This is no lie. I prowl around used bookstores quite often, and one of my favorite sections is engineering/technology. I like old and antique, out of print books - and it is amazing to look at old steam engineering books from the late-1800's to early 1900's. These people knew their shit: it was definitely the IT of the day. It is a very mature and very well understood technology.
Instead of a single piston, put a piston on each end of a shaft, in the middle of the shaft is your magnet (or more likely, as in an alternator) or energized coil. The "cylinders" surround the piston, and the generator magnet/coil assembly sits in an oil bath (like the sump in a standard ICE engine), which serves to both cool the generator as well as lubricate the pistons (using an electric pump system, maybe). Such a system could be built fairly easily.
Another option might be a standard block design, but instead of a crankshaft, have the ends of the rods (which would be fixed to the piston) attached to "return springs", and the coil/magnet pack at that end (and immersed in oil).
In all of these designs, you would want to run the system at its resonant frequency for best efficiency (the spring return design would have a different resonant frequency than the free-piston design, of course)...
Free-piston engines aren't that radical of an idea - many have been built, mainly in internal combustion engines and Sterling engines, as you noted.
I have an older Popular Mechanic's magazine (1950's era) which had the cover story of a hydraulic powered truck, in which a free-piston IC engine (think of something like a tube with a piston stuck in it, with inlet/exhaust valves and sparkplugs at the ends, the piston riding on a rod that poked out each end) drove a dual-sided hydraulic pump, the pressure of which was directed by hoses and pipes to a rotary hydraulic motor which turned the wheels. Kinda neat (could be kinda dangerous, too, in the event of a hydraulic leak in the wrong spot).
The idea of a similar IC engine, with the piston (somehow) being a magnet or energized coil of some sort acting as an electric generator as it passed through other coils (the electricity which could then be used in a hybrid system to power hub-motors or the like to turn the wheels of the vehicle) has always been something I have wanted to build, but I don't have the shop or time to do it. I suppose a steam-engine could also be built this way. The efficiencies you would gain over a regular IC engine could be quite large, because you eliminate a ton of moving parts that are found in a common IC engine. I would also imagine you might be able to adopt a passive exhaust/intake system like in a 2-stroke engine, or something like is found in a pee-wee glow-plug engine used in radio-control - this would eliminate the need for complex intake/exhaust valving (although, I would imagine instead electronic controlled valves with fuel injection would work OK, too).
Such a hybrid engine would be very interesting to see built - I can imagine that it could be scaled-down fairly small to power small loads as well, like a laptop or such. It might also make for small and quiet (quieter than a Honda? Maybe) emergency power generators, too...
At the first software development job I ever had, about 12 years ago, I was given a "piece of junk" electronic calculator by the IT guy (small mom & pop shop). I was a "kid" then (19 or 20 years old), and I didn't have the same appreciation for old electronics that I do now. Back then, a piece of electronic junk, for me, was another thing to tear apart, and salvage any usable junk from it.
I don't remember the make or model of this calculator - it may have been a Texas Instruments, not sure. I do remember that it had the regular layout of keys, and a switch or two to set a decimal position or something like that, and it plugged into the wall - but all in all, a very basic calculator, with the exception of this: it had a memory feature. Plugging it in, nothing on it worked, it just displayed all 9's - on a bunch of glowing nixie tubes.
Now, I didn't know what a nixie tube was at that time, but I knew that the display was old, and that it was a tube display. I was thinking it was similar to a neon display (which of course it is), so I thought that piece was neat and all. But - it didn't work! It was a non-working calculator. But that memory feature bugged me, because I could tell it was old, and there was date on it (from sometime in the very early 1970's - prior to the 4004). I knew it didn't have a bit of RAM in it - so, how did it store things. In my zeal to understand (and my ignorance of youth), I decided I would take it apart, keep what was good and throw the rest away.
That calculator is long gone - I ended up saving nothing of it (cringe), but what I found was very cool, and I only appreciated it later as my knowledge of computer and electronics history grew as I learned more with age. First off - the entire logic of the calculator was done in transistors - not a chip in sight. This was something I was impressed to see when I first saw it, but it didn't really strike me at the time as something I should save. Transistors didn't interest me that much - I could buy them cheaply anywhere. There was also the driver system for the (what I would later learn) were the nixie tubes. I kept the tubes for a little while after that, but they too eventually were thrown out, as well (I couldn't see any use for them at the time). They were all lined up and supported in a fitted metal chassis with rubber shock mounts, and the wires were individually soldered to the drivers and logic system - no sockets there! Then, there was the metal box, with four wires coming out of it.
This piece intrigued me - what was this thing? Could this be the memory? With only four wires, how could that be? The box itself was alluminum, and was sealed airtight - no screws or such to easily open it, just a metal box with four wires. So, I did what any stupid kid would do when confronted with such a device - I took a hammer and screwdriver to it (nowadays, if that was something I wanted to get into, and I didn't care about it like I would now, I would use a vice and a hacksaw, maybe a dremel too, but I didn't have those at the time in my apartment). I punched a hole in the side, expecting to hear a vacuum released, but I heard nothing. Using other tools, I got it ripped open, and what I found inside was curious: Where two of the wires entered was some kind of device hard mounted to the alluminum case, with a (steel?) wire coming from the center, which itself was suspended and coiled inside the box, with the other end connected to a similar device for the other two wires. What was this, and how could it be memory. I ended up throwing it away, along with most of the rest of the calculator - eventually, it all became trash.
Have I told you how much I now kick myself for this? It was only much later that I realized what that alluminum box was, and that maybe that calculator could be fixed, and was probably worth something to a collector. The box was this: a very compact implementation of an old form of electronic computer memory, the serial delay line. Original delay lines on computers that had them in the 1940's used acoustic tr
I know you were posting "in jest", but if you really wanted to "homebrew" a latex version of one of these models (or almost any 3D model), everything does exist to do so in the comfort of one's garage or apartment (Note: If you are going to do this in an apartment, be prepared to have no space to do anything else except shower and sleep. Of course, since you are building a latex female doll, you probably have no life otherwise, so no BFD, right?).
One would first need a homebrew CNC milling machine, with an X/Y bed of sized around 1 meter per side, and a Z travel for the milling head of around a foot. The milling head can be a simple dremel tool with either a tool extension or a way to tilt the tool or rotate the material to be worked on. It is assummed the doll will be built in sections (the why will be apparent). Enough information on building such a machine is easily available on the internet, parts can be sourced from surplus, structural material can be either "free", surplus, or new, and controlling software is freely available, and in some limited cases, easy to develop (I am sure someone has made simple CNC milling software using QBASIC controlling the parallel port, which is hooked to the servos).
Once you have the CNC milling machine built (not an easy task alone, but sure to be rewarding!), you then need to choose the material to mill. The easiest and cheapest would be plaster of paris. Build half-thickness molds of plaster of paris, then reverse-impression mill them with the model. Alignment accuracy is important, as these molds will form the parts you are building, and the edges of the molds (after milling) must line up accurately. After milling, you will likely notice tool marks left behind, you will need to carefully (using dental picks, files, sandpaper, etc) smooth all of this out.
Once you have all of these molds created, you can now start casting with latex (or, if you have the money, silicone rubber). Plenty of information on the internet about how to do this - just realize that latex in the large amounts needed won't be cheap. Also, realize that at this point, if you do things correctly, you can insert metal/plastic armatures (up to and including robotics!) into the molds prior to filling them with latex. These things would themselves have to be carefully engineered, but that is what your CNC machine is for, right? Come to think of it - you could eMachineShop the molds and the armature parts (at significant cost)...
At this point, it is just pouring, assembly (got to learn how to apply hair, latex paint, where to get fake eyeballs, etc - but all of this too is available on the internet), etc. After all, you got time, right? You are somebody with not much of a life building his (or her) own RealDoll, right? Actually - you want to know what might make you some money? Troll the internet looking for all the information, from the ground up, to custom build such a doll. From building the CNC machine to how to make the casts, to pouring latex, etc - include sources, sample 3D model files, etc. Dump it all on a few CD-Rs or a DVD-R - then sell it in the adult section of Ebay.
Perhaps we will have developed technology to the point where we can make babies in a tank though.
Actually, we are closer to this than you may think. I have (at home, unfortunately, so I can't provide a cite or reference right now) an issue of Life magazine from not too many years ago (meaning, I don't know how research has progressed since then) which had a photo of a baby goat (IIRC) in an artificial "womb" which was developed by a researcher in Japan.
Without having the magazine in front of me, I can't give much more information. The best I can do (with the power of google) is this link, which states:
In 2002, a team at Cornell University used cells from a human uterus to grow an artificial womb. When a fertilized human egg was introduced, it implanted itself in the uterus wall as in a natural pregnancy. After six days of gestation, the experiment was halted due solely to legal constraints.
Meanwhile, half-a-world away, Dr. Yoshinori Kuwabara of Juntendo University in Japan has been removing fetuses from goats and keeping them alive for weeks in clear plastic tanks of amniotic fluid with machine-driven 'umbilical cords'.
I included the first part just to let you know how far we have come, and the second part is likely the researcher I am thinking of in Japan, and from which the image in Life magazine came from, most likely (the description above is accurate for the picture that was shown - I remember the image looking like a largish clear-acrylic tank, like a fish tank, filled with a thick fluid in which the unborn goat was immersed with a number of tubes sticking out of it).
Now - notice the name of the HTML page in that link I supplied. If you do some googling on "artificial wombs", you are going to stumble across an interesting topic, something that it seems has a lot of people up in arms (or at least wondering about it all), but hasn't yet hit the public as to the implications. As with anything of this nature, it has to do with the abortion debate. I am not wanting to start a flamewar, but the idea of a working artificial womb (for humans) brings up a number of interesting possibilities...
First off, if you have such a device, the life and health of prematurely born babies could possibly be made a lot better with such a device, vs the mechanical incubators and other methods we currently have. What possibilities an artificial womb could open up for such uses are anybody's guess.
