I was just looking into this not too long ago. Strangely enough, we met someone from Israel while we were travelling in New Zealand who said it had closed, which I was sure was wrong. Turns out it's still there.
And remember it's not really a hole, i.e. there is ozone present, it's just at significantly lower levels.
When we were in New Zealand the sun feels different ! It feels very intense and somewhat uncomfortable, and it was only the first month of spring. You HAVE to use sunscreen.
Isn't this what software vendors are trying to do? The idea is to enforce the license agreement as a contract. There is nothing wrong with putting all sorts of ridiculous conditions in a contract (unconstitutional or otherwise) because the idea is that you don't have to "sign it".
Since congress passes laws which everyone should, in theory, obey, it must be "regulated" in a sense.
So the interesting thing here is that a company could in fact:
gain a monopoly in an application (that'll never happen).
Update the license to that app to call for ridiculous restrictions on free speech.
Poof ! If enough people decide they just HAVE to use the software, they've just taken away their own freedom.
Maybe there is going to have to be some sort of push that says contracts which abridges freedoms outlined in the constitution are unenforceable and invalid.
On the other hand, if people are going to CHOOSE to give up their freedoms, so don't they deserve what they get ?
The climate _will_ change as a result. We are causing _significant_ changes in CO2 levels.
However it's not necessarily going to get warmer. There are theories that the warmth may radically alter the flow of the "salt converyor" in the Atlantic and could actually cause an ice age.
The weather _is_ going to change.
The only argument is weather or not it will have a significant impact on our lives. But you know what, I don't give a f*ck. I don't have kids. It's your kids that are going to have to live in this sh*thole.
Plus, the threat of global warming pales in comparison to the amount of other crap we're dumping into the biosphere, the rate at which species are going exinct due to habitat loss, and the distribution of non-native species in the world.
If he is right about the antenna being 21dB then it is most likely to be illegal.
Most 802.11b cards put out about +12 to +15dBm, some more than that. +12 + 21 = an effective radiated power of +33dBm. The FCC limits for the 2.4GHz band where 802.11b lives is 1W maximum, i.e. +30dBm.
His set-up is most certainly illegal. The FCC cares about the effective power, not the power fed to the antenna.
Also, if you are using a +21dB antenna and you are 50ft off, it is probably not going work. A +21dB antenna is going to have a _very_ narrow beamwidth.
Nobody creating genetically modified crops is doing it to make the world a better place, they are doing it for $$$. This is _very_ important.
What does this mean :
Well, there might be less pesticide, but the field next door has a bunch of plants that allow the use of more herbicide.
As usual, the customer is scum, so the plants will be sterile so that you ALWAYS have to buy the seed from me (and patents let's me be a monopoly for 17+ years).
I'm going to do as little testing as I possibly can, because it's expensive. So you can rest assured if there is going to be a problem, you're not going to see it until I've released my GMO in large quantities.
I'm also going to come up with really neat products to end world hunger and they are going to go to the highest bidder. Naturally the people who need these products are the ones that can least afford them - tought sh*t.
If I do f$ck things up royally you're going to be left holding the bag because it's going to be loose and their is no way we're getting it back under control.
If you think about how badly we're f*cking up the planet with _simple_ things like coal and fertilizer, just wait until something goes wrong on the genetic side.
That's exactly right - what's to stop people from just using e-mail ?
Then, by demonstrating to the courts that there is copyrighted material being traded, will we
eventually see a time in the not so distant future where corporations can force ISP's to examine
e-mail and users accounts to look for copyrighted
material.
After all, they will only be looking for their very own(ed) copyrighted material, so if you don't have any you have nothing to worry about, right ?
I personally believe that corporations are getting powerful enough to make this is a very real concern. Remember, Disney single handedly re-wrote the copyright laws to protect Mickey Mouse.
I saw a ridiculous statement in the media somewhere (I just can't find it, WSJ maybe?), that said something to the effect of - the internet needs commercialization to be successful, or useful - something to that effect.
