the camera. The reflection on the table is much closer to the real color.)
I think the in-counter supermarket checkout scanners often use a HeNe laser.
Green would most likely be a DPSS(the green laser pointers), dye, or YAG laser.
I understand the situation the LaserShoppe guy is in. As someone planning to start selling a 50-100 watt CO2 laser kit this summer(should be good for laser engraving and lightweight cutting of wood/plastic/cloth with a CNC table), this kind of news really worries me. A CO2 laser under several KW would pose very little threat to aircraft since regular glass blocks the beam, but if these incidents became bad enough to become "top stories", I doubt most people would make the distinction(including police/FBI).
The problem is that no matter how responsible 99% of the buyers are, there is still that idiot who does something stupid and gets hurt. I don't want to be at the center of any media/legal feeding frenzy. For the safety information, I'm thinking some "raw meat vs. laser" photos and a very clear safety description should help get the point across, but after reading some of the posts on the Amazing1.com forums, my faith in people's judgement is pretty low. Of course, that also assumes that nobody buys it FOR irresponsible/illegal purposes.
The CO2 laser is hundreds of times as powerful as the little LaserShoppe one and putting your hand in the beam is a big no-no(the above videos from Synrad.com probably make that clear enough). On the positive side, eye protection isn't as big a problem, since most materials will absorb the 1060nm infrared light. Regular safety goggles work fine.
I guess the biggest problem with selling lasers is that most people are nearly 100% clueless about them. A lot of people think lasers are something they aren't, don't understand what they do, and/or are just plain stupid.
I've mirrored the manual here in staroffice format.
I was wondering about that too.
It looks like there is an extension cord on the left side, but it isn't plugged in. Its hard to tell in the photo, but I'm guessing there are deep-cycle batteries in the bottom shelf. You could probably fit at least 250AH worth in there without a problem. That should be enough to run the computer for several hours between charges.
I did a quick enhancement of that picture. Yes, I know I should have used feather around Linus' head, but whatever. You can see the three screens a little better with the color levels adjusted.
The left(behind Linus) laptop looks like it has a terminal or something open in the front, and might be running Windows or something configured to look like it.
Linus' laptop has Frozen Bubble, what looks like the pico editor, and some other stuff. I can't tell what GUI it is, but it's not Windows.
The one on the right(with the picture of the girl) is running GKrellm, and the guy is either staring at his wallpaper picture or getting ready to run a program.
Enhanced picture (JPEG 1024x768 107K)
Good point, but newer devices are more complex that you think. First of all, any automatic device is covered by the dictionary definition of a robot, but for this, I'll use a much less general definition. It must use sensor feedback.
Anyways, A bit more about the thermostat:
Our thermostat(a pretty basic digital one) reads the temperature of the room and looks up the proper temperature for the current time of day and day of week in its memeory. Then it compares the two and runs through a set startup sequence for the heater or a/c. Once its turned the heater and fan on, it monitors the room temperature, and times how long it takes for the room to heat up. Then it adjusts the data in memory to improve its efficiency on the next cycle. There are also a whole bunch of other processes going on at the same time, like reading data from the keypad, updating the display, checking which mode(heat/off/cool) its is, etc...
Meanwhile at the high-efficiency furnace(I am not a HVAC guy, so I might have some details off):
The furnace gets the signal to start. It starts the inducer motor and monitors its current draw. If the current draw is too high, it will shut down. It then uses a pressure switch to make sure that the inducer is actually pulling air. Again, if its not, the furnace shuts down. Next, it releases gas into the burner assembly, and checks with a sensor to see if it is ignited by the pilot. If it isn't, the controller uses the electronic ignition to try to light the burner. It checks for flame again, and if it fails, the furnace shuts down. Otherwise, it will continus. This is done by a logic controller.
A lot of equipment like that has feedback devices for safety and control.
Our washer uses an electronic pressure sensor to measure the water level. Some new ones have a touch screen display, and various configurable programs.
Some dryers have electronic moisture sensors that determine the degree of dryness.
We don't use a dishwasher right now, so I'll use another one for this example. It had a keypad on the front, where you could enter temperature and cycle information. There was an LED display that told the current status and temperature. It would monitor the temperature, and control a heater in response. It also used an electronic sensor to measure the water level and maintain it. It had a built in microprocessor to do this. It looked like it also did some calculations to improve efficiency.
Most new cars are also partly a robot. The engine control computer does countless calculations to optimize fuel efficiency based on data from several sensors. It controls exactly how much fuel is injected, among other things. It will monitor systems and give you a warning if something isn't right. It might log data for later diagnostics. Then there's also the traction control system and anti-lock brakes on some cars.