But think about this: if an artificial womb can keep a baby which was "born" premature alive, what implications does this have on the abortion debate/issue? If instead of aborting a fetus and terminating its life, it could be put into an artificial womb, instead...
Or, if instead of procreating the "normal" way, one used "harvested" eggs and sperm to create an in-vitro embryo (or blastocyst) and "implanted" that into the artificial womb to be brought to term in that manner...
What implications does this have on society? What about the state (what if the state/society allowed "abortions" in which the fetus was transferred to these devices to come to term - would the state become the "parent", if the mother or parents didn't want it)?
The questions are numerous, and these are only the tip of the iceberg. Unfortunately, just like every other "big question" that we should ALL be paying attention to RIGHT NOW, working together to solve the moral, legal, and ethical dillemas, we are instead ignoring it. Right now, the debate seems to be going on in "fringe groups", most likely with religious connotations. This may "explode" on us in the very near future. It would be nice if we were all prepared ahead, but unfortunately history has shown we never want to think that far in the future, especially on subjects such as this...
We scream our heads off about "think of the children" when it comes to pornography! We must fight, FIGHT, FIGHT against smut, against it being used to "warp" "impressionable" "minds"! We are concerned that it will cause marriages to fail, and the destruction of limb and country!
BULLSHIT! PURE UNADULTERATED BULLSHIT!
The fact is - the reason people want pornography, is because it is "taboo". People would not want pornography of any sort if it wasn't seen as taboo and naughty. We have no problem with people of any race, sex, or sexual orientation (ok, apparently some dumb fuckers have problems with that last one, but they are idiots) wandering around and - "GASP!" - letting our children see them - "URP!" -...
!!!! CLOTHED !!!!
Horrors! Why is this though? Why do we not find clothed individuals "pornographic"? Furthermore - if nudity and other similar depictions were seen as "non-taboo" and perfectly acceptable by society - would clothed displays be seen as the new "pornography"? In other words, in bizzaro world, are clothed people taboo?
We are so stupid, and the cycle repeats, because we are too stupid to see the answer to our problems is clear. Those damn trees getting in the way of my forest.
You want to stop pornography? You want it to go away? Then quit making it a taboo subject! Quit making nudity and sex, and everything that revolves around those topics or are based on those topics, something that is only talked about in whispers or side glances. Quit making it taboo - and it will cease to be an issue!
This will never happen, though - IT IS TOO FUCKING LOGICAL AND REASONED TO OCCUR.
Note: I have been researching building my own DIY projector for a couple of years now - I am pretty well knowledgable about what goes into one, I have browsed LumenLabs and other site forums extensively, and I have looked into a number of options for lighting. What I don't seem to have enough of is time.
First off, the bulbs used in LumenLabs (and other DIY) projectors are not expensive - not when compared to similar (though smaller) bulbs used in commercial projectors. The expense for the DIY projector bulbs is in the ballast, not the bulb itself. If you are looking at a 400 Watt Metal Halide (MH) bulb, you are going to need the proper 400 Watt ballast to power it - these aren't cheap, at around $200.00 (US). The bulbs themselves, while much larger (physically) than regular projector bulbs, are fairly cheap, at $30.00 - $60.00 (US), depending on bulb size and base type - many can be easily bought at Home Depot or Lowes (although, strangely, these same places do not sell the fixtures/ballasts these bulbs are used in). They also tend to have a fairly long life - 10,000+ hours of use are not uncommon. Contrast this with the smaller bulbs used in commercial projectors: 3-4000+ hours of life (not bad), at around $300.00-$400.00 per bulb assembly (ouch!). Of course, they are a lot smaller...
Something else to remember is that at one time, video projectors used halogen bulbs instead of MH (MH bulbs are used more now because they use less current, generate less heat, and have a whiter light). The benefit of using such bulbs in a homebrew project is the lower cost (a 400 watt halogen work lamp from Home Depot or Harbor Freight costs less than $20.00 (US)). The downsides are the fact that you have to work really hard to keep the heat away from the LCD panel you are using (cooling such a beast, while possible, can be tricky - be careful), and the color temperature of the bulb is more into the yellow than white. Also, it is possible to find cheap halogen lamp and bulb assemblies on the surplus market for overhead projectors - these bulbs tend to be the smaller two-prong base with integrated faceted or smooth parabolic reflectors. The problem is powering them properly, as most seem to want a weird voltage (like 80 Volts). I have such a bulb assembly, and I plan to try using an off-the-shelf lamp dimmer switch to power it. I plan to do this in my shop, with suitable eye and face protection (these bulbs are tricky - you can't just plug them into the wall, they can explode, etc). I don't know if it will work or not.
Something else I have recently thought about is that here at my work, we have a commercial video projector (some relatively late model ViewSonic). It uses a 160-175 Watt MH bulb. This bulb costs about $350.00 (US) to replace. But what is interesting is the wattage: it is less than half of the wattage of the bulbs and ballasts that LumenLabs sells (400 Watts). So, what can be found around the 200 Watt range? Actually, plenty. It used to be that LumenLabs sold a 250 Watt kit (bulb, ballast, socket, etc) - but no longer. This kit was much cheaper (about half the price) of the 400 Watt kit. Something I have noticed over the years is that the DIY projector community seems to attract people who have similar mindsets as those who are into case-modding or ricing their cars: BIGGER IS BETTER. In this case, they are right - a 400 Watt MH light will be better than a 200 Watt one: more lumens, brighter image, better able to see it in a lighted room. But, they are more expensive, and you have to work harder to eliminate the heat. So - if bigger is better - why isn't our commercial ViewSonic projector using a 400 Watt bulb?
Well - it is the heat factor, once again. In a small case, like this projector is, it is very difficult to remove the heat, so cut down the heat from the bulb to begin with, and it gets easier (plus, it is cheaper for them to build, which they can pass the savings back to themselves!). But you know something? The display is quite bright, certainly good enough to watch TV with. So - if cost
Something I have wondered about, but haven't seen (although I am not a big gamer on consoles or PC - my most current console is a PS1, and my workstation is a Linux box), is game console case-modding. Since it doesn't seem to be a big thing (if it is done at all), it might be a risky proposition - but the basic idea would be:
Stock console modding accessories (NOT MOD CHIPS - to risky legally) and related gear
Offer a service (for those who either don't have the skills or are too scared to do it themselves) where a "pro-modder" customizes their case (lights, cooling fans, paint) to thier specification, or from a catalog of designs.
Run classes on the weekends where the pro can show how it is done, and give tips and advice ("how to solder", "LED basics", "simple airbrushing", etc)
You could probably find a gamer who does this to their PCs, or knows somebody who does. Maybe you could pay to have two cases "tricked out" - perhaps a PS2 or XBOX, and a PC as well. Set up an area and invite comments on whether customers would like such a system made for them. On the PC side, you might even go the route of doing this to the 9's, by building from a list of parts custom gaming rigs, from the bottom up to the paint job. Don't go cheap on it, and do it well - think the difference between auto detailing and run-of-the-mill carwash - have your modder take the time and care to do each machine "just right" - and charge the end user rightly for this.
I think such an angle could easily make you stand out - my only reservation is the fact that I haven't seen such a service anywhere before (and nobody seems to do case modding of consoles - or at least I haven't seen any).
A couple of other things: if your case-modder is good enough, maybe he could "custom integrate" the PC and "console of user's choice" into the same case (?). This is a difficult thing to do most of the time, but not impossible (I have seen a PS1 "integrated" into a PC case before). Another "case mod"-type service would be to offer custom silk-screen painted game discs - the customer can bring in their own discs (non-pirated - have them sign a statement to this effect), or perhaps purchase new ones - but they would have to sign something that they realize they can't bring the disc back for refund (unless it is due to the paintjob, but the discs should be tested prior to sale).
Hope these ideas help, and as always, it would be wise to run them by a lawyer to make sure they can be done legally (and implemented right so you don't end up with possible legal loopholes that can allow someone to sue you or otherwise - all of the ideas I have listed sound perfectly legal to me, but in today's time it seems you can be thrown in prison for sneezing wrong)...
I have had an idea for a little while that I would love to see implemented. It shouldn't be too hard to build, either - in fact, I would bet it could be retrofitted into existing cruise controls. A standard cruise control comes close, but not quite.
Basically, I want a way where I can set the "maximum speed" of the vehicle I am driving. Most of the time as I drive normally, I try to keep at the speed limit. However, over time, I am likely to find myself going over the limit by 5-15 mph, unless I am watching it constantly. Those split seconds when my eyes aren't on the road could be a problem I just as soon avoid. It is kinda like I don't speed intentionally, it just "creeps up" on me if I don't constantly watch it. Especially on the freeway when driving long distances, but even on surface streets, too. I can't be the only driver this happens to.
So, why not a device that lets you set the speed when you get to it (like a cruise control), but then "locks" to that speed, so you can't go past it. Slow down, stop (like in normal surface street traffic) - and even if you start back up again, it won't allow you to go past it, unless you do one of three things: 1) turn it off, 2) very quick accelleration, 3) very quick decelleration.
I don't expect this will ever be made - it is such a niche product, and the police dept would probably oppose it because I bet they catch a lot of speeders that are speeding, but don't realize it - until of course, they see the flashing lights and hear the siren behind them - DOH!
No - not Commodore Business Machines (though I wonder what a beowulf cluster of Amiga 4000's could do).
A long time ago (or so it feels), a company existed which seemed - both at the time and even now - to be one of those "fly-by-night" dot com scams that was flying around near the time of the bubble. It seemed like a pump-and-dump scheme, a scam to get peoples money and run with it. At the same time, it seemed to hold out promise for the possibility of AI, and if not that, than at the very least the possibility of a radically new type of computer architecture, on par with that of Hillis' Connection Machine.
