Do remember that in traditional sword fighting a longer reach count's for quite a lot
Which begs the question, why are light sabres so short? Conventional swords are limited by the mass of the blade, if it's too long, it's going to be too heavy to swing properly. A light sabre is massless, so it should be possible to make one much longer, and give a much more dangerous weapon.
All online fora have a high percentage of typos, spelling and grammatical errors. Humans are naturally prone to making mistakes, and without a period of reflection and revision, these mistakes get published. Non online fora are almost always validated by an editor, who can catch the errors and fix them, which is why we see a lower number of errors in them.
Many, perhaps most, punch card & tape readers used optical methods, basically shining a light through the hole with a dector on the other side. Mechanical methods at high speed would be too prone to damaging the media.
I don't think the government every really did it. Jon Postel did, and he was paid by the government to do so, but it was really just Jon doing the right thing, and the government not having any interest in it.
Because some claims are trivial, and we can't spend enough time to validate every claim at the level required to validate the extrordianary ones. If I claim that I've found a fossil of a new species of dinosaur, then that can be validated simply by publishing a description of the fossil. If I claim that I've found a living dinosaur, then I'm going to have to do a little more than just write about it.
Helicopters, and to a lesser effect wing effect, find it easy to fly very near the ground. The airflow is disrupted by the ground, and this reduces the drag and increases the lift. This page and this page explain it well. This means that flying 5' off the ground is actually very easy, and as long as there is adequate room above the craft, it should be possible.
You can get hinges where the pins aren't removable when the doors are closed, allowing the door to fit to swing outward. My parents had this done so that my mother could get her in while in her wheelchair, as it was cheaper to do that than have major rebuilding.
In almost every case, the card opening is simply a switch hidden behind an approriate sized slot. Anything which will push through the slot will open the door. That's why a card inserted in any of the 4 possible orientations will open the door, while on the actual ATM, it has to be inserted in the 1 working orientation.
The majority of email goes from people who know each other to other people who know each other. Therefore, if the two people have exchanged email before, then that should be allowed. Of course, if either side decides that they no longer wish to communicate, then they can the other one from their database.
Another section of email is going to people who have not communicated. This should have a paypay like 'deposit', which will be set by the reciever, and if the sender accepts it, then the email will be communicated. When the receiver reads the message, they have the option to either cancel the deposit, or keep it. If you think reading a spam message costs you 25 cents, then you set the depost to that level. On the other hand, if you think it's worth $100, then you set the deposit to that level too. On the sending side, you set a limit where you'll automatically pay the deposit, and any deposits above that will be manually asked for confirmation before sending.
This would require minor changes to the SMTP protocol, to identify the amount of the deposit, the acceptance or rejection of it, and links into accepted Paypal like services.
This way you get to continue to exchange emails with your friends. You charge spammers, and if your aunt Mabel, who got your email address from your mother, happens to email you, you don't charge her.
Except we're using all of them. The codings are here. There are 20 amino acids used by the vast majority of cells, and most of these are encoded multiple times.
The better system is that used in the UK, where the judge decides on costs seperatly from the case. You can win the case, and have to eat your own costs, or you can loose the case and have to pay for the other side's costs.
But there have been many 'sure thing' hits which have flunked in the past. here are 10 movies which lost over $30 million each, and all of them are before the Internet could have made any difference. Even if a movie flops, that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have flopped without any internet unauthorized copying.
If you've got a problem which requires it, then it's definatly worth the money for Veritas, which is why it's still being sold even with the free package available. I'd imagine this would remain the same, even for Linux. However, there are a lot of products in the product line, and until they're all available, then I'd not consider Linux a possible replacement. HSM & FlashSnap are part of the reasons why I want to use Veritas.
Yeah I know about those, but it's still got stuff missing. I just finished debugging a problem which turned out to be a process not having it's DISPLAY variable set. Easy to check in Linux, very hard to check in Solaris. Similarly for the cmdline, the binary, the shared libraries, etc.
