In regards to this thread, relating issues/ideas about hyper-oxygenated flourocarbons:
In theory, yes - humans should be able to breath such "liquids" - albeit with more work (due to the density of the liquid). I remember watching a program regarding this a few years back, and they had stuck a mouse (or some other small rodent) into this sort of liquid, and it breathed rather normally.
I don't think such an experiment has yet been done with a human volunteer, however (but please, if it has, let me know!). And regarding premature babies, I haven't ever heard/seen such use - I would be highly interested in any links to such information - however, it sounds possible.
Also, IIRC - the company that made the suits for the Abyss is an actual deep-sea diving equipment manufacturer, and I think they were actually looking into building actual systems similar to what was in the movie, and used the movie as PR - however, what you saw in the movie wasn't real - the people/actors weren't breathing liquid. The movie was SF, but portions of it could be considered - I dunno - "edge" fiction...?
I am not sure if the device they show allows the same thing, but the Forte CyberPuck has three buttons and a tilt sensor, for use as a "baseless" joystick. It is fully analog, so you can have a complete range of values for X/Y axis control - the three buttons are standard joystick buttons (the thing plugs into the joystick port).
The are similar devices also available that look like baseless "pistol-grip" joysticks - that may/may not have more buttons. These devices work pretty well for navigating in standard 3D games (Doom, Quake) - but they might be a pain for anything else (true 6DOF games, or a desktop style environment) - but they should work ok for menu style selection...
1. The Difference Engine (1832) was not a computer, in the modern sense of the word - it was not programmable, and did not have any memory for storing data. It was, however, a splendid device designed to perform the calculations of what are called difference tables - tables of values (in a set order) used in polynomial equation solving (I have seen an explanation on what the "method of differences" are and how they relate to polynomial equations/speed up of solutions, but I can't remember now). These tables were used for a lot of things - prime being that of navigation - into which errors crept, causing ships to be lost on rocks due to navigational errors (I believe in star positional charts)...
2. The Analytical Engine (1834-1835), however, was programmable, and even had crude branching capability (though I don't think it had looping capability). It had memory registers (the store), and a calculation portion (the mill). Input was via punched cards (after seeing Jaquard's mechanical loom), output was via a special printer. First proposed programming was done by Ada Byron (Lady Lovelace), Lord Byron's daughter, and Babbage's friend. From what is known, she understood the implications and uses of such a machine as well or better than the inventor himself, going so far as to imagine composing music and creating drawings with such a machine. What is now regarded as the first computer program, was in fact a plan to compute Bernoulli numbers using the Analytical Engine! Female coders, be proud!
3. The machines were mechanically sophisticated, but hardly outside the engineering capabilities at the time. Accuracy of the elements of such a machine was paramount, but could be achieved with the tools of the time to the tolerances required. What really killed the project was the "switchover" from building the Difference Engine to the design and thought on the Analytical Engine - Babbage was one of those tragic figures in history who always gets 50-80% complete of a project, and then moves on - alienating those working on the project, as well as those contributing monetarily to the project. Thus, not only did he lose workers, but his funding ran out because those that were supplying it (parliment?) thought they were putting money into a sinking (and hence, unprofitable) ship...
Go into any older Subway sandwich places, with the "old" style subway wallpaper, and you can see pictures of this thing - alongside pictures of the rail based subway. No mention is made of the pneumatic system - it is presented on this wallpaper as being the same as the rail system. No mention is made of the developer, either. It didn't run for very far, and was soon bricked up. When the rail subway was later built, several decades later, they broke through and found one of the stations of this subway - complete with a grand piano, in pristine condition!
BTW - the pictures on the Subway wallpaper are the ones that show the tube shaped device in the loading station, and the one of a cross-section of tube and the car, showing the interior of the car with a gentleman sitting, and I think a conductor. The picture of the "developer" they show, is actually the developer of the rail subway, not the secret pneumatic one.
I think a return to the early 80's style is in order - if anyone else can remember back that far (and I know they have to exist).
I want a well rounded magazine - something that would be enjoyable to either an adult computer engineer to a kid just learning about his PC. I have seen very few magazines that did this properly, so I am going to speak from my experience growing up with a TRS-80 CoCo 2:
I started out with Tandy's computer publication - this was ok, with a few good programming examples. Later, I moved on to Hot CoCo - which was ok as well.
The magazine that stuck, though, was Rainbow. It covered the spectrum of the CoCo - from advertisements for software, software reviews, editorial comment, user submitted programming, hardware projects - all of it. A child could read and enjoy it, as well as learn a chockfull of information. An adult could learn and review things he may not have known before, as well as build interesting projects for his CoCo to boot.
I am certain other machines had similar magazines (RUN for the C=64 was close in this regard, and I remember seeing one for the Apple as well), so I don't want to make this a flame war.
My point is there doesn't seem to be any magazines to really get kids interested in computers, to a point deeper than game playing or using a few "normal" applications. The internet isn't always an option for these kids - parents are beginning to restrict the access to the net to thier children because of what they hear on TV and the media (which is more often than not, wrong). A magazine would be better in these cases.
Adults find it hard to learn more than the basics of computers, even with the internet, because they don't have a point of reference to go "deeper". They may know how to work a word processor, but what would make them want to know how a word processor worked - in depth? In the past, a magazine might have a program you typed in to spur this inquisitiveness on.
Many small and useful programs were published this way. While I don't expect a magazine to publish a full working 3d modeling program, is it too much to show how 3d algorithms work, with sample code? Or how to interface devices with the parallel port (or ISA or PCI slots?) with code to control those devices? How about in depth stories on up and coming technology?
I don't know anyone who is deeper into computers than "point'n'click" that learned from reading a book or magazine alone, or checking a web site. These individuals gained their knowledge from hands-on work. The printed words gave them the incentive to go ahead with it.
The man was another one of those ahead of his time - right up there with Tesla and Tucker, IMHO. His main invention was that of fully electronic television (there is a very interesting and largely unknown story about this - see the second link).
In his later years he came up with the Fusor technology - I haven't heard any "qualified" opinions about the tech - there just isn't much info about it (most of what I have found is at that first link!). But it IS a very interesting concept and idea...