The company was (is?) called Genobyte, and the system they (supposedly?) developed was the CAM-Brain system. Relying on a certain model Xilinx FPGA (the Xilinx XC6264BG560 - one which, as I have seen noted, either on the website or in other papers on the net - is likely no longer available, and that they bought up the last of them for their efforts), the system essentially combines the ability to "program" an FPGA by using cellular-automata software to "evolve" neural networks, the final emergent design which is then loaded into the CBM, hopefully to solve useful problems. Essentially, what was developed was a hardware-based neural network processing system, the design of which was evolved using a cellular automata system, to solve problems.
But, as I have noted, what they made seemed (seems?) akin to "vaporware". Sure, they have pictures of the machine (and I must admit I find the computer to be one of the best looking designs for a computer since the Cray 2), and the ideas and theory seem sound. Supposedly, they installed at least two machines: one in November 1999 at Kansai Science City, Kyoto, Japan (ATR Human Information Processing Research Laboratories), and one in December 1999 at Ieper, Belgium (Flanders Language Valley). If this is all true, then these machines must actually exist somewhere, right?
What is the truth on this company, and the people behind it? Did they actually create what seems, at least on the surface, to possibly be a real advance in computational hardware? Or, is it likely to be another scam? Their website hasn't been updated in years, but somebody is paying the bills to their registrar and/or hosting provider (or whatever they are using - the electricity is still flowing to host their site). So - anybody have any idea what this company is, or is not? What about the people behind it?
Porn may be impossible to define but it's fairly obvious what upsets the Christian Right. Ideally all women's clothing should come up to the chin and down past the ankle the way God intended.
Porn isn't impossible to define. Porn is simply whatever the viewer sees it to be. Porn can only be defined on a subjective basis, not an objective one.
Each person has a different idea of what porn is:
For some, porn is hardcore beastiality horse banging. For others, porn is erotic sex involving one or more participants. For others, porn is a male or a female tied up, being whipped. For others, porn is a hot chick in a skin-tight bikini, with a camel. For others, porn is a female crushing wine glasses in high heels. For others, porn is an automobile crash. For still others, porn is seeing some guy getting his nuts kicked squarely by a beautiful female. Not a single one of these examples is "made up".
I guarantee you, that there is probably more than one person out there where porn is women's clothing up to the chin and down past the ankle. Hell, I wouldn't be suprised if there wasn't "burka-porn" out there. Perhaps these extremist Christian conservatives are simply waaay kinkier than we think?
I just wanted to chime in with another "this has been done before", to mention another way it was done, which spawned the image of what some consider to be the iconographic input interface for virtual reality, the dataglove.
The VPL DataGlove grew out of a glove interface created by Tom Zimmerman in the 1980's, hooked up to an Atari computer to allow him to "play" air-guitar. A few years later he and Jaron Lanier got together to advance the device to become what is known as the VPL DataGlove. A quick search of google will yield many links, here is a representative one.
The DataGlove (and similar input devices) helped to define the concept of what we know as "virtual reality" today, however, due to the patents on the device, we have not seen many glove implementations since then. Data gloves have remained a niche market - most methods of employing them have been explored (and further patented). Of these devices, we have seen simple contact sensor gloves, to the VPL-guided Mattel PowerGlove (for the Nintendo, but hacked to be used on other platforms as well, most notably the PC with Bernie Rohl and Dave Stampe's Rend386 and derivatives), and the Dextrous Handmaster (an articulated exo-skeleton that fitted around the hand and measured bend angles via hall-effect sensors - fairly accurate, but an absolute pain to put on and configure for each user), among others. The last of the consumer-grade gloves seem to be the P5 Virtual Controller. It seems to be based on similar technology as the Mattel PowerGlove. Same as the PowerGlove, it has been a failure in the marketplace (it can be picked up fairly cheap on Ebay and other places).
It is debatable while such input devices fail with the consumer, but I believe that part of reason can be traced to two factors: 3D position tracking and virtual display technology. The first factor can be explained by the fact that there are very few 3D position and orientation tracking technologies out there that combine speed and accuracy with quick setup, that are not encumbered in some way by patents. Magnetic tracking systems are out - even if they could work in a home environment (which is doubtful - they are difficult to get set up properly in a lab environment), both Polhemus and Ascension have such systems locked up tight in patents - if you want a magnetic tracker, you either attempt to build it yourself (I only know of one such attempt which was mostly successful), or you go to them and spend a lot of money (prices have come down, but you are still looking at over $2000.00 for a simple two sensor system). Many other companies have gone the route of inbound or outbound camera systems with IR markers (both passive and active). These can be a pain to set up and properly track, because unlike magnetic trackers, line-of-sight is a must. Thus multiple cameras and multiple IR markers must be used and tracked to maintain state. The P5 (and others) use a scaled down version of this system. The last method used is typically ultrasonic - which was used by the Mattel PowerGlove, as well as a 3D tracking system developed by Logitech. Such a system is also line-of-sight, but it also suffers from multi-path interference and absorption issues that introduce jitter and reduce accuracy.
Regardless of all of this, none of these systems really make sense when used to control the movement of an FPS or other avatar on a small two dimensional screen. All of these technolgies tend to be best used in an immersive environment, or in a CAVE-like setting. Unfortunately, both of these technologies - that of immersive HMDs or CAVE environments with shutter glasses - have been out of reach for most consumers, and they have their own issues which cause consumers to avo
Believe me, I have thought about getting a broadband router, especially since they are now so cheap. All of your points are valid. However, every time I almost decide to do so, I take a look at my box I built and say to myself "Why?". Partly because, as I have noted, I am lazy, but also partly because what I have works - it does the job I have it do, it does it effectively and well. Once again, why fix something that isn't broke? Buying a broadband router would entail spending extra money ($30 - $40 I could use for something else most likely - being a homeowner that could mean a lot of things), likely cause me some network downtime and maybe pulling of some hair (changing out the router should be a simple thing - but I have seen so many supposed simple things turn into nightmares quickly), and in the end, I would end up with the same exact setup, albeit in a smaller form factor, maybe using less power.
That just doesn't make sense to me. It is like going through the trouble and work changing a faucet that doesn't leak "just because the new one is new". Once again, why fix something that isn't broken?
I figure one of these days I will find something that makes me change it out. Likely, I will get tired of having to shut it down every 6 months to a year to clean it. Or, fixing/replacing fans (power supply and CPU). Maybe the floppy drive will die, and that will do it. But until then, I will likely keep my homebuilt box...
The answer to the "can't define porn well" problem is not that there is no porn, it's that too much is considered "porn" by somebody, and attempts to ban it will necessarily overreach. That's what your parent poster is getting at.
You are hitting the nail, not squarely, but very close.
The idea of "I-know-porn-when-I-see-it" is not something that can be applied objectively, only subjectively by each individual person. For instance (and this is just one of hundreds I can think of), there are people out there who find depictions of automobile accident scenes to be highly erotic. For them, an auto accident is pornography. For others, it is simply a bad (or sometimes, horrific) scene that you pass by on the way to work (I don't understand it, but then again they may not understand my desires, either, right?). Think about that the next time you are near an accident and are slowed by a bunch of rubberneckers - how many of them are "creaming their jeans", so to speak?
Since such people exist, it is therefore logically impossible to define what is or what is not pornography. Pornography is what people subjectively view and experience it to be.
I currently have a setup, that while it doesn't meet your needs for low power, and isn't a RAID'ed system, has been fairly reliable, considering its location in my home.
The system is a P2-300 with 256 MB and a 40 gig drive, running Debian Woody. It currently serves the files via SAMBA, and it also has Apache, PHP, MySQL, and PostgreSQL installed (for web app dev work). I have things set up so that cron jobs (and in the case of the one 'doze box, a task manager run DOS batch file) copy various files from the workstations in my house to it periodically late at night. Later in the night, these files and others (the dev files on the server mainly - I intended the server to hold MP3s and other media files, things that I already would have other copies of, so I only cared about my dev work and the home directories on the server) are aggregated and a daily "backup" copy is made. Once a week, the last "backed up" version is copied to an ISO which I can then burn at my leisure (or via another cron job) to a CD-R.
This system has been up and running stable for over 2 years now, in my workshop, here in Phoenix, Arizona. The workshop is not air conditioned (though it is attached to the house and insulated) - so it gets a tad hot in the summer, and nice and "chilly" (for Phoenix, that is) in the winter. Also, my workshop is a workshop - all manner of crap and work happens in there, from woodwork to light welding at times - whatever is needed to be done. So, plenty of dirt and other crap. Even in this relatively harsh environment (for a desktop machine), it has worked wonderfully and serves my needs well.
I would step away from the RAID bandwagon unless you really need it. Look into what your needs are: what really needs to be backed up? You should only back up those things that you need to back up: MP3's that can be re-ripped (or are already on CD/DVD-R archive disks), video files you have from other sources stored elsewhere, and other media files - probably don't need to be backed up. Things you are working on - like development work or media processing work (like images, custom 3D models, video editing, sound editing, your thesis, etc) - things which you are actively working on and don't want to lose - those are the things to back up. You will find many cheap tape-based backup systems out there for this (DLT is one of them) - or in a pinch a DVD-R (or even - like in my case - CD-R) will work (you may need to implement a disk-spanning system if things get too large). Only if you are backing up huge amounts of data do you need to worry about spending a lot of cash for backup (like if you are a professional video editor, for instance), and you may need to think that if that data is that valuable, you should spend the cash.
If you stay away from the RAID, and use an older CPU (like I use a P2-300), your power requirements and heat output will drop off significantly, and putting it in a closet should not be an issue for heat (but realize that if the thing catches fire, your renter's/homeowner's insurance may not cover it because a closet isn't meant to hold running equipment). Set up properly, such a system should be cheap to build and relatively trouble free. Oh, and by the way - don't ever combine the duties of a fileserver with that of a server (router or web server) exposed to the internet. Doing so is just asking to have all of your data exposed to the greater world - either unintentionally or via malice...