Mind you, it's a lot better now that it used to be. Early Solaris, all you could get was a handle to the memory image of the process, useful for gcore and nothing else.
And our system of government is not about allowing businesses to make a profit, but about what is best for the people. Businesses would make a bigger profit if they didn't have to worry about child labour, pollution and other similar laws - we don't let me. Microsoft and other monopolies would make more money if they could use their monopoly to maximize their profit at the expense of the people, and thus the aim on anti-trust law is to prevent that.
It depends a lot on what exactly you're doing. Solaris is better for support for 'big iron' things like RAID, there is nothing like Veritas's VXVA on Linux, or for logical paritioning. On the other hand, Solaris's/proc implementation isn't as good as Linux's, which can make a big difference in day to day usage of Linux.
I once got shipped a huge box full of peanuts, with a padded envelope inside. Inside the padded envelope, another padded envelope (and a letter), and inside the second padded envelope - a SCSI terminator.
We've already got systems which detect people trying to steal books. They work on the same principle, except they don't uniquely track the book. There is no advantage in changing the system to prevent thieft - anyone who defeats the existing system can defeat the new system.
0 Kelvin (-273 C) is -459 Farenheit. There is also the Rankine scale, which uses absolute zero as it's base, but with units the same size as Farenheit - the same relationshipo Kelvin has to Celsius.
UPC product codes don't have enough digitsto encode every book uniquely. Books encoded using UPC usually have only a code for the producer, and the price, eg the book I have in front of me is ISBN 0-553-58150-3, and has UPC of 076783-00699, and costs $6.99.
EAN codes on the other hand are 13 digits long, and there is a direct 1 to 1 mapping between ISBNs and EAN codes, the same book has an EAN of 9780553-581508, which is the ISBN with the prefix of 78, and the check digit.
On most paperbacks, the UPC is on the back cover, while the EAN is on the inside of the front cover. ON hardbacks, usually they only have an EAN, on the back cover.
Slashdot Mirror
Which begs the question, why are light sabres so short? Conventional swords are limited by the mass of the blade, if it's too long, it's going to be too heavy to swing properly. A light sabre is massless, so it should be possible to make one much longer, and give a much more dangerous weapon.
All online fora have a high percentage of typos, spelling and grammatical errors. Humans are naturally prone to making mistakes, and without a period of reflection and revision, these mistakes get published. Non online fora are almost always validated by an editor, who can catch the errors and fix them, which is why we see a lower number of errors in them.
Many, perhaps most, punch card & tape readers used optical methods, basically shining a light through the hole with a dector on the other side. Mechanical methods at high speed would be too prone to damaging the media.
I don't think the government every really did it. Jon Postel did, and he was paid by the government to do so, but it was really just Jon doing the right thing, and the government not having any interest in it.
Because some claims are trivial, and we can't spend enough time to validate every claim at the level required to validate the extrordianary ones. If I claim that I've found a fossil of a new species of dinosaur, then that can be validated simply by publishing a description of the fossil. If I claim that I've found a living dinosaur, then I'm going to have to do a little more than just write about it.
Helicopters, and to a lesser effect wing effect, find it easy to fly very near the ground. The airflow is disrupted by the ground, and this reduces the drag and increases the lift. This page and this page explain it well. This means that flying 5' off the ground is actually very easy, and as long as there is adequate room above the craft, it should be possible.
You can get hinges where the pins aren't removable when the doors are closed, allowing the door to fit to swing outward. My parents had this done so that my mother could get her in while in her wheelchair, as it was cheaper to do that than have major rebuilding.
In almost every case, the card opening is simply a switch hidden behind an approriate sized slot. Anything which will push through the slot will open the door. That's why a card inserted in any of the 4 possible orientations will open the door, while on the actual ATM, it has to be inserted in the 1 working orientation.