So is this something left over from the original IBM machines? To power the DRAM in it? Heh, all I know is that my machine works fine like it is, so I am not complaining...
You have defined what you want (low noise, low power, no hard drive, no cpu fan, no power supply fan), but your reasoning behind what would make the machine silent is a little flawed. Let me elaborate:
Removing all fans from such a machine - indeed, all moving parts - would make it silent, and use less power. However, in the quest of doing so, you will run into issues which begin to raise the cost of the system - such as what to use to boot the system. You indicate that booting with a floppy would be OK if you could get everything you needed on a floppy - so boot noise doesn't seem to be an issue. But running noise - that is, noise generated in normal operation of the machine - is an issue. Solid state disk devices would be the only option (unless you do get a full system on a floppy - which I can't say would be impossible) - and a very costly option.
Running noise seems to be the issue here - the solution is to choose components that make as little noise as possible (until it is inaudible to a human), and will use as little power as possible. To this end, I offer this list:
For the CPU - use an AMD 5X86 OC'd (or not) to 160 Mhz - these can be bought off of eBay or surplus very easy. Use a good 486 heat sink with fan, and compound to cool it. Most fans on 486 heat sinks are inaudible, especially in the case.
Use a 2.5 inch laptop IDE hard drive to boot from. 100 Mb hard drives can be had off of eBay for 5-10 dollars, sometimes less. Wrap the hard drive in some egg-crate - with it inside the case, you won't hear a thing, and the drive won't heat up enough to worry about cooling it.
For the power supply, we need to get creative - go to www.alltronics.com and order their Mini Switcher power supply (stock #98E011). You might want to wire up another Molex connector for the motherboard, as it comes with only a single connector (the one with 12V, -12V, 5V and ground. It doesn't output -5V. In fact, I don't think it is needed, as a machine I have runs fine without the -5V output. Anybody know what the -5V is used for in a PC?). It has 2 standard drive connectors, and one mini connector (for the floppy). I believe it outputs 60 watts without a fan, but add a fan (23 CFM), and output goes up to 80 watts. However, a 23 CFM fan might make too much noise to be comfortable for you - you might want to try smaller fan(s) - maybe 486 coolers, to get a little airflow over the thing (don't just box it up, give it some breathing room).
Think about the area and the noise level the box will be used in. Silence is not being heard because of surrounding noise (it is easy to be "silent" outdoors - just don't make more noise than what is the ambient level outside) - and most rooms have a lot of ambient noise. You may want to get somebody to measure the avaerage dB level of noise in the room - just don't make the box emit more than this level, and the box will be silent.
While what I described isn't "silent" by your definition - it is silent by normal definition - that is, it make so little noise you would be hard pressed to hear it. The loudest thing in this box is going to be the hard drive - and it will be damn quiet. I have built a box similar to this, for an in-vehicle computer system - I use all of the parts mentioned (well, my hard drive is larger - it is a 350 Mb), including the power supply. The hard drive is wrapped in egg crate, and doesn't get hot at all. Neither does the cpu (which is OC'd for playing MP3's). In total, I have spent maybe $50.00 on this system. It doesn't make any noise in a quiet room, and it is definitely inaudible in my vehicle.
What you ask is possible, and easy to do, if you are willing bend your rules a little. Hope this helps...
Yeah, I know they'll gore you in the wallet any which way, but in this case, it might be worth it:
Radio Shack sells a shielded 2-way mini speaker, catalog #40-2080 for $59.99 each (as of this writing, they are on sale for $39.99 each). The speaker has a 4" woofer and a 1" soft dome tweeter, and is magnetically shielded, so it can be used near a monitor. It handles 50 watts, and has a 90-20,000 Hz frequency range. Comes in an aluminum die-cast cabinet with a punched metal grille.
Now, you may think you are getting ripped, but I can tell you from experience that these speakers sound excellent. The cabinets make for a nice "no rattle" sound (which you can easily get from cheaper plastic speakers). If you can do it, place them in the front upper corners of your office for the best bass response (though I can say that this is not a necessary thing - the woofers on these are pretty powerful - I used a pair that they sell bare to build a subwoofer once), and good stereo separation.
But what good are these speakers without an amplifier? Radio Shack once again offers a solution - catalog #31-1957, thier Mini Stereo Amplifier. This device is small - 2-3/4x9-1/2x6-1/2" - so it can easily sit on your desk or a bookshelf. It has various inputs (phono, CD/tape and tuner) to hook up a selection of devices, tone adjustment and balance controls (which, for a computer, may be of limited use depending on your sound card). However, no information is given on it's technical details - I would guess it to put out about 25 watts (which is about what you will get on cheap computer speakers anyhow - sure, they may say 150-200 watts, but any speaker can do this, and distort like crap - better computer speakers will go up to 50 watts - if you don't believe me, open up a pair of el cheapos and look at the rating on the speaker magnet - one popular pair of ultra cheapos was being sold at one time rated at 160 watts - yet the speakers inside the box were rated at 7.5 watts - 160 watts, maybe - at 90% THD!). If you want a better amp, RS sells a 50 watt one here as well, but it is in a larger cabinet, so it may or may not fit on your bookshelf - catalog #31-3047 - for $149.99 - but it does have a tuner and a remote...
So, our total comes to - on the low end (I am not using sale prices here) - about $180.00, and on the high end (with the 50 watt amp and remote), $270.00. Add on $20.00 or so for cabling.
You might be wondering about a subwoofer, though. Seriously question whether you need one for your office - consider the size of your office, and where you could place such a sub. Also, consider your neighbors - would they enjoy the sound of a chaingun firing, or the heavy beat of techno (or the gut renching, thunderous boom of a kettle drum in a classical piece, if that is your style)? Ten to one odds may get you a no on both measures. Try out the system I outlined with just the bookshelf speakers - you may find that they are perfect as they stand...
Think about it: If your fridge died, it could call out to the service center for repair. The repair center could then email/page/call you for approval, and then send someone out to your house to fix or replace it (without you having to be there), so you don't lose $50-100 worth of food (a good refridgerator will keep things cold in a "power failure" mode for a number of hours).