I won't pretend to answer for the parent, but I have a similar system to his. My firewall is a Pentium 90 underclocked to 60 MHz with 8 meg (probably overkill), a floppy and no hard drive. Two NICs and a copy of FreeSCO. So far it has served me well. But your question is a common one. So, why do I use it, instead of a commercially available router/firewall thingie?
Well, I initially did it because I had the parts laying around, and those routers at the time (> 5 years ago) cost a tad more than they do now. So, it was a question of free vs. $$$, and free won the day (and $$$ went to groceries for my family). One could argue that the smaller box might have saved me money from electricity usage, but I doubt my box is using that much anyhow - probably less than 20 watts total, but I have no way to verify that currently. I do know that the switching power supply in it is more efficient than the cheapo iron-core saturated AC wall wart that comes with most commercial routers, but all in all they probably both consume the same wattage. I did have longevity and power considerations in mind when I built it though, which is why it was underclocked. I once opened it for cleaning, and noticed the fan had stopped turning, but it was still running fine, so it isn't pushing anything.
I also like the fact that I can easily modify it however I want. I can add more NICs, or alter the distribution to add other extras to it - or swap out the distribution altogether for another floppy-based distro if I want. I am not limited in the number of ports I can use - just slap a larger switch on the inside NIC. If I ever needed 802.11x, a wireless NIC could be set up as an AP.
Really, the only thing I don't like about it is its size. But, it would be in the junkyard if it wasn't being used as a firewall, so I spare it the fate. Also, I am lazy when it comes to changing something that just works and does its job (and does it extremely well, I might add - it has been a very reliable unit all these years). Finally, if I got a different router/firewall, I would need to have my broadband provider (COX) reprovision my cable modem, since the MAC address would be different (of course, if that outbound NIC ever failed, I would have to do this as well). They might want me to explain myself - who knows, they might even want to kick me in the nuts with the AUP (you are running a network instead of a single machine - you must buy extra static IPs to do so or move to a business account - I can see COX doing this - really).
So - I stick with what works and has worked over the past mumble years - why fix what isn't broken?
I am currently reading it - found a used copy at a library book sale (do I get my geek badge of honor now?). I have found it to be very interesting - it is at once both "futuristic" and "contemporary" at the same time. I guess I should say that while at the time it was published, it was meant as science-fiction, the passage of time and norms has made much of it seem like "present-day". Some things were missed, as is to be expected - but on the whole it is a great read. An excellent complement to novels from Sterling or Gibson. I tend to wonder if anyone has actually implemented a software version of the "fencing" game described in the book?
By the way - if you want to really delve into the question of "where did cyberpunk and transhumanism spring from?", a good place to start is with "Future Shock" by Alvin Toffler (from which Brunner notes he gained inspiration for Shockwave Rider) and "Optimism: One" by FM Esfandiary (arguably one of the first, if not the first, books to define the philosophy and ideas behind transhumanism). Some weird (as well as provocative and prescient) shit came out of the backend of the 1960's and the hippie era; these two authors and books are by no means the only examples...
In the past, it was an issue with hard drives - might still be, today. Basically, the motors and such would be spinning merrily along for months to years. Then, the machine would be shut off, never to be rebooted again. What happens is that the bearings, running for years, the grease and such got old or whatever. They get turned off, the grease solidifies (or it is all gone), and so the bearing seizes on the shutdown. When it is powered back up, the motor doesn't have enough power to start the platters rotating again (sometimes they could be "unstuck" by dropping the drives flat from a couple of inches onto a table - at least unstuck so the data could be transferred off to a new drive)...
Today, this isn't likely to be as big of an issue (although who knows with a server) - but I recently experienced a similar issue with my home desktop. I normally keep it running 24/7. Recently, my graphics card fan was going out (cheap sleeve bearing fan - but the fact it is upside down on a card trying to move heat away from the chip which is also upside down - who else here wonders what crack they were smoking when they came up with this design?) - so I decided to replace it. At first, I wasn't sure it was the graphics card fan, so I shut everything down to take the case apart and check. I pulled the system from under my desk, set it up on the desk, removed the cover, took the hard drive cable off (so it wouldn't boot), and pressed the power button. Everything started up - but I noticed now that the power supply fans weren't turning! They were before I shut it off (I checked them first)! The only fan spinning properly was my CPU fan. I ended up replacing/fixing all three fans (both power supply fans and the fan on the GPU). Obviously, they all needed it (plus the inside was dusty so I cleaned that up as well), so it was a good thing overall. Even so, this illustrates the fact of failures occurring because you turn something off after it has been running a long time.
Note that this doesn't just apply to computers, either. It applies to any electronic or mechanical system. Sometimes, it can be better to leave it running - at least until a replacement can be found/installed or you can get the data off of it otherwise. However, I would say on a desktop system, regular power-up/power-down cycles aren't anything to worry about. Only if it has been left on for an extended period (like in the case of my desktop - or if you have a 24/7 fileserver or something) would you want to think about the rammifications of shutting it down...
Thanks for mentioning this - this is something I have thought about for a while, but never got around to investingating it. Googling on "passenger freighter" brought up a ton of links, including a very informative angelfire link. From there I found a link to a freighter cruise agent called "Maris" or something like that.
Such a trip really seems feasibly - even it is a "once in a lifetime" thing to do. Transatlantic roundtrips seemed to average about $3000.00 per person, taking around a month to complete (most of the time spent on the open sea - average about 5 days at various ports). Get used to walking up and down stairs on the ship (no elevators usually!) - but the food accomadations sound good and interesting. There seem to be a lot of options, and prices weren't outlandish (around $100.00 per person per day - I have stayed in hotels which were more expensive, though not on my dime). Of course, it takes longer, but you are guaranteed to have interesting stories to tell when you get back home. Also, since it is a freighter it is possible to bring along (or more likely, send via another ship) your automobile or other transportation (though getting licensed/insured/etc on the other side might be an issue!). Finally, you can't take much in the way of luggage with you (a suitcase or two, max), nor can you take pets - but the rooms on some freighters look pretty nice!
Wow! Thanks again for pointing this out - I had a great time looking up the information I found. I encourage everyone who has ever thought about this to look into it further - it might be the most interesting adventure you could take!
As shown in the documentary, The Corporation, businesses, and by extension any other large bearocratic organization, governments included - tend to be sociopathic. Should it really be that big of a shock that those who make the best leaders of such groups tend to be sociopathic and/or psychopathic as well?
What should be shocking is why those of us who likely aren't sociopathic/psychopathic tend to vote or otherwise promote to positions of power those of us who are? Doesn't this seem irrational? Then again, one can easily demonstrate that complete and total rationality is the same as being sociopathic and/or psychopathic. So - do we promote such people out of rational reasons, because they seem most rational to make descisions, and that rationality is a manifestation of thier altered nature...?
This thing sounds like what has been sold on Ebay in various forms as "hydrogen boosting" or "hydro-boost", of a gas engine in an automobile. In this case, it is being applied to a diesel engine in a truck. But based on what I am hearing, it doesn't sound much different.
People here are saying they have seen similar things sold on the internet (or to be announced) for insane amounts of money. I have seen these devices sold on Ebay - every time there is an "energy crunch", you see the number of auctions skyrocket. Most of these are for plans or sometimes actual devices - some knowledge of your car and engine, and some level of mechanical aptitude is required to install them.
At the same time, all of these things sound like a scam. I have heard all of the arguments, some make sense, some don't. So, instead of arguing about it, why don't we slashdotters construct our own, test it out, then see what is real? First off, start by googling hydro-boost. One of the first few links will take you to this page, which is a complete set of "plans" on how to build this kind of device from parts picked up at Home Depot (or the building supply place of your choice/location) and AutoZone or Checker (or whatever auto parts store is near you).
These devices are simple - they make what is known as Brown's Gas - a HIGHLY EXPLOSIVE MIXTURE of hydrogen and oxygen gases (note that if you build a "hydro-boost" cell for your car, that you want to make sure all of the gas is going into your engine, and not building up in areas under the hood/bonnet - unless you want a "car that goes BOOM!" literally) - used industrially for welding (similar to an oxy-acetylene torch system) - in fact, from that google search link you will find many suppliers of industrial Brown's Gas welding systems.
I don't know if these systems are the equivalent of fuel-line magnets or if they really work. If you are willing, try it yourself. Also note that I am not sure how your local environmental testing spot will treat you if you leave that device hooked up under your hood for a smog/emmissions test. They would probably fail you outright for unlawful engine modifications. However, they probably wouldn't have a problem helping you test such a system if you are willing to pay the fees needed - to see if emmissions go down if nothing else (other measurements they may or may not be willing to help out on). Just don't go through there "on the sly" - they don't look kindly on loose hoses, never mind funky emmisions modifications they don't approve...
I was not meaning to indicate that I think "we are all going to die". We may, or we may not - but ultimately it is up to us to choose whether we want to or not. Right now, it seems like there is a large minority who do want all of us to die, and the majority of us just want to get on with our lives, but are instead being dragged into this whole "we all gotta die" mess. Of that majority, there is a minority who realizes that it all doesn't have to be this way.
Personally, I think the development of nuclear weapons was a test, perhaps created/realized by the collective unconsciousness of mankind. The test was basically "Here is a source of energy of near ultimate magnitude created by science. Through this source, you may turn it toward peace or turn it toward war. Should you choose peaceful uses, the solar system, and possibly the galaxy, is yours. Should you choose war, the death of the species and the world may be imminent". At first, we chose war - but quickly chose peaceful uses, as best as we could, thereafter. We saw the horrifying effects, both immediate and future, that resulted from the use of these ultimately small-yield weapons (the horror and fascination continued as we developed and tested greater yield versions - personally, I think the stopping of tests, while good in one light, might have been a bad thing as well - for by stopping the tests, we put a blindfold over our eyes to the ultimate power we wield with a nuclear device - from what I have read, the awe of a nuclear explosion is something that humbles even the most hardened of men, for they instantly know the terrible power which we as a species now have under our control - and it scares them). The madness of war is still there - the weapons are made, deployed, maintained - but not used. It is an insane backdrop to the peaceful uses of nuclear power, which is used worldwide. Our leaders and elected officials, and ultimately us, are responsible to keep us from taking the leap of irrationality which may ultimately prove our downfall.