The majority of email goes from people who know each other to other people who know each other. Therefore, if the two people have exchanged email before, then that should be allowed. Of course, if either side decides that they no longer wish to communicate, then they can the other one from their database.
Another section of email is going to people who have not communicated. This should have a paypay like 'deposit', which will be set by the reciever, and if the sender accepts it, then the email will be communicated. When the receiver reads the message, they have the option to either cancel the deposit, or keep it. If you think reading a spam message costs you 25 cents, then you set the depost to that level. On the other hand, if you think it's worth $100, then you set the deposit to that level too. On the sending side, you set a limit where you'll automatically pay the deposit, and any deposits above that will be manually asked for confirmation before sending.
This would require minor changes to the SMTP protocol, to identify the amount of the deposit, the acceptance or rejection of it, and links into accepted Paypal like services.
This way you get to continue to exchange emails with your friends. You charge spammers, and if your aunt Mabel, who got your email address from your mother, happens to email you, you don't charge her.
Remember that it costs the employer more than just the salary. Benefits, taxes and so on add to the cost.
Kevin J Anderson is a hack writer, who whores himself out to write books for Star Trek, X Files, even the Scientologists.
Except we're using all of them. The codings are here. There are 20 amino acids used by the vast majority of cells, and most of these are encoded multiple times.
The better system is that used in the UK, where the judge decides on costs seperatly from the case. You can win the case, and have to eat your own costs, or you can loose the case and have to pay for the other side's costs.
But there have been many 'sure thing' hits which have flunked in the past. here are 10 movies which lost over $30 million each, and all of them are before the Internet could have made any difference. Even if a movie flops, that doesn't mean that it wouldn't have flopped without any internet unauthorized copying.
No. Truss prints off system calls. putenv(3) and getenv(3) are not system calls, so when you truss, you don't see them.
If you've got a problem which requires it, then it's definatly worth the money for Veritas, which is why it's still being sold even with the free package available. I'd imagine this would remain the same, even for Linux. However, there are a lot of products in the product line, and until they're all available, then I'd not consider Linux a possible replacement. HSM & FlashSnap are part of the reasons why I want to use Veritas.
Mind you, it's a lot better now that it used to be. Early Solaris, all you could get was a handle to the memory image of the process, useful for gcore and nothing else.
And our system of government is not about allowing businesses to make a profit, but about what is best for the people. Businesses would make a bigger profit if they didn't have to worry about child labour, pollution and other similar laws - we don't let me. Microsoft and other monopolies would make more money if they could use their monopoly to maximize their profit at the expense of the people, and thus the aim on anti-trust law is to prevent that.
It depends a lot on what exactly you're doing. Solaris is better for support for 'big iron' things like RAID, there is nothing like Veritas's VXVA on Linux, or for logical paritioning. On the other hand, Solaris's /proc implementation isn't as good as Linux's, which can make a big difference in day to day usage of Linux.
Actually, if you look at the statistics, you should really be saying "Don't trust relatives & friends of the family".
I once got shipped a huge box full of peanuts, with a padded envelope inside. Inside the padded envelope, another padded envelope (and a letter), and inside the second padded envelope - a SCSI terminator.
We've already got systems which detect people trying to steal books. They work on the same principle, except they don't uniquely track the book. There is no advantage in changing the system to prevent thieft - anyone who defeats the existing system can defeat the new system.
0 Kelvin (-273 C) is -459 Farenheit. There is also the Rankine scale, which uses absolute zero as it's base, but with units the same size as Farenheit - the same relationshipo Kelvin has to Celsius.
EAN codes on the other hand are 13 digits long, and there is a direct 1 to 1 mapping between ISBNs and EAN codes, the same book has an EAN of 9780553-581508, which is the ISBN with the prefix of 78, and the check digit.
On most paperbacks, the UPC is on the back cover, while the EAN is on the inside of the front cover. ON hardbacks, usually they only have an EAN, on the back cover.
So what you are saying is that it's a better implementation. Which is exactly what I said.