I can see having a networked freezer outside that would "know" your eating/ordering habits (via a bar code scanner you would use as you used up product) and send updates/orders to Shwann's (sp?) for restocking on a weekly/monthly basis. Same with your in-home fridge - which others have mentioned - of keeping a list of things in it and when they are gone to produce a grocery list and have the groceries delivered (we already have one half of that ready - all we need is a scanner/computer built in to the fridge and it is set to go).
I can see similar networked cabinets for your dry goods (I can't remember the number of times I have gone to the store and bought cooking oil, only to find I already had two bottles already at home - call me stupid or forgetful, but if I had a networked Palm Pilot with me that could check the status of the cabinets at home, this would never occur when I go shopping)...
A toaster? No - this won't - and shouldn't - be networked - I just want them to make one that cooks evenly...
Probably a railgun - which uses high voltage, large capacitors, and something called the Lorentz Force, to fire the projectile (generally a disk of some conductive material) down the rails (has to do with two conductive rails, supplying the current, and the magnetic field that is generated by the projectile that sits between them - the magnetic field is repulsed by the fields being generated by the rails, and as the projectile travels faster, the field increases - also, the projectile has to be moving before any of this happens, so generally there is some kind of launcher behind the projectile to get it moving before it hits the rails).
Yeah, I know this sounds like bull, but it is the truth - only works at extremely high voltages, and only with the right materials for the rails and projectile (as the projectile moves down the rails, it leaves a bit of itself behind due to arcing - if it isn't moving fast enough, it will weld itself to the rails - forming a short, and probably blowing the capacitor bank in the process).
There was a guy at DefCon 5 (went by the name of Ming - never got an email address or anything) a while back that was building a handheld railgun, used PVC pipe and aluminium (sp?) railing, and shot these special slugs he had made up - he was supposed to fire it at DC5, but he wasn't finished with it - at the time, I didn't believe the thing would even work (he kept going on about making caps using beer bottles and tinfoil - only later did I realize that people really do this for Tesla coils and other HV stuff). After doing some research, it seemed like this guy actually had something - however, I never heard what happened with his device or anything...
Actually, I think they should have waited to release the program after low-cost means of copying the resulting file became available. A very likely outcome of this whole thing will be some kind of restrictions or something on DVD recorders (tech or price wise)...
I submitted this to/. today (10-29-99) and was rejected - I am putting this here if it comes up later - because it seems that everytime I submit a story, it gets rejected, then someone else submits the SAME DAMN THING THE NEXT DAMN DAY and it is accepted! What is up with that??? Case in point - I submitted the info on the OpenDesk thing TWO DAYS AGO - it was rejected, but now, today someone else gets it (Public Beta For OpenDesk)?? If you notice, it was posted by Hemos saying that Isaac-Lew sent it thier way - FALSE! That is FUBAR - Bah!
Yes, this is a rant - but a justified one, I think. I also think I deserve some kind of response as to why this happened and why my "scoop" on either of these stories was bad. I realize I may be wrong on the Amiga thing - ie. maybe the employment posting is old news (no date on it, so I couldn't check) - however, the OpenDesk thing ISN'T - so give me an answer as to why, if you dare!
While all interesting, from a geek point of view, still make me shudder when I think about it - all of them, they are CUTTING into your eye - there is a reason why on nearly every horror or sci-fi movie made something happens with someone's eye(s) - because the eyes are one of the most vunerable spots on our bodies - as well as being the most needed parts of our bodies...
Now, I understand that the procedures (well, maybe not RK or PRK) are painless - and are probably about as exciting as going to the dentist for a cleaning - but given the fact that they aren't reversable (with exception of intac), and they cost a pretty penny to boot, and you only have one set of eyes...
For what comes down to a mainly cosmetic decision, or a practicality decision (meaning wanting it because of wanting to do away with the hassles of glasses and contacts) - for something that can possibly really mess you up for other geeky interests (microscopes/telescopes) and night vision being shot due to haloing (which happens to me, with my contacts - probably dirty), I just can't see the worth.
If you don't figure you will pursue any of the microscope/telescope stuff, or that the night vision problems are a concern, then maybe that is ok.
I just can't see (no pun intended) why someone would want to gamble with their eyes...
The concept of a "Cube" was done by Robert Silverberg ("The World Inside" I believe was the title) - please correct me if I am wrong.
The more asthetic style structures of this sort were also popularized/architected by Paolo Soleri (My spelling might be off on this one), with his Arcology designs (most all of which are practical, efficient, beautiful - and could be built today if society wasn't such a greedy warren of rats). These designs are ones I would move into immediately if they existed (I guess I could move to Arcosanti)...
I am sure such designs have also been proposed earlier (if you look at some of the future city designs from the early part of this century, you would find that many structures were very tall with ramps inbetween buildings, etc) by others.
On a smaller scale Southwestern Indian Pueblos are reminiscent of the design (though actually closer to apartment buildings - however, the asthetics and energy efficiency of the designs are what really make them special)...
Nothing should stop us from building these style cities - we have the technology (go into any modern large office tower or large stadium for a proof of concept) - I fear we don't have the will to do so (until, of course, when it gets to be "too late")...
Tempest (Van Eck (sp?)) monitoring works via the reconstruction of signals emanated from a communications device (most commonly a computer). It does this by the fact that the monitor of a computer, as the electron gun scans the screen, the signals being sent to control the electron gun are also radiated into the atmosphere, like a small radio station. Most of the stuff is just voltage levels for brightess of the pixels and such, you may even get lucky and get some of the sync pulses. In reality, most of the syncing (horz and vert) is gone, so you have to supply that another way (usually via a linked set of frequency generators). You can pick up the signals emanated by most monitors with an antenna (a Yagi? I can't remember - my antenna knowledge sucks) "pointed" at the source, fed into an amplifier.
This signal is then overlaid with syncing frequencies (from the sig generators, or if the computer is set to 640 x 480 x 60hz, it might even be possible to use a VCR or something to supply the sync pulses - maybe another VGA card, perhaps a Tempest monitoring machine could be built with another PC?). The signal is then sent on to a normal monitor for display (this is a real basic setup - I am sure it is much more complicated and expensive in real equipment).