The web is, and will be, a great thing for the same reason that free software is. Those people who are eager to contribute to it because of their own personal desire.
When I think of the "success" of the web I think of things like Project Gutenberg and SourceForge, not mypetfoodstore.com.
Even without all the VC, there will always be a market for the service and soon. The service alone is enough to keep the web viable without any crass commercialization at all.
I have to agree with Katz on this point, the media completely ignores the contributions of creative individuals to content, and seems to focus purely on the "business" aspects. As if the web needs that kind of justification !
According to my math, the entire US can be powered by a collection of solar cells (12% efficient) 55km on a side.
That's 34 mi on a side, or about 1000 mi^2
That's for the entire US ! which weighs in at about 6 million mi^2 (probably more)
That's.016% of the land area. My guess is that the top ten largest cities probably take up more area than that.
And yes I can back these numbers up with facts. It does assume they are lit 24 hrs/day. So multiply by 3 to put them on an 8 hour day. Are then goes up to.048% or about 3000mi^2
Then you've got oeverhead because you can't put them right next to each other and there are line losses. x2 = 6000mi^2 and we're still at.1% of land area.
Just think about how much cleaner the environment would be.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the ticket.
I got me a firewire set-up.
Plug in 30GB - backup - unplug -turn off.
Takes about 6min.
Everybody likes to talk about standing up for free speech, but many would rather sit on the bench than actually step up to the plate.
How has this situation affected you personally ?
Has it increased your level of day to day stress ?
Do you lose sleep over it ?
I'm referring both to your original decision to publish your work and your current legal effort.
I'm currently using a WD 30GB disk for backups using firewire. The drive is powered externally, i.e. using a wall-wart.
The firewire code is quite stable for disk drive access.
I'm seeing about 6MBytes/s block writes to the drive. Not exactly ata100 but it beats the heck out of a tape drive.
I haven't tried hot-plugging, but it's easy enough to get your drive recognized using rescan-scsi-bus.
So the bottom line is that you could very easily set-up an automated back-up system using firewire.
I was just looking into this not too long ago. Strangely enough, we met someone from Israel while we were travelling in New Zealand who said it had closed, which I was sure was wrong. Turns out it's still there.
And remember it's not really a hole, i.e. there is ozone present, it's just at significantly lower levels.
Here are a couple of sites I found useful :
www.epa.gov/ozone/science/hole/holehome.html
www.atm.ch.cam.ac.uk/tour/
When we were in New Zealand the sun feels different ! It feels very intense and somewhat uncomfortable, and it was only the first month of spring. You HAVE to use sunscreen.
Don't you mean no more calculator rp0n ?
72dBA sound pressure level
Where does the noise come from ?
Isn't this what software vendors are trying to do? The idea is to enforce the license agreement as a contract. There is nothing wrong with putting all sorts of ridiculous conditions in a contract (unconstitutional or otherwise) because the idea is that you don't have to "sign it".
Since congress passes laws which everyone should, in theory, obey, it must be "regulated" in a sense.
So the interesting thing here is that a company could in fact:
gain a monopoly in an application (that'll never happen).
Update the license to that app to call for ridiculous restrictions on free speech.
Poof ! If enough people decide they just HAVE to use the software, they've just taken away their own freedom.
Maybe there is going to have to be some sort of push that says contracts which abridges freedoms outlined in the constitution are unenforceable and invalid.
On the other hand, if people are going to CHOOSE to give up their freedoms, so don't they deserve what they get ?
5GHz is NOT going to be released this summer. Th hype is being released this summer. Don't expect REAL products until next year.
They will NOT be cheaper than 802.11b.
Yes, they do allow 54MB/s, but the range suffers drastically.
CO2 _is_ a greenhouse gas. That's physics.
The climate _will_ change as a result. We are causing _significant_ changes in CO2 levels.
However it's not necessarily going to get warmer. There are theories that the warmth may radically alter the flow of the "salt converyor" in the Atlantic and could actually cause an ice age.