Yes, I worked George Bush into the matter - I was singling him out as an example of a leader who has publically stated that he bases at least some of his decisions on irrational thoughts (how can an individual claim to be rational yet believe in invisible, all-powerful beings - mythos, children's stories?). Irrationality is not something I want in a leader in command of a nuclear arsenal. We seem to think that "islamic extremists" (or pick any other irrational religious group) - that is, those who believe fervently in Allah and will do anything to convert others - should not have the ability to obtain nuclear devices. We have deemed such people incapable of being rational enough to use such power responsibly. However, for some reason, it is OK to be irrational and believe in a "Christian God" (perhaps even fervently?) - and be a leader with a nuclear arsenal. This form of hypocrisy is madness.
When will we ever get past this irrational need to believe in invisible beings? We admonish children when they believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, or have imaginary friends, after a certain point in their lives, but we somehow think it is rational if as adults we do the EXACT SAME THING? That form of reasoning is nothing but hypocritical, irrational madness. Why is it that I and tons of other people can see this, but for some reason the majority of humanity cannot?
I have to go day to day, knowing that the majority of people around me are irrational, yet have this maddening ability to not appear so to me, until I start asking certain questions about them. When confronted with their irrationality, most continue in the strangest ways, becoming angry and explosive when I show them their faulty logic. Others seem to have a near "brain collapse", like I have fundamentally broken them mentally in some manner. I am not the only rational person who has encountered these responses. These are people who turn into Brownshirts and Inquisitors at a drop of the hat - the people who have, in the past, ridicu
For example, the Prius does not even have "spark plugs" with a "coil" but instead has a new gizmo in the top of each cylinder that selectively turns the spark off and on under computer control based on power demand while the cylinder continues to move.
I don't know if this is a good or bad thing: either we are looking at integrated coils on the plug, or integrated coils in the plug "wires". On the one hand, this could be "good" as it moves the coil closer to the plug, so there is less chance of vibration and heat affecting the wires and such (as with regular plug wires, which carry high voltage), but on the other hand, now the coils are subjected to much higher heat loads (being that they are closer to the cylinder), so they could wear out quicker.
Futhermore, if they are integrated into the spark plug, you could be looking at $5.00 - 10.00 per plug to replace. If they are a "wire set", then those are things likely to go for at least (and probably much more) $100.00 for the set. Also, it is likely these things are "dealer parts", meaning double the price - you can't get them at AutoZone, at least not yet.
I can see the benefits of doing this, especially in a hybrid vehicle. However, I doubt they save you money, and probably make a lot of money for the dealer (assumming you can replace them yourself - something tells me they make you come to the dealer if you want to replace such a simple part)...
Slashdot Mirror
This is no lie. I prowl around used bookstores quite often, and one of my favorite sections is engineering/technology. I like old and antique, out of print books - and it is amazing to look at old steam engineering books from the late-1800's to early 1900's. These people knew their shit: it was definitely the IT of the day. It is a very mature and very well understood technology.
Another option might be a standard block design, but instead of a crankshaft, have the ends of the rods (which would be fixed to the piston) attached to "return springs", and the coil/magnet pack at that end (and immersed in oil).
In all of these designs, you would want to run the system at its resonant frequency for best efficiency (the spring return design would have a different resonant frequency than the free-piston design, of course)...
I have an older Popular Mechanic's magazine (1950's era) which had the cover story of a hydraulic powered truck, in which a free-piston IC engine (think of something like a tube with a piston stuck in it, with inlet/exhaust valves and sparkplugs at the ends, the piston riding on a rod that poked out each end) drove a dual-sided hydraulic pump, the pressure of which was directed by hoses and pipes to a rotary hydraulic motor which turned the wheels. Kinda neat (could be kinda dangerous, too, in the event of a hydraulic leak in the wrong spot).
The idea of a similar IC engine, with the piston (somehow) being a magnet or energized coil of some sort acting as an electric generator as it passed through other coils (the electricity which could then be used in a hybrid system to power hub-motors or the like to turn the wheels of the vehicle) has always been something I have wanted to build, but I don't have the shop or time to do it. I suppose a steam-engine could also be built this way. The efficiencies you would gain over a regular IC engine could be quite large, because you eliminate a ton of moving parts that are found in a common IC engine. I would also imagine you might be able to adopt a passive exhaust/intake system like in a 2-stroke engine, or something like is found in a pee-wee glow-plug engine used in radio-control - this would eliminate the need for complex intake/exhaust valving (although, I would imagine instead electronic controlled valves with fuel injection would work OK, too).
Such a hybrid engine would be very interesting to see built - I can imagine that it could be scaled-down fairly small to power small loads as well, like a laptop or such. It might also make for small and quiet (quieter than a Honda? Maybe) emergency power generators, too...
I don't remember the make or model of this calculator - it may have been a Texas Instruments, not sure. I do remember that it had the regular layout of keys, and a switch or two to set a decimal position or something like that, and it plugged into the wall - but all in all, a very basic calculator, with the exception of this: it had a memory feature. Plugging it in, nothing on it worked, it just displayed all 9's - on a bunch of glowing nixie tubes.
Now, I didn't know what a nixie tube was at that time, but I knew that the display was old, and that it was a tube display. I was thinking it was similar to a neon display (which of course it is), so I thought that piece was neat and all. But - it didn't work! It was a non-working calculator. But that memory feature bugged me, because I could tell it was old, and there was date on it (from sometime in the very early 1970's - prior to the 4004). I knew it didn't have a bit of RAM in it - so, how did it store things. In my zeal to understand (and my ignorance of youth), I decided I would take it apart, keep what was good and throw the rest away.
That calculator is long gone - I ended up saving nothing of it (cringe), but what I found was very cool, and I only appreciated it later as my knowledge of computer and electronics history grew as I learned more with age. First off - the entire logic of the calculator was done in transistors - not a chip in sight. This was something I was impressed to see when I first saw it, but it didn't really strike me at the time as something I should save. Transistors didn't interest me that much - I could buy them cheaply anywhere. There was also the driver system for the (what I would later learn) were the nixie tubes. I kept the tubes for a little while after that, but they too eventually were thrown out, as well (I couldn't see any use for them at the time). They were all lined up and supported in a fitted metal chassis with rubber shock mounts, and the wires were individually soldered to the drivers and logic system - no sockets there! Then, there was the metal box, with four wires coming out of it.
This piece intrigued me - what was this thing? Could this be the memory? With only four wires, how could that be? The box itself was alluminum, and was sealed airtight - no screws or such to easily open it, just a metal box with four wires. So, I did what any stupid kid would do when confronted with such a device - I took a hammer and screwdriver to it (nowadays, if that was something I wanted to get into, and I didn't care about it like I would now, I would use a vice and a hacksaw, maybe a dremel too, but I didn't have those at the time in my apartment). I punched a hole in the side, expecting to hear a vacuum released, but I heard nothing. Using other tools, I got it ripped open, and what I found inside was curious: Where two of the wires entered was some kind of device hard mounted to the alluminum case, with a (steel?) wire coming from the center, which itself was suspended and coiled inside the box, with the other end connected to a similar device for the other two wires. What was this, and how could it be memory. I ended up throwing it away, along with most of the rest of the calculator - eventually, it all became trash.
Have I told you how much I now kick myself for this? It was only much later that I realized what that alluminum box was, and that maybe that calculator could be fixed, and was probably worth something to a collector. The box was this: a very compact implementation of an old form of electronic computer memory, the serial delay line. Original delay lines on computers that had them in the 1940's used acoustic tr
One would first need a homebrew CNC milling machine, with an X/Y bed of sized around 1 meter per side, and a Z travel for the milling head of around a foot. The milling head can be a simple dremel tool with either a tool extension or a way to tilt the tool or rotate the material to be worked on. It is assummed the doll will be built in sections (the why will be apparent). Enough information on building such a machine is easily available on the internet, parts can be sourced from surplus, structural material can be either "free", surplus, or new, and controlling software is freely available, and in some limited cases, easy to develop (I am sure someone has made simple CNC milling software using QBASIC controlling the parallel port, which is hooked to the servos).
Once you have the CNC milling machine built (not an easy task alone, but sure to be rewarding!), you then need to choose the material to mill. The easiest and cheapest would be plaster of paris. Build half-thickness molds of plaster of paris, then reverse-impression mill them with the model. Alignment accuracy is important, as these molds will form the parts you are building, and the edges of the molds (after milling) must line up accurately. After milling, you will likely notice tool marks left behind, you will need to carefully (using dental picks, files, sandpaper, etc) smooth all of this out.
Once you have all of these molds created, you can now start casting with latex (or, if you have the money, silicone rubber). Plenty of information on the internet about how to do this - just realize that latex in the large amounts needed won't be cheap. Also, realize that at this point, if you do things correctly, you can insert metal/plastic armatures (up to and including robotics!) into the molds prior to filling them with latex. These things would themselves have to be carefully engineered, but that is what your CNC machine is for, right? Come to think of it - you could eMachineShop the molds and the armature parts (at significant cost)...
At this point, it is just pouring, assembly (got to learn how to apply hair, latex paint, where to get fake eyeballs, etc - but all of this too is available on the internet), etc. After all, you got time, right? You are somebody with not much of a life building his (or her) own RealDoll, right? Actually - you want to know what might make you some money? Troll the internet looking for all the information, from the ground up, to custom build such a doll. From building the CNC machine to how to make the casts, to pouring latex, etc - include sources, sample 3D model files, etc. Dump it all on a few CD-Rs or a DVD-R - then sell it in the adult section of Ebay.
Remember - this will be the best prom evar...