Generally, the output is real grainy, but legible - the fonts that were created to defeat Tempest were designed to utilise the artifacting inherent in such a signal rebuilding system to garble the output. Now, your statement:
Most of the output for Tempest monitoring does come from the monitor - but a lot also comes from the cable that hooks up to the monitor as well - even if it is shielded. Signals are also emanated by your VGA card, even the computer itself. It is possible to Tempest monitor all of this stuff (basically, all Tempest monitoring is the reconstruction of signals emanated by communications equipment - it is special in the regard that computers or other type equipment weren't designed as general purpose transmitting systems, and hence the signals are more difficult to reconstruct, but in the end, Tempest boils down to radio receiving - in theory, you could Tempest monitor your microwave).
So how do you protect yourself from Tempest monitoring? Good question. Because we haven't got any idea what "the other side" is capable of, we can only guess on what to do. Of pictures I have seen of real Tempest equipment, most were encased in a lot of steel, with steel braid encasing the cables entering/exiting the computer (making the removal of plugs/boards/etc a total nightmare). Unknown what was inside the machines, but I wouldn't put it past them to encase cards in special steel inner-casings. The room the computers are in might be encased in a faraday cage (or maybe the rebar of the concrete is formed for this). There may even be some ECM equipment on the offensive side as well, supplying bogus signals.
This is what I know of the stuff - I hope this helps.
Like I said, such a cube would be bad - and I am not saying these should be low-rent things, just average cost (say $1000/mo for rent, may to own as well?) - not outrageous in price. Also, remember that this could be a city, not just a place to live (I was making it a place to live just for the argument). Not all of it would have to be houses.
Plus, these things would be much, MUCH larger than a "project" home - 25 x 25 x 10 meters? Think something the volume of approx 80 x 80 x 30 feet - know of many house near you that size? Personally, I can only think of one place near me with "houses" that size (not counting an apartment complex). The place is a multi-story high-rise housing complex - houses in it go for $250,000 a pop - not a "project" by any means.
As far as an elevator ride is concerned, it shouldn't be too much of a problem with high-speed elevators, especially if the elevators could traverse in three dimensions (via special corridors, etc).
BTW, the two kid family was just for the sake of simplicity - with a house of the size mentioned, they could probably have six and still have more than enough living room.
Also, rather than a monolithic cube, I could see a "sparse" cube type structure, with individual cubes linked by walkways/tunnels, so that each cube could have windows. Or, bring in sunlight via fiber optic systems, and views via plasma screens and cameras. The place wouldn't even necessarily have to be a cube - how about a staircase/spiral type shape (think of a thick triangle rolled to make a screw shape).
At any rate, a system which utilizes volume will be superior to one that concentrates on area (as far a number of people housed). We aren't at the point where we need to do this, but we should be thinking heavily about it - the alternative is to pave over/destroy every last inch of land left, leaving none for farming, perhaps causing incredible starvation.
Society needs to cooperate, rather than compete, which is what, in the end, all of this is about (keeping up with the Jones, etc)...
The way we live - or more appropriately, the design and layout of the structures we live in, the devices we call "homes".
You see, for the most part people in general tend to only think in the realm of two dimensions when it comes to living space. We build cities, and continue to build outward in a "ring-like" configuration, devouring more area for a larger population - area that could be better used to feed the larger population. Consider this:
Let us take a plot of land of dimensions of 1000 meters by 1000 meters (a square kilometer). We now give each family (of two adults and two children) a bit of the land - an area of 25 meters by 25 meters (for sake of simplicity, we will assume no roads, bear with me) for enclosed living area. If we made this entire complex enclosed (think of it as a large warehouse, subdivided into cubicle-like living spaces), we could house 1600 families, of four people each, in relatively spacious living quarters. This amounts to 6400 people living in a square kilometer.
Now, what happens if we want to add another 6400 people to the population? That's correct, the population must take over another square kilometer of space. But what happens if we do the simple thing - put them on top of the first 6400 individuals in our complex? Correct, again - we double our population in the same amount of area.
Ok, now - let's say with current technology we can build this system to a height of 1000 meters, and we gave each "level" 10 meters to play with (which would allow for structural and evironmental support). We would end up with a 100 level community - each level holding 6400 people. In the end - the "Cube" would hold 640,000 people, all in the area of a square kilometer!
How many square kilometers would it take to hold that many people in our current society (assuming a single level structure)? Unstack the cube - 100 square kilometers! An area larger than most cities! In our original single level (and Cube), we didn't make allowances for roads, etc - so the area would have to be even larger!
So how is it we get this number of people in (sometimes) smaller areas? Well, number one - not every family has an allowance of a 25 by 25 by 10 meter living space - most don't even have half that. That is quite a large house, by anyone's standards. Cost for a house that size is the major concern.
In reality, we couldn't create a Cube - nor would we want to (most "houses" would have no windows, there are other psychological reasons as well - plus, there may be a few technical reasons for a structure that size, like fire escape). Even so, there still should be no reason why we shouldn't be thinking up/down instead of out...
My comment is off-topic, yet the poster I was replying to wasn't? I was continuing the thread, for crying out loud!
If I had said something like "Drink Pepsi, instead - you moron!", that would have been off-topic. However, what I did was give a solution to another's problem - that of getting caffiene in milk.
Maybe I should have mentioned the word caffiene? Would that have saved it?
I swear, many times I think moderators just have way too many points and not enough time on thier hands (that, and I think there is some kind of conspiracy against me to not be moderated up, for whatever reason).
Watch, this will be moderated down to "off-topic" - at least I can agree with that, though!
Slashdot Mirror
In regards to this thread, relating issues/ideas about hyper-oxygenated flourocarbons:
In theory, yes - humans should be able to breath such "liquids" - albeit with more work (due to the density of the liquid). I remember watching a program regarding this a few years back, and they had stuck a mouse (or some other small rodent) into this sort of liquid, and it breathed rather normally.
I don't think such an experiment has yet been done with a human volunteer, however (but please, if it has, let me know!). And regarding premature babies, I haven't ever heard/seen such use - I would be highly interested in any links to such information - however, it sounds possible.
Also, IIRC - the company that made the suits for the Abyss is an actual deep-sea diving equipment manufacturer, and I think they were actually looking into building actual systems similar to what was in the movie, and used the movie as PR - however, what you saw in the movie wasn't real - the people/actors weren't breathing liquid. The movie was SF, but portions of it could be considered - I dunno - "edge" fiction...?
