Granted, it really wasn't necessary for the response, but how is this "bigoted"? I have no problem with people who believe in an invisble man in the sky (or "around you", or "in your heart", etc). If they want to believe that, fine.
I only wish they would own up to what they are believing in. Why is it that Santa Clause can't exist (and is a children's story), but "God" can (isn't the notion of "God" merely a comforting story for adults)? Both are invisible, both live in "mysterious" places, both have "amazing" powers (ok, one's powers is much more amazing than the other) - so whats the difference. Further more, since no one can prove that any of this exists (for any so-called "god"), why can't all have a place in the world? Why do we kill each other over what amount to "fantasies"?
If this story is true, then these researchers may have unlocked a "secret" that is incredible in scope: They have learned (in a limited manner) how to code in DNA - they have hacked nature's UTM.
Such a discovery and the applications of its use would lead to incredible things - both for good and ill! Incredible "cures" and horrific weapons all at once! Instant death and neverending life at our fingertips! In some ways - I think this may have come too soon, and will end up killing off life on this planet - we can't even agree to disagree on our religion (never mind the fact that religion is nothing more than mythology and fantasy for grown adults), instead choosing to kill ourselves over which invisible man in the sky is better!
DNA (and the attendent processes for its replication - heliocase, RNA primase, DNA polymerase, etc) is nothing more than