In other news, parents seek to ban the use of dihydrogen monoxide in schools because it may cause serious health effects in large enough quantities.
"We are outraged at the irresponsibility of these school officials," said plantiff Rebecca Gilmore, "countless studies have PROVEN that prolonged exposure to large quantities of dihydrogen monoxide without proper protection is almost always fatal!"
We interviewed Gary Richardson, a self proclaimed expert on the subject. "Thousands of people have already been killed due to dihydrogen monoxide inhalation! Now we are letting this deadly chemical into our schools and putting out children at risk? It takes less than a gallon of dihydrogen monoxide to kill an adult, and these schools are using thousands of gallons of it, enough to kill everyone at the school!"
Another man remarked, "I think its terrible that this has gone unnoticed for so long. Its time the parents step up to protect our children from this stuff."
Being mirrored here
Would their definition not include server's too? Lets take Apache for example:
(A) enable a computer on which such software is used to transmit files or data to another such computer;
This is Apache's main purpose.
(B) enable the user of one such computer to request the transmission of files or data from another such computer; and
HTTP is a two way thing, not broadcast. The "client" needs to be able to send data to a server to request files. If not GET, the POST directive meets this. I'm using it to send this post.
(C) enable the user of one such computer to designate files or data available for transmission to another such computer, but which definition excludes, to the extent otherwise included, software products legitimately marketed and distributed primarily for the operation of business and home networks, the networks of Internet access providers, or the Internet itself;
Okay, this part is kind of vague. Designation of the files is program specific, but but Apache and most P2P software do something along the lines of "you put the files in a shared dir". The excluded part is REALLY vague. P2P software IS legitimately marketed and distributed. It only fails to meet that part is it is already illegal by this bill.
The actual exclusions seem to be written by someone who has no clue about networking. Lets see... Home(non-business) and business networks are excluded. Government networks are about the only thing that isn't excluded. ISP networks, which are yet another business network, are then specifically excluded.
Of course, if that isn't enough, the internet itself is excluded. WTF do they think "the Internet itself" is??? Some palpable item? The internet is formed OF the other types of networks(most of which were excluded). They either include the application layer in these exclusions, or they don't. P2P is excluded if the other servers are excluded. For that matter, it's possible to use Apache FOR P2P type things. P2P is just another service on the internet.
Or is there something I'm missing and I need to RTFA better next time?
HAM radio is nothing special, without those car batteries and other backup power sources it would have been as useless as a pair of tits on a bull.
No offense, but thats kind of pointless. Its like saying that without radios, they couldn't have done what they did. True, but so what?
The thing is, they DO have backups, will still have backups, and they aren't likely to all fail at once. They even solar to keep the batteries charged if needed. Antenna, radio, and a power source are all thats needed for communication, and those aren't likely to all fail at once either. A major aspect of ham radio is independence of infrastructure. A few stations will have equipment failure, but that's why its a "distributed network".
Actually, by "chatting", I mean non-emergency/non-critical communications, which includes: practice contacting people, efficient communication, net operations, traffic nets, etc. in a non-formal manner. It allows you to practice operating skills and is fun too(offers a reason to become a ham).
Basically, chatting give operators experience and practice in ham radio operation. Without that, nobody would be able to do much in a real emergency, since efficiency is important for emergency communications.
If you read books about computers but had never actually USED a computer before, would you be able to just sit down, configure a network, and E-Mail someone quickly? Probably not.
On a more serious note:
A lot of people seem to say "Its much more valuable to have thousands of people get broadband internet access than to have ham radio. After all, most of the time, hams just chat and aren't helping with emergencies. Plus, powerline broadband would only affect HF."
However, the general chit-chat that ham operators do IS valuable. Without it, ham radio would become worthless. People aren't going to buy thousand dollar radios "just in case" if they have huge amounts of interference to deal with so they can't chat. Similarly, would YOU pay for internet service that had 99% downtime? Furthermore, current operators will be less willing to keep an operational station if theres nothing to do with it. That radio will just sit in the attic, and if there's an emergency, too bad. Also, people aren't going to be able to do anything even if they have a working station if they haven't ever been able to practice.
Its not that ham-radio is old and more reliable than newer technologies, its that nothing yet can easily replace ham-radio(try to think of something that really can), and seeing how the internet has been turned into a marketing/media tool, there may not be anything for a while. Ham radio is simple, long-range, portable, versatile/flexible, and most importantly, independant of other services.
Cell-phone nets get overloaded with callers.
The internet has no long range portability, and is dependent on physical networks.
Sattelite phones are WAY too expensive and limited.
Etc...