I am not sure if the device they show allows the same thing, but the Forte CyberPuck has three buttons and a tilt sensor, for use as a "baseless" joystick. It is fully analog, so you can have a complete range of values for X/Y axis control - the three buttons are standard joystick buttons (the thing plugs into the joystick port).
The are similar devices also available that look like baseless "pistol-grip" joysticks - that may/may not have more buttons. These devices work pretty well for navigating in standard 3D games (Doom, Quake) - but they might be a pain for anything else (true 6DOF games, or a desktop style environment) - but they should work ok for menu style selection...
Actually, I must correct this:
m
/ 5.html
1 862-89.html
1. The Difference Engine (1832) was not a computer, in the modern sense of the word - it was not programmable, and did not have any memory for storing data. It was, however, a splendid device designed to perform the calculations of what are called difference tables - tables of values (in a set order) used in polynomial equation solving (I have seen an explanation on what the "method of differences" are and how they relate to polynomial equations/speed up of solutions, but I can't remember now). These tables were used for a lot of things - prime being that of navigation - into which errors crept, causing ships to be lost on rocks due to navigational errors (I believe in star positional charts)...
2. The Analytical Engine (1834-1835), however, was programmable, and even had crude branching capability (though I don't think it had looping capability). It had memory registers (the store), and a calculation portion (the mill). Input was via punched cards (after seeing Jaquard's mechanical loom), output was via a special printer. First proposed programming was done by Ada Byron (Lady Lovelace), Lord Byron's daughter, and Babbage's friend. From what is known, she understood the implications and uses of such a machine as well or better than the inventor himself, going so far as to imagine composing music and creating drawings with such a machine. What is now regarded as the first computer program, was in fact a plan to compute Bernoulli numbers using the Analytical Engine! Female coders, be proud!
3. The machines were mechanically sophisticated, but hardly outside the engineering capabilities at the time. Accuracy of the elements of such a machine was paramount, but could be achieved with the tools of the time to the tolerances required. What really killed the project was the "switchover" from building the Difference Engine to the design and thought on the Analytical Engine - Babbage was one of those tragic figures in history who always gets 50-80% complete of a project, and then moves on - alienating those working on the project, as well as those contributing monetarily to the project. Thus, not only did he lose workers, but his funding ran out because those that were supplying it (parliment?) thought they were putting money into a sinking (and hence, unprofitable) ship...
Links to more info:
http://www.museums.reading.ac.uk/vmoc/babbage/
http://www.agnesscott.edu/lriddle/women/love.ht
http://zeus.fh-brandenburg.de/~tenbusch/history
http://www.nmsi.ac.uk/on-line/treasure/objects/
http://www.maxmon.com/1822ad.htm
http://www.maxmon.com/1830ad.htm
More info:
Go into any older Subway sandwich places, with the "old" style subway wallpaper, and you can see pictures of this thing - alongside pictures of the rail based subway. No mention is made of the pneumatic system - it is presented on this wallpaper as being the same as the rail system. No mention is made of the developer, either. It didn't run for very far, and was soon bricked up. When the rail subway was later built, several decades later, they broke through and found one of the stations of this subway - complete with a grand piano, in pristine condition!
BTW - the pictures on the Subway wallpaper are the ones that show the tube shaped device in the loading station, and the one of a cross-section of tube and the car, showing the interior of the car with a gentleman sitting, and I think a conductor. The picture of the "developer" they show, is actually the developer of the rail subway, not the secret pneumatic one.
I think a return to the early 80's style is in order - if anyone else can remember back that far (and I know they have to exist).
I want a well rounded magazine - something that would be enjoyable to either an adult computer engineer to a kid just learning about his PC. I have seen very few magazines that did this properly, so I am going to speak from my experience growing up with a TRS-80 CoCo 2:
I started out with Tandy's computer publication - this was ok, with a few good programming examples. Later, I moved on to Hot CoCo - which was ok as well.
The magazine that stuck, though, was Rainbow. It covered the spectrum of the CoCo - from advertisements for software, software reviews, editorial comment, user submitted programming, hardware projects - all of it. A child could read and enjoy it, as well as learn a chockfull of information. An adult could learn and review things he may not have known before, as well as build interesting projects for his CoCo to boot.
I am certain other machines had similar magazines (RUN for the C=64 was close in this regard, and I remember seeing one for the Apple as well), so I don't want to make this a flame war.
My point is there doesn't seem to be any magazines to really get kids interested in computers, to a point deeper than game playing or using a few "normal" applications. The internet isn't always an option for these kids - parents are beginning to restrict the access to the net to thier children because of what they hear on TV and the media (which is more often than not, wrong). A magazine would be better in these cases.
Adults find it hard to learn more than the basics of computers, even with the internet, because they don't have a point of reference to go "deeper". They may know how to work a word processor, but what would make them want to know how a word processor worked - in depth? In the past, a magazine might have a program you typed in to spur this inquisitiveness on.
Many small and useful programs were published this way. While I don't expect a magazine to publish a full working 3d modeling program, is it too much to show how 3d algorithms work, with sample code? Or how to interface devices with the parallel port (or ISA or PCI slots?) with code to control those devices? How about in depth stories on up and coming technology?
I don't know anyone who is deeper into computers than "point'n'click" that learned from reading a book or magazine alone, or checking a web site. These individuals gained their knowledge from hands-on work. The printed words gave them the incentive to go ahead with it.
fus.x0r.com
More on the Inventor: Philo T. Farnsworth
The man was another one of those ahead of his time - right up there with Tesla and Tucker, IMHO. His main invention was that of fully electronic television (there is a very interesting and largely unknown story about this - see the second link).
In his later years he came up with the Fusor technology - I haven't heard any "qualified" opinions about the tech - there just isn't much info about it (most of what I have found is at that first link!). But it IS a very interesting concept and idea...
So is this something left over from the original IBM machines? To power the DRAM in it? Heh, all I know is that my machine works fine like it is, so I am not complaining...