The weather _is_ going to change.
The only argument is weather or not it will have a significant impact on our lives. But you know what, I don't give a f*ck. I don't have kids. It's your kids that are going to have to live in this sh*thole.
Plus, the threat of global warming pales in comparison to the amount of other crap we're dumping into the biosphere, the rate at which species are going exinct due to habitat loss, and the distribution of non-native species in the world.
If he is right about the antenna being 21dB then it is most likely to be illegal.
Most 802.11b cards put out about +12 to +15dBm, some more than that. +12 + 21 = an effective radiated power of +33dBm. The FCC limits for the 2.4GHz band where 802.11b lives is 1W maximum, i.e. +30dBm.
His set-up is most certainly illegal. The FCC cares about the effective power, not the power fed to the antenna.
Also, if you are using a +21dB antenna and you are 50ft off, it is probably not going work. A +21dB antenna is going to have a _very_ narrow beamwidth.
Nobody creating genetically modified crops is doing it to make the world a better place, they are doing it for $$$. This is _very_ important.
What does this mean :
Well, there might be less pesticide, but the field next door has a bunch of plants that allow the use of more herbicide.
As usual, the customer is scum, so the plants will be sterile so that you ALWAYS have to buy the seed from me (and patents let's me be a monopoly for 17+ years).
I'm going to do as little testing as I possibly can, because it's expensive. So you can rest assured if there is going to be a problem, you're not going to see it until I've released my GMO in large quantities.
I'm also going to come up with really neat products to end world hunger and they are going to go to the highest bidder. Naturally the people who need these products are the ones that can least afford them - tought sh*t.
If I do f$ck things up royally you're going to be left holding the bag because it's going to be loose and their is no way we're getting it back under control.
If you think about how badly we're f*cking up the planet with _simple_ things like coal and fertilizer, just wait until something goes wrong on the genetic side.
That's exactly right - what's to stop people from just using e-mail ?
Then, by demonstrating to the courts that there is copyrighted material being traded, will we
eventually see a time in the not so distant future where corporations can force ISP's to examine
e-mail and users accounts to look for copyrighted
material.
After all, they will only be looking for their very own(ed) copyrighted material, so if you don't have any you have nothing to worry about, right ?
I personally believe that corporations are getting powerful enough to make this is a very real concern. Remember, Disney single handedly re-wrote the copyright laws to protect Mickey Mouse.
Hasn't anyone _actually_ read the GNU manifesto ?
The GPL was not devised to provide a business opportunity. It was devised to preserve freedom.
Getting involved with GPL'ed code, and then saying "gee, the GPL isn't a very business friendly" is totally ridiculous.
I saw a ridiculous statement in the media somewhere (I just can't find it, WSJ maybe?), that said something to the effect of - the internet needs commercialization to be successful, or useful - something to that effect. The web is, and will be, a great thing for the same reason that free software is. Those people who are eager to contribute to it because of their own personal desire. When I think of the "success" of the web I think of things like Project Gutenberg and SourceForge, not mypetfoodstore.com. Even without all the VC, there will always be a market for the service and soon. The service alone is enough to keep the web viable without any crass commercialization at all. I have to agree with Katz on this point, the media completely ignores the contributions of creative individuals to content, and seems to focus purely on the "business" aspects. As if the web needs that kind of justification !
According to my math, the entire US can be powered
.016% of the land area. My guess is that the top ten largest cities probably take up more area than that.
.048% or about 3000mi^2
.1% of land area.
by a collection of solar cells (12% efficient) 55km on a side.
That's 34 mi on a side, or about 1000 mi^2
That's for the entire US ! which weighs in at about 6 million mi^2 (probably more)
That's
And yes I can back these numbers up with facts. It does assume they are lit 24 hrs/day. So multiply by 3 to put them on an 8 hour day. Are then goes up to
Then you've got oeverhead because you can't put them right next to each other and there are line losses. x2 = 6000mi^2 and we're still at
Just think about how much cleaner the environment would be.