Actually, we are closer to this than you may think. I have (at home, unfortunately, so I can't provide a cite or reference right now) an issue of Life magazine from not too many years ago (meaning, I don't know how research has progressed since then) which had a photo of a baby goat (IIRC) in an artificial "womb" which was developed by a researcher in Japan.
Without having the magazine in front of me, I can't give much more information. The best I can do (with the power of google) is this link, which states:
In 2002, a team at Cornell University used cells from a human uterus to grow an artificial womb. When a fertilized human egg was introduced, it implanted itself in the uterus wall as in a natural pregnancy. After six days of gestation, the experiment was halted due solely to legal constraints.
Meanwhile, half-a-world away, Dr. Yoshinori Kuwabara of Juntendo University in Japan has been removing fetuses from goats and keeping them alive for weeks in clear plastic tanks of amniotic fluid with machine-driven 'umbilical cords'.
I included the first part just to let you know how far we have come, and the second part is likely the researcher I am thinking of in Japan, and from which the image in Life magazine came from, most likely (the description above is accurate for the picture that was shown - I remember the image looking like a largish clear-acrylic tank, like a fish tank, filled with a thick fluid in which the unborn goat was immersed with a number of tubes sticking out of it).
Now - notice the name of the HTML page in that link I supplied. If you do some googling on "artificial wombs", you are going to stumble across an interesting topic, something that it seems has a lot of people up in arms (or at least wondering about it all), but hasn't yet hit the public as to the implications. As with anything of this nature, it has to do with the abortion debate. I am not wanting to start a flamewar, but the idea of a working artificial womb (for humans) brings up a number of interesting possibilities...
First off, if you have such a device, the life and health of prematurely born babies could possibly be made a lot better with such a device, vs the mechanical incubators and other methods we currently have. What possibilities an artificial womb could open up for such uses are anybody's guess.
But think about this: if an artificial womb can keep a baby which was "born" premature alive, what implications does this have on the abortion debate/issue? If instead of aborting a fetus and terminating its life, it could be put into an artificial womb, instead...
Or, if instead of procreating the "normal" way, one used "harvested" eggs and sperm to create an in-vitro embryo (or blastocyst) and "implanted" that into the artificial womb to be brought to term in that manner...
What implications does this have on society? What about the state (what if the state/society allowed "abortions" in which the fetus was transferred to these devices to come to term - would the state become the "parent", if the mother or parents didn't want it)?
The questions are numerous, and these are only the tip of the iceberg. Unfortunately, just like every other "big question" that we should ALL be paying attention to RIGHT NOW, working together to solve the moral, legal, and ethical dillemas, we are instead ignoring it. Right now, the debate seems to be going on in "fringe groups", most likely with religious connotations. This may "explode" on us in the very near future. It would be nice if we were all prepared ahead, but unfortunately history has shown we never want to think that far in the future, especially on subjects such as this...
BULLSHIT! PURE UNADULTERATED BULLSHIT!
The fact is - the reason people want pornography, is because it is "taboo". People would not want pornography of any sort if it wasn't seen as taboo and naughty. We have no problem with people of any race, sex, or sexual orientation (ok, apparently some dumb fuckers have problems with that last one, but they are idiots) wandering around and - "GASP!" - letting our children see them - "URP!" - ...
!!!! CLOTHED !!!!
Horrors! Why is this though? Why do we not find clothed individuals "pornographic"? Furthermore - if nudity and other similar depictions were seen as "non-taboo" and perfectly acceptable by society - would clothed displays be seen as the new "pornography"? In other words, in bizzaro world, are clothed people taboo?
We are so stupid, and the cycle repeats, because we are too stupid to see the answer to our problems is clear. Those damn trees getting in the way of my forest.
You want to stop pornography? You want it to go away? Then quit making it a taboo subject! Quit making nudity and sex, and everything that revolves around those topics or are based on those topics, something that is only talked about in whispers or side glances. Quit making it taboo - and it will cease to be an issue!
This will never happen, though - IT IS TOO FUCKING LOGICAL AND REASONED TO OCCUR.
First off, the bulbs used in LumenLabs (and other DIY) projectors are not expensive - not when compared to similar (though smaller) bulbs used in commercial projectors. The expense for the DIY projector bulbs is in the ballast, not the bulb itself. If you are looking at a 400 Watt Metal Halide (MH) bulb, you are going to need the proper 400 Watt ballast to power it - these aren't cheap, at around $200.00 (US). The bulbs themselves, while much larger (physically) than regular projector bulbs, are fairly cheap, at $30.00 - $60.00 (US), depending on bulb size and base type - many can be easily bought at Home Depot or Lowes (although, strangely, these same places do not sell the fixtures/ballasts these bulbs are used in). They also tend to have a fairly long life - 10,000+ hours of use are not uncommon. Contrast this with the smaller bulbs used in commercial projectors: 3-4000+ hours of life (not bad), at around $300.00-$400.00 per bulb assembly (ouch!). Of course, they are a lot smaller...
Something else to remember is that at one time, video projectors used halogen bulbs instead of MH (MH bulbs are used more now because they use less current, generate less heat, and have a whiter light). The benefit of using such bulbs in a homebrew project is the lower cost (a 400 watt halogen work lamp from Home Depot or Harbor Freight costs less than $20.00 (US)). The downsides are the fact that you have to work really hard to keep the heat away from the LCD panel you are using (cooling such a beast, while possible, can be tricky - be careful), and the color temperature of the bulb is more into the yellow than white. Also, it is possible to find cheap halogen lamp and bulb assemblies on the surplus market for overhead projectors - these bulbs tend to be the smaller two-prong base with integrated faceted or smooth parabolic reflectors. The problem is powering them properly, as most seem to want a weird voltage (like 80 Volts). I have such a bulb assembly, and I plan to try using an off-the-shelf lamp dimmer switch to power it. I plan to do this in my shop, with suitable eye and face protection (these bulbs are tricky - you can't just plug them into the wall, they can explode, etc). I don't know if it will work or not.
Something else I have recently thought about is that here at my work, we have a commercial video projector (some relatively late model ViewSonic). It uses a 160-175 Watt MH bulb. This bulb costs about $350.00 (US) to replace. But what is interesting is the wattage: it is less than half of the wattage of the bulbs and ballasts that LumenLabs sells (400 Watts). So, what can be found around the 200 Watt range? Actually, plenty. It used to be that LumenLabs sold a 250 Watt kit (bulb, ballast, socket, etc) - but no longer. This kit was much cheaper (about half the price) of the 400 Watt kit. Something I have noticed over the years is that the DIY projector community seems to attract people who have similar mindsets as those who are into case-modding or ricing their cars: BIGGER IS BETTER. In this case, they are right - a 400 Watt MH light will be better than a 200 Watt one: more lumens, brighter image, better able to see it in a lighted room. But, they are more expensive, and you have to work harder to eliminate the heat. So - if bigger is better - why isn't our commercial ViewSonic projector using a 400 Watt bulb?
Well - it is the heat factor, once again. In a small case, like this projector is, it is very difficult to remove the heat, so cut down the heat from the bulb to begin with, and it gets easier (plus, it is cheaper for them to build, which they can pass the savings back to themselves!). But you know something? The display is quite bright, certainly good enough to watch TV with. So - if cost
Well, it is a step - now all I have to do is become rich enough to afford a BMW...
You could probably find a gamer who does this to their PCs, or knows somebody who does. Maybe you could pay to have two cases "tricked out" - perhaps a PS2 or XBOX, and a PC as well. Set up an area and invite comments on whether customers would like such a system made for them. On the PC side, you might even go the route of doing this to the 9's, by building from a list of parts custom gaming rigs, from the bottom up to the paint job. Don't go cheap on it, and do it well - think the difference between auto detailing and run-of-the-mill carwash - have your modder take the time and care to do each machine "just right" - and charge the end user rightly for this.
I think such an angle could easily make you stand out - my only reservation is the fact that I haven't seen such a service anywhere before (and nobody seems to do case modding of consoles - or at least I haven't seen any).
A couple of other things: if your case-modder is good enough, maybe he could "custom integrate" the PC and "console of user's choice" into the same case (?). This is a difficult thing to do most of the time, but not impossible (I have seen a PS1 "integrated" into a PC case before). Another "case mod"-type service would be to offer custom silk-screen painted game discs - the customer can bring in their own discs (non-pirated - have them sign a statement to this effect), or perhaps purchase new ones - but they would have to sign something that they realize they can't bring the disc back for refund (unless it is due to the paintjob, but the discs should be tested prior to sale).
Hope these ideas help, and as always, it would be wise to run them by a lawyer to make sure they can be done legally (and implemented right so you don't end up with possible legal loopholes that can allow someone to sue you or otherwise - all of the ideas I have listed sound perfectly legal to me, but in today's time it seems you can be thrown in prison for sneezing wrong)...
Good luck!
Basically, I want a way where I can set the "maximum speed" of the vehicle I am driving. Most of the time as I drive normally, I try to keep at the speed limit. However, over time, I am likely to find myself going over the limit by 5-15 mph, unless I am watching it constantly. Those split seconds when my eyes aren't on the road could be a problem I just as soon avoid. It is kinda like I don't speed intentionally, it just "creeps up" on me if I don't constantly watch it. Especially on the freeway when driving long distances, but even on surface streets, too. I can't be the only driver this happens to.
So, why not a device that lets you set the speed when you get to it (like a cruise control), but then "locks" to that speed, so you can't go past it. Slow down, stop (like in normal surface street traffic) - and even if you start back up again, it won't allow you to go past it, unless you do one of three things: 1) turn it off, 2) very quick accelleration, 3) very quick decelleration.
I don't expect this will ever be made - it is such a niche product, and the police dept would probably oppose it because I bet they catch a lot of speeders that are speeding, but don't realize it - until of course, they see the flashing lights and hear the siren behind them - DOH!
A long time ago (or so it feels), a company existed which seemed - both at the time and even now - to be one of those "fly-by-night" dot com scams that was flying around near the time of the bubble. It seemed like a pump-and-dump scheme, a scam to get peoples money and run with it. At the same time, it seemed to hold out promise for the possibility of AI, and if not that, than at the very least the possibility of a radically new type of computer architecture, on par with that of Hillis' Connection Machine.