You have defined what you want (low noise, low power, no hard drive, no cpu fan, no power supply fan), but your reasoning behind what would make the machine silent is a little flawed. Let me elaborate:
Removing all fans from such a machine - indeed, all moving parts - would make it silent, and use less power. However, in the quest of doing so, you will run into issues which begin to raise the cost of the system - such as what to use to boot the system. You indicate that booting with a floppy would be OK if you could get everything you needed on a floppy - so boot noise doesn't seem to be an issue. But running noise - that is, noise generated in normal operation of the machine - is an issue. Solid state disk devices would be the only option (unless you do get a full system on a floppy - which I can't say would be impossible) - and a very costly option.
Running noise seems to be the issue here - the solution is to choose components that make as little noise as possible (until it is inaudible to a human), and will use as little power as possible. To this end, I offer this list:
For the CPU - use an AMD 5X86 OC'd (or not) to 160 Mhz - these can be bought off of eBay or surplus very easy. Use a good 486 heat sink with fan, and compound to cool it. Most fans on 486 heat sinks are inaudible, especially in the case.
Use a 2.5 inch laptop IDE hard drive to boot from. 100 Mb hard drives can be had off of eBay for 5-10 dollars, sometimes less. Wrap the hard drive in some egg-crate - with it inside the case, you won't hear a thing, and the drive won't heat up enough to worry about cooling it.
For the power supply, we need to get creative - go to www.alltronics.com and order their Mini Switcher power supply (stock #98E011). You might want to wire up another Molex connector for the motherboard, as it comes with only a single connector (the one with 12V, -12V, 5V and ground. It doesn't output -5V. In fact, I don't think it is needed, as a machine I have runs fine without the -5V output. Anybody know what the -5V is used for in a PC?). It has 2 standard drive connectors, and one mini connector (for the floppy). I believe it outputs 60 watts without a fan, but add a fan (23 CFM), and output goes up to 80 watts. However, a 23 CFM fan might make too much noise to be comfortable for you - you might want to try smaller fan(s) - maybe 486 coolers, to get a little airflow over the thing (don't just box it up, give it some breathing room).
Think about the area and the noise level the box will be used in. Silence is not being heard because of surrounding noise (it is easy to be "silent" outdoors - just don't make more noise than what is the ambient level outside) - and most rooms have a lot of ambient noise. You may want to get somebody to measure the avaerage dB level of noise in the room - just don't make the box emit more than this level, and the box will be silent.
While what I described isn't "silent" by your definition - it is silent by normal definition - that is, it make so little noise you would be hard pressed to hear it. The loudest thing in this box is going to be the hard drive - and it will be damn quiet. I have built a box similar to this, for an in-vehicle computer system - I use all of the parts mentioned (well, my hard drive is larger - it is a 350 Mb), including the power supply. The hard drive is wrapped in egg crate, and doesn't get hot at all. Neither does the cpu (which is OC'd for playing MP3's). In total, I have spent maybe $50.00 on this system. It doesn't make any noise in a quiet room, and it is definitely inaudible in my vehicle.
What you ask is possible, and easy to do, if you are willing bend your rules a little. Hope this helps...
Can be found at:
The Colossus of Bletchley Park - The German Cipher System
Computer History (1940-1944)
The Turing Bombe Rebuild Project
Official Bletchley Park Website
The Colossus Rebuild Project
Mr. Flowers Death Announcement in 1998
Yeah, I know they'll gore you in the wallet any which way, but in this case, it might be worth it:
Radio Shack sells a shielded 2-way mini speaker, catalog #40-2080 for $59.99 each (as of this writing, they are on sale for $39.99 each). The speaker has a 4" woofer and a 1" soft dome tweeter, and is magnetically shielded, so it can be used near a monitor. It handles 50 watts, and has a 90-20,000 Hz frequency range. Comes in an aluminum die-cast cabinet with a punched metal grille.
Now, you may think you are getting ripped, but I can tell you from experience that these speakers sound excellent. The cabinets make for a nice "no rattle" sound (which you can easily get from cheaper plastic speakers). If you can do it, place them in the front upper corners of your office for the best bass response (though I can say that this is not a necessary thing - the woofers on these are pretty powerful - I used a pair that they sell bare to build a subwoofer once), and good stereo separation.
But what good are these speakers without an amplifier? Radio Shack once again offers a solution - catalog #31-1957, thier Mini Stereo Amplifier. This device is small - 2-3/4x9-1/2x6-1/2" - so it can easily sit on your desk or a bookshelf. It has various inputs (phono, CD/tape and tuner) to hook up a selection of devices, tone adjustment and balance controls (which, for a computer, may be of limited use depending on your sound card). However, no information is given on it's technical details - I would guess it to put out about 25 watts (which is about what you will get on cheap computer speakers anyhow - sure, they may say 150-200 watts, but any speaker can do this, and distort like crap - better computer speakers will go up to 50 watts - if you don't believe me, open up a pair of el cheapos and look at the rating on the speaker magnet - one popular pair of ultra cheapos was being sold at one time rated at 160 watts - yet the speakers inside the box were rated at 7.5 watts - 160 watts, maybe - at 90% THD!). If you want a better amp, RS sells a 50 watt one here as well, but it is in a larger cabinet, so it may or may not fit on your bookshelf - catalog #31-3047 - for $149.99 - but it does have a tuner and a remote...
So, our total comes to - on the low end (I am not using sale prices here) - about $180.00, and on the high end (with the 50 watt amp and remote), $270.00. Add on $20.00 or so for cabling.
You might be wondering about a subwoofer, though. Seriously question whether you need one for your office - consider the size of your office, and where you could place such a sub. Also, consider your neighbors - would they enjoy the sound of a chaingun firing, or the heavy beat of techno (or the gut renching, thunderous boom of a kettle drum in a classical piece, if that is your style)? Ten to one odds may get you a no on both measures. Try out the system I outlined with just the bookshelf speakers - you may find that they are perfect as they stand...
Think about it: If your fridge died, it could call out to the service center for repair. The repair center could then email/page/call you for approval, and then send someone out to your house to fix or replace it (without you having to be there), so you don't lose $50-100 worth of food (a good refridgerator will keep things cold in a "power failure" mode for a number of hours).
I can see having a networked freezer outside that would "know" your eating/ordering habits (via a bar code scanner you would use as you used up product) and send updates/orders to Shwann's (sp?) for restocking on a weekly/monthly basis. Same with your in-home fridge - which others have mentioned - of keeping a list of things in it and when they are gone to produce a grocery list and have the groceries delivered (we already have one half of that ready - all we need is a scanner/computer built in to the fridge and it is set to go).
I can see similar networked cabinets for your dry goods (I can't remember the number of times I have gone to the store and bought cooking oil, only to find I already had two bottles already at home - call me stupid or forgetful, but if I had a networked Palm Pilot with me that could check the status of the cabinets at home, this would never occur when I go shopping)...
A toaster? No - this won't - and shouldn't - be networked - I just want them to make one that cooks evenly...
Probably a railgun - which uses high voltage, large capacitors, and something called the Lorentz Force, to fire the projectile (generally a disk of some conductive material) down the rails (has to do with two conductive rails, supplying the current, and the magnetic field that is generated by the projectile that sits between them - the magnetic field is repulsed by the fields being generated by the rails, and as the projectile travels faster, the field increases - also, the projectile has to be moving before any of this happens, so generally there is some kind of launcher behind the projectile to get it moving before it hits the rails).
Yeah, I know this sounds like bull, but it is the truth - only works at extremely high voltages, and only with the right materials for the rails and projectile (as the projectile moves down the rails, it leaves a bit of itself behind due to arcing - if it isn't moving fast enough, it will weld itself to the rails - forming a short, and probably blowing the capacitor bank in the process).
There was a guy at DefCon 5 (went by the name of Ming - never got an email address or anything) a while back that was building a handheld railgun, used PVC pipe and aluminium (sp?) railing, and shot these special slugs he had made up - he was supposed to fire it at DC5, but he wasn't finished with it - at the time, I didn't believe the thing would even work (he kept going on about making caps using beer bottles and tinfoil - only later did I realize that people really do this for Tesla coils and other HV stuff). After doing some research, it seemed like this guy actually had something - however, I never heard what happened with his device or anything...
Anyone know?
Actually, I think they should have waited to release the program after low-cost means of copying the resulting file became available. A very likely outcome of this whole thing will be some kind of restrictions or something on DVD recorders (tech or price wise)...
I submitted this to /. today (10-29-99) and was rejected - I am putting this here if it comes up later - because it seems that everytime I submit a story, it gets rejected, then someone else submits the SAME DAMN THING THE NEXT DAMN DAY and it is accepted! What is up with that??? Case in point - I submitted the info on the OpenDesk thing TWO DAYS AGO - it was rejected, but now, today someone else gets it (Public Beta For OpenDesk)?? If you notice, it was posted by Hemos saying that Isaac-Lew sent it thier way - FALSE! That is FUBAR - Bah!
Gateway Looking to Hire Amiga Development Team
Yes, this is a rant - but a justified one, I think. I also think I deserve some kind of response as to why this happened and why my "scoop" on either of these stories was bad. I realize I may be wrong on the Amiga thing - ie. maybe the employment posting is old news (no date on it, so I couldn't check) - however, the OpenDesk thing ISN'T - so give me an answer as to why, if you dare!
While all interesting, from a geek point of view, still make me shudder when I think about it - all of them, they are CUTTING into your eye - there is a reason why on nearly every horror or sci-fi movie made something happens with someone's eye(s) - because the eyes are one of the most vunerable spots on our bodies - as well as being the most needed parts of our bodies...
Now, I understand that the procedures (well, maybe not RK or PRK) are painless - and are probably about as exciting as going to the dentist for a cleaning - but given the fact that they aren't reversable (with exception of intac), and they cost a pretty penny to boot, and you only have one set of eyes...
For what comes down to a mainly cosmetic decision, or a practicality decision (meaning wanting it because of wanting to do away with the hassles of glasses and contacts) - for something that can possibly really mess you up for other geeky interests (microscopes/telescopes) and night vision being shot due to haloing (which happens to me, with my contacts - probably dirty), I just can't see the worth.
If you don't figure you will pursue any of the microscope/telescope stuff, or that the night vision problems are a concern, then maybe that is ok.
I just can't see (no pun intended) why someone would want to gamble with their eyes...
This just in:
Further study has concluded that while ingesting mashed potatoes improves memory, the salt, pepper, butter, and gravy increases risk of heart failure.
Seriously - which is it, the potatoes or the barley? Both, for some wierd reason?
Peeled or dirty?
Plain, or with sour cream?
Hmm?
Damn, I'm hungry now...
The concept of a "Cube" was done by Robert Silverberg ("The World Inside" I believe was the title) - please correct me if I am wrong.
The more asthetic style structures of this sort were also popularized/architected by Paolo Soleri (My spelling might be off on this one), with his Arcology designs (most all of which are practical, efficient, beautiful - and could be built today if society wasn't such a greedy warren of rats). These designs are ones I would move into immediately if they existed (I guess I could move to Arcosanti)...
I am sure such designs have also been proposed earlier (if you look at some of the future city designs from the early part of this century, you would find that many structures were very tall with ramps inbetween buildings, etc) by others.
On a smaller scale Southwestern Indian Pueblos are reminiscent of the design (though actually closer to apartment buildings - however, the asthetics and energy efficiency of the designs are what really make them special)...
Nothing should stop us from building these style cities - we have the technology (go into any modern large office tower or large stadium for a proof of concept) - I fear we don't have the will to do so (until, of course, when it gets to be "too late")...
Read this comment about Tempest monitoring and LCD's by another /.er...
Read my comment regarding LCD's...
Probably from here:
DIA Information Technology Acquisition Support Center (ITASC)
Fun stuff!
Actually, they could still spy on you:
Tempest (Van Eck (sp?)) monitoring works via the reconstruction of signals emanated from a communications device (most commonly a computer). It does this by the fact that the monitor of a computer, as the electron gun scans the screen, the signals being sent to control the electron gun are also radiated into the atmosphere, like a small radio station. Most of the stuff is just voltage levels for brightess of the pixels and such, you may even get lucky and get some of the sync pulses. In reality, most of the syncing (horz and vert) is gone, so you have to supply that another way (usually via a linked set of frequency generators). You can pick up the signals emanated by most monitors with an antenna (a Yagi? I can't remember - my antenna knowledge sucks) "pointed" at the source, fed into an amplifier.
This signal is then overlaid with syncing frequencies (from the sig generators, or if the computer is set to 640 x 480 x 60hz, it might even be possible to use a VCR or something to supply the sync pulses - maybe another VGA card, perhaps a Tempest monitoring machine could be built with another PC?). The signal is then sent on to a normal monitor for display (this is a real basic setup - I am sure it is much more complicated and expensive in real equipment).
Generally, the output is real grainy, but legible - the fonts that were created to defeat Tempest were designed to utilise the artifacting inherent in such a signal rebuilding system to garble the output. Now, your statement:
Most of the output for Tempest monitoring does come from the monitor - but a lot also comes from the cable that hooks up to the monitor as well - even if it is shielded. Signals are also emanated by your VGA card, even the computer itself. It is possible to Tempest monitor all of this stuff (basically, all Tempest monitoring is the reconstruction of signals emanated by communications equipment - it is special in the regard that computers or other type equipment weren't designed as general purpose transmitting systems, and hence the signals are more difficult to reconstruct, but in the end, Tempest boils down to radio receiving - in theory, you could Tempest monitor your microwave).
So how do you protect yourself from Tempest monitoring? Good question. Because we haven't got any idea what "the other side" is capable of, we can only guess on what to do. Of pictures I have seen of real Tempest equipment, most were encased in a lot of steel, with steel braid encasing the cables entering/exiting the computer (making the removal of plugs/boards/etc a total nightmare). Unknown what was inside the machines, but I wouldn't put it past them to encase cards in special steel inner-casings. The room the computers are in might be encased in a faraday cage (or maybe the rebar of the concrete is formed for this). There may even be some ECM equipment on the offensive side as well, supplying bogus signals.
This is what I know of the stuff - I hope this helps.
Like I said, such a cube would be bad - and I am not saying these should be low-rent things, just average cost (say $1000/mo for rent, may to own as well?) - not outrageous in price. Also, remember that this could be a city, not just a place to live (I was making it a place to live just for the argument). Not all of it would have to be houses.
Plus, these things would be much, MUCH larger than a "project" home - 25 x 25 x 10 meters? Think something the volume of approx 80 x 80 x 30 feet - know of many house near you that size? Personally, I can only think of one place near me with "houses" that size (not counting an apartment complex). The place is a multi-story high-rise housing complex - houses in it go for $250,000 a pop - not a "project" by any means.
As far as an elevator ride is concerned, it shouldn't be too much of a problem with high-speed elevators, especially if the elevators could traverse in three dimensions (via special corridors, etc).
BTW, the two kid family was just for the sake of simplicity - with a house of the size mentioned, they could probably have six and still have more than enough living room.
Also, rather than a monolithic cube, I could see a "sparse" cube type structure, with individual cubes linked by walkways/tunnels, so that each cube could have windows. Or, bring in sunlight via fiber optic systems, and views via plasma screens and cameras. The place wouldn't even necessarily have to be a cube - how about a staircase/spiral type shape (think of a thick triangle rolled to make a screw shape).
At any rate, a system which utilizes volume will be superior to one that concentrates on area (as far a number of people housed). We aren't at the point where we need to do this, but we should be thinking heavily about it - the alternative is to pave over/destroy every last inch of land left, leaving none for farming, perhaps causing incredible starvation.
Society needs to cooperate, rather than compete, which is what, in the end, all of this is about (keeping up with the Jones, etc)...
The way we live - or more appropriately, the design and layout of the structures we live in, the devices we call "homes".
You see, for the most part people in general tend to only think in the realm of two dimensions when it comes to living space. We build cities, and continue to build outward in a "ring-like" configuration, devouring more area for a larger population - area that could be better used to feed the larger population. Consider this:
Let us take a plot of land of dimensions of 1000 meters by 1000 meters (a square kilometer). We now give each family (of two adults and two children) a bit of the land - an area of 25 meters by 25 meters (for sake of simplicity, we will assume no roads, bear with me) for enclosed living area. If we made this entire complex enclosed (think of it as a large warehouse, subdivided into cubicle-like living spaces), we could house 1600 families, of four people each, in relatively spacious living quarters. This amounts to 6400 people living in a square kilometer.
Now, what happens if we want to add another 6400 people to the population? That's correct, the population must take over another square kilometer of space. But what happens if we do the simple thing - put them on top of the first 6400 individuals in our complex? Correct, again - we double our population in the same amount of area.
Ok, now - let's say with current technology we can build this system to a height of 1000 meters, and we gave each "level" 10 meters to play with (which would allow for structural and evironmental support). We would end up with a 100 level community - each level holding 6400 people. In the end - the "Cube" would hold 640,000 people, all in the area of a square kilometer!
How many square kilometers would it take to hold that many people in our current society (assuming a single level structure)? Unstack the cube - 100 square kilometers! An area larger than most cities! In our original single level (and Cube), we didn't make allowances for roads, etc - so the area would have to be even larger!
So how is it we get this number of people in (sometimes) smaller areas? Well, number one - not every family has an allowance of a 25 by 25 by 10 meter living space - most don't even have half that. That is quite a large house, by anyone's standards. Cost for a house that size is the major concern.
In reality, we couldn't create a Cube - nor would we want to (most "houses" would have no windows, there are other psychological reasons as well - plus, there may be a few technical reasons for a structure that size, like fire escape). Even so, there still should be no reason why we shouldn't be thinking up/down instead of out...
I invite more discussion on this...
My comment is off-topic, yet the poster I was replying to wasn't? I was continuing the thread, for crying out loud!
If I had said something like "Drink Pepsi, instead - you moron!", that would have been off-topic. However, what I did was give a solution to another's problem - that of getting caffiene in milk.
Maybe I should have mentioned the word caffiene? Would that have saved it?
I swear, many times I think moderators just have way too many points and not enough time on thier hands (that, and I think there is some kind of conspiracy against me to not be moderated up, for whatever reason).
Watch, this will be moderated down to "off-topic" - at least I can agree with that, though!
Do what Laverne did - mix in some Pepsi!