The company was (is?) called Genobyte, and the system they (supposedly?) developed was the CAM-Brain system. Relying on a certain model Xilinx FPGA (the Xilinx XC6264BG560 - one which, as I have seen noted, either on the website or in other papers on the net - is likely no longer available, and that they bought up the last of them for their efforts), the system essentially combines the ability to "program" an FPGA by using cellular-automata software to "evolve" neural networks, the final emergent design which is then loaded into the CBM, hopefully to solve useful problems. Essentially, what was developed was a hardware-based neural network processing system, the design of which was evolved using a cellular automata system, to solve problems.
But, as I have noted, what they made seemed (seems?) akin to "vaporware". Sure, they have pictures of the machine (and I must admit I find the computer to be one of the best looking designs for a computer since the Cray 2), and the ideas and theory seem sound. Supposedly, they installed at least two machines: one in November 1999 at Kansai Science City, Kyoto, Japan (ATR Human Information Processing Research Laboratories), and one in December 1999 at Ieper, Belgium (Flanders Language Valley). If this is all true, then these machines must actually exist somewhere, right?
What is the truth on this company, and the people behind it? Did they actually create what seems, at least on the surface, to possibly be a real advance in computational hardware? Or, is it likely to be another scam? Their website hasn't been updated in years, but somebody is paying the bills to their registrar and/or hosting provider (or whatever they are using - the electricity is still flowing to host their site). So - anybody have any idea what this company is, or is not? What about the people behind it?
Is it a scam, or a "revolutionary" real product?
Porn isn't impossible to define. Porn is simply whatever the viewer sees it to be. Porn can only be defined on a subjective basis, not an objective one.
Each person has a different idea of what porn is:
For some, porn is hardcore beastiality horse banging. For others, porn is erotic sex involving one or more participants. For others, porn is a male or a female tied up, being whipped. For others, porn is a hot chick in a skin-tight bikini, with a camel. For others, porn is a female crushing wine glasses in high heels. For others, porn is an automobile crash. For still others, porn is seeing some guy getting his nuts kicked squarely by a beautiful female. Not a single one of these examples is "made up".
I guarantee you, that there is probably more than one person out there where porn is women's clothing up to the chin and down past the ankle. Hell, I wouldn't be suprised if there wasn't "burka-porn" out there. Perhaps these extremist Christian conservatives are simply waaay kinkier than we think?
The VPL DataGlove grew out of a glove interface created by Tom Zimmerman in the 1980's, hooked up to an Atari computer to allow him to "play" air-guitar. A few years later he and Jaron Lanier got together to advance the device to become what is known as the VPL DataGlove. A quick search of google will yield many links, here is a representative one.
The DataGlove (and similar input devices) helped to define the concept of what we know as "virtual reality" today, however, due to the patents on the device, we have not seen many glove implementations since then. Data gloves have remained a niche market - most methods of employing them have been explored (and further patented). Of these devices, we have seen simple contact sensor gloves, to the VPL-guided Mattel PowerGlove (for the Nintendo, but hacked to be used on other platforms as well, most notably the PC with Bernie Rohl and Dave Stampe's Rend386 and derivatives), and the Dextrous Handmaster (an articulated exo-skeleton that fitted around the hand and measured bend angles via hall-effect sensors - fairly accurate, but an absolute pain to put on and configure for each user), among others. The last of the consumer-grade gloves seem to be the P5 Virtual Controller. It seems to be based on similar technology as the Mattel PowerGlove. Same as the PowerGlove, it has been a failure in the marketplace (it can be picked up fairly cheap on Ebay and other places).
It is debatable while such input devices fail with the consumer, but I believe that part of reason can be traced to two factors: 3D position tracking and virtual display technology. The first factor can be explained by the fact that there are very few 3D position and orientation tracking technologies out there that combine speed and accuracy with quick setup, that are not encumbered in some way by patents. Magnetic tracking systems are out - even if they could work in a home environment (which is doubtful - they are difficult to get set up properly in a lab environment), both Polhemus and Ascension have such systems locked up tight in patents - if you want a magnetic tracker, you either attempt to build it yourself (I only know of one such attempt which was mostly successful), or you go to them and spend a lot of money (prices have come down, but you are still looking at over $2000.00 for a simple two sensor system). Many other companies have gone the route of inbound or outbound camera systems with IR markers (both passive and active). These can be a pain to set up and properly track, because unlike magnetic trackers, line-of-sight is a must. Thus multiple cameras and multiple IR markers must be used and tracked to maintain state. The P5 (and others) use a scaled down version of this system. The last method used is typically ultrasonic - which was used by the Mattel PowerGlove, as well as a 3D tracking system developed by Logitech. Such a system is also line-of-sight, but it also suffers from multi-path interference and absorption issues that introduce jitter and reduce accuracy.
Regardless of all of this, none of these systems really make sense when used to control the movement of an FPS or other avatar on a small two dimensional screen. All of these technolgies tend to be best used in an immersive environment, or in a CAVE-like setting. Unfortunately, both of these technologies - that of immersive HMDs or CAVE environments with shutter glasses - have been out of reach for most consumers, and they have their own issues which cause consumers to avo
That just doesn't make sense to me. It is like going through the trouble and work changing a faucet that doesn't leak "just because the new one is new". Once again, why fix something that isn't broken?
I figure one of these days I will find something that makes me change it out. Likely, I will get tired of having to shut it down every 6 months to a year to clean it. Or, fixing/replacing fans (power supply and CPU). Maybe the floppy drive will die, and that will do it. But until then, I will likely keep my homebuilt box...
You are hitting the nail, not squarely, but very close.
The idea of "I-know-porn-when-I-see-it" is not something that can be applied objectively, only subjectively by each individual person. For instance (and this is just one of hundreds I can think of), there are people out there who find depictions of automobile accident scenes to be highly erotic. For them, an auto accident is pornography. For others, it is simply a bad (or sometimes, horrific) scene that you pass by on the way to work (I don't understand it, but then again they may not understand my desires, either, right?). Think about that the next time you are near an accident and are slowed by a bunch of rubberneckers - how many of them are "creaming their jeans", so to speak?
Since such people exist, it is therefore logically impossible to define what is or what is not pornography. Pornography is what people subjectively view and experience it to be.
The system is a P2-300 with 256 MB and a 40 gig drive, running Debian Woody. It currently serves the files via SAMBA, and it also has Apache, PHP, MySQL, and PostgreSQL installed (for web app dev work). I have things set up so that cron jobs (and in the case of the one 'doze box, a task manager run DOS batch file) copy various files from the workstations in my house to it periodically late at night. Later in the night, these files and others (the dev files on the server mainly - I intended the server to hold MP3s and other media files, things that I already would have other copies of, so I only cared about my dev work and the home directories on the server) are aggregated and a daily "backup" copy is made. Once a week, the last "backed up" version is copied to an ISO which I can then burn at my leisure (or via another cron job) to a CD-R.
This system has been up and running stable for over 2 years now, in my workshop, here in Phoenix, Arizona. The workshop is not air conditioned (though it is attached to the house and insulated) - so it gets a tad hot in the summer, and nice and "chilly" (for Phoenix, that is) in the winter. Also, my workshop is a workshop - all manner of crap and work happens in there, from woodwork to light welding at times - whatever is needed to be done. So, plenty of dirt and other crap. Even in this relatively harsh environment (for a desktop machine), it has worked wonderfully and serves my needs well.
I would step away from the RAID bandwagon unless you really need it. Look into what your needs are: what really needs to be backed up? You should only back up those things that you need to back up: MP3's that can be re-ripped (or are already on CD/DVD-R archive disks), video files you have from other sources stored elsewhere, and other media files - probably don't need to be backed up. Things you are working on - like development work or media processing work (like images, custom 3D models, video editing, sound editing, your thesis, etc) - things which you are actively working on and don't want to lose - those are the things to back up. You will find many cheap tape-based backup systems out there for this (DLT is one of them) - or in a pinch a DVD-R (or even - like in my case - CD-R) will work (you may need to implement a disk-spanning system if things get too large). Only if you are backing up huge amounts of data do you need to worry about spending a lot of cash for backup (like if you are a professional video editor, for instance), and you may need to think that if that data is that valuable, you should spend the cash.
If you stay away from the RAID, and use an older CPU (like I use a P2-300), your power requirements and heat output will drop off significantly, and putting it in a closet should not be an issue for heat (but realize that if the thing catches fire, your renter's/homeowner's insurance may not cover it because a closet isn't meant to hold running equipment). Set up properly, such a system should be cheap to build and relatively trouble free. Oh, and by the way - don't ever combine the duties of a fileserver with that of a server (router or web server) exposed to the internet. Doing so is just asking to have all of your data exposed to the greater world - either unintentionally or via malice...
Well, I initially did it because I had the parts laying around, and those routers at the time (> 5 years ago) cost a tad more than they do now. So, it was a question of free vs. $$$, and free won the day (and $$$ went to groceries for my family). One could argue that the smaller box might have saved me money from electricity usage, but I doubt my box is using that much anyhow - probably less than 20 watts total, but I have no way to verify that currently. I do know that the switching power supply in it is more efficient than the cheapo iron-core saturated AC wall wart that comes with most commercial routers, but all in all they probably both consume the same wattage. I did have longevity and power considerations in mind when I built it though, which is why it was underclocked. I once opened it for cleaning, and noticed the fan had stopped turning, but it was still running fine, so it isn't pushing anything.
I also like the fact that I can easily modify it however I want. I can add more NICs, or alter the distribution to add other extras to it - or swap out the distribution altogether for another floppy-based distro if I want. I am not limited in the number of ports I can use - just slap a larger switch on the inside NIC. If I ever needed 802.11x, a wireless NIC could be set up as an AP.
Really, the only thing I don't like about it is its size. But, it would be in the junkyard if it wasn't being used as a firewall, so I spare it the fate. Also, I am lazy when it comes to changing something that just works and does its job (and does it extremely well, I might add - it has been a very reliable unit all these years). Finally, if I got a different router/firewall, I would need to have my broadband provider (COX) reprovision my cable modem, since the MAC address would be different (of course, if that outbound NIC ever failed, I would have to do this as well). They might want me to explain myself - who knows, they might even want to kick me in the nuts with the AUP (you are running a network instead of a single machine - you must buy extra static IPs to do so or move to a business account - I can see COX doing this - really).
So - I stick with what works and has worked over the past mumble years - why fix what isn't broken?
By the way - if you want to really delve into the question of "where did cyberpunk and transhumanism spring from?", a good place to start is with "Future Shock" by Alvin Toffler (from which Brunner notes he gained inspiration for Shockwave Rider) and "Optimism: One" by FM Esfandiary (arguably one of the first, if not the first, books to define the philosophy and ideas behind transhumanism). Some weird (as well as provocative and prescient) shit came out of the backend of the 1960's and the hippie era; these two authors and books are by no means the only examples...
Today, this isn't likely to be as big of an issue (although who knows with a server) - but I recently experienced a similar issue with my home desktop. I normally keep it running 24/7. Recently, my graphics card fan was going out (cheap sleeve bearing fan - but the fact it is upside down on a card trying to move heat away from the chip which is also upside down - who else here wonders what crack they were smoking when they came up with this design?) - so I decided to replace it. At first, I wasn't sure it was the graphics card fan, so I shut everything down to take the case apart and check. I pulled the system from under my desk, set it up on the desk, removed the cover, took the hard drive cable off (so it wouldn't boot), and pressed the power button. Everything started up - but I noticed now that the power supply fans weren't turning! They were before I shut it off (I checked them first)! The only fan spinning properly was my CPU fan. I ended up replacing/fixing all three fans (both power supply fans and the fan on the GPU). Obviously, they all needed it (plus the inside was dusty so I cleaned that up as well), so it was a good thing overall. Even so, this illustrates the fact of failures occurring because you turn something off after it has been running a long time.
Note that this doesn't just apply to computers, either. It applies to any electronic or mechanical system. Sometimes, it can be better to leave it running - at least until a replacement can be found/installed or you can get the data off of it otherwise. However, I would say on a desktop system, regular power-up/power-down cycles aren't anything to worry about. Only if it has been left on for an extended period (like in the case of my desktop - or if you have a 24/7 fileserver or something) would you want to think about the rammifications of shutting it down...
Such a trip really seems feasibly - even it is a "once in a lifetime" thing to do. Transatlantic roundtrips seemed to average about $3000.00 per person, taking around a month to complete (most of the time spent on the open sea - average about 5 days at various ports). Get used to walking up and down stairs on the ship (no elevators usually!) - but the food accomadations sound good and interesting. There seem to be a lot of options, and prices weren't outlandish (around $100.00 per person per day - I have stayed in hotels which were more expensive, though not on my dime). Of course, it takes longer, but you are guaranteed to have interesting stories to tell when you get back home. Also, since it is a freighter it is possible to bring along (or more likely, send via another ship) your automobile or other transportation (though getting licensed/insured/etc on the other side might be an issue!). Finally, you can't take much in the way of luggage with you (a suitcase or two, max), nor can you take pets - but the rooms on some freighters look pretty nice!
Wow! Thanks again for pointing this out - I had a great time looking up the information I found. I encourage everyone who has ever thought about this to look into it further - it might be the most interesting adventure you could take!
Not so much as sad, as is to be expected.
As shown in the documentary, The Corporation, businesses, and by extension any other large bearocratic organization, governments included - tend to be sociopathic. Should it really be that big of a shock that those who make the best leaders of such groups tend to be sociopathic and/or psychopathic as well?
What should be shocking is why those of us who likely aren't sociopathic/psychopathic tend to vote or otherwise promote to positions of power those of us who are? Doesn't this seem irrational? Then again, one can easily demonstrate that complete and total rationality is the same as being sociopathic and/or psychopathic. So - do we promote such people out of rational reasons, because they seem most rational to make descisions, and that rationality is a manifestation of thier altered nature...?
...shudder...
People here are saying they have seen similar things sold on the internet (or to be announced) for insane amounts of money. I have seen these devices sold on Ebay - every time there is an "energy crunch", you see the number of auctions skyrocket. Most of these are for plans or sometimes actual devices - some knowledge of your car and engine, and some level of mechanical aptitude is required to install them.
At the same time, all of these things sound like a scam. I have heard all of the arguments, some make sense, some don't. So, instead of arguing about it, why don't we slashdotters construct our own, test it out, then see what is real? First off, start by googling hydro-boost. One of the first few links will take you to this page, which is a complete set of "plans" on how to build this kind of device from parts picked up at Home Depot (or the building supply place of your choice/location) and AutoZone or Checker (or whatever auto parts store is near you).
These devices are simple - they make what is known as Brown's Gas - a HIGHLY EXPLOSIVE MIXTURE of hydrogen and oxygen gases (note that if you build a "hydro-boost" cell for your car, that you want to make sure all of the gas is going into your engine, and not building up in areas under the hood/bonnet - unless you want a "car that goes BOOM!" literally) - used industrially for welding (similar to an oxy-acetylene torch system) - in fact, from that google search link you will find many suppliers of industrial Brown's Gas welding systems.
I don't know if these systems are the equivalent of fuel-line magnets or if they really work. If you are willing, try it yourself. Also note that I am not sure how your local environmental testing spot will treat you if you leave that device hooked up under your hood for a smog/emmissions test. They would probably fail you outright for unlawful engine modifications. However, they probably wouldn't have a problem helping you test such a system if you are willing to pay the fees needed - to see if emmissions go down if nothing else (other measurements they may or may not be willing to help out on). Just don't go through there "on the sly" - they don't look kindly on loose hoses, never mind funky emmisions modifications they don't approve...
I was not meaning to indicate that I think "we are all going to die". We may, or we may not - but ultimately it is up to us to choose whether we want to or not. Right now, it seems like there is a large minority who do want all of us to die, and the majority of us just want to get on with our lives, but are instead being dragged into this whole "we all gotta die" mess. Of that majority, there is a minority who realizes that it all doesn't have to be this way.
Personally, I think the development of nuclear weapons was a test, perhaps created/realized by the collective unconsciousness of mankind. The test was basically "Here is a source of energy of near ultimate magnitude created by science. Through this source, you may turn it toward peace or turn it toward war. Should you choose peaceful uses, the solar system, and possibly the galaxy, is yours. Should you choose war, the death of the species and the world may be imminent". At first, we chose war - but quickly chose peaceful uses, as best as we could, thereafter. We saw the horrifying effects, both immediate and future, that resulted from the use of these ultimately small-yield weapons (the horror and fascination continued as we developed and tested greater yield versions - personally, I think the stopping of tests, while good in one light, might have been a bad thing as well - for by stopping the tests, we put a blindfold over our eyes to the ultimate power we wield with a nuclear device - from what I have read, the awe of a nuclear explosion is something that humbles even the most hardened of men, for they instantly know the terrible power which we as a species now have under our control - and it scares them). The madness of war is still there - the weapons are made, deployed, maintained - but not used. It is an insane backdrop to the peaceful uses of nuclear power, which is used worldwide. Our leaders and elected officials, and ultimately us, are responsible to keep us from taking the leap of irrationality which may ultimately prove our downfall.
Yes, I worked George Bush into the matter - I was singling him out as an example of a leader who has publically stated that he bases at least some of his decisions on irrational thoughts (how can an individual claim to be rational yet believe in invisible, all-powerful beings - mythos, children's stories?). Irrationality is not something I want in a leader in command of a nuclear arsenal. We seem to think that "islamic extremists" (or pick any other irrational religious group) - that is, those who believe fervently in Allah and will do anything to convert others - should not have the ability to obtain nuclear devices. We have deemed such people incapable of being rational enough to use such power responsibly. However, for some reason, it is OK to be irrational and believe in a "Christian God" (perhaps even fervently?) - and be a leader with a nuclear arsenal. This form of hypocrisy is madness.
When will we ever get past this irrational need to believe in invisible beings? We admonish children when they believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, or have imaginary friends, after a certain point in their lives, but we somehow think it is rational if as adults we do the EXACT SAME THING? That form of reasoning is nothing but hypocritical, irrational madness. Why is it that I and tons of other people can see this, but for some reason the majority of humanity cannot?
I have to go day to day, knowing that the majority of people around me are irrational, yet have this maddening ability to not appear so to me, until I start asking certain questions about them. When confronted with their irrationality, most continue in the strangest ways, becoming angry and explosive when I show them their faulty logic. Others seem to have a near "brain collapse", like I have fundamentally broken them mentally in some manner. I am not the only rational person who has encountered these responses. These are people who turn into Brownshirts and Inquisitors at a drop of the hat - the people who have, in the past, ridicu
I don't know if this is a good or bad thing: either we are looking at integrated coils on the plug, or integrated coils in the plug "wires". On the one hand, this could be "good" as it moves the coil closer to the plug, so there is less chance of vibration and heat affecting the wires and such (as with regular plug wires, which carry high voltage), but on the other hand, now the coils are subjected to much higher heat loads (being that they are closer to the cylinder), so they could wear out quicker.
Futhermore, if they are integrated into the spark plug, you could be looking at $5.00 - 10.00 per plug to replace. If they are a "wire set", then those are things likely to go for at least (and probably much more) $100.00 for the set. Also, it is likely these things are "dealer parts", meaning double the price - you can't get them at AutoZone, at least not yet.
I can see the benefits of doing this, especially in a hybrid vehicle. However, I doubt they save you money, and probably make a lot of money for the dealer (assumming you can replace them yourself - something tells me they make you come to the dealer if you want to replace such a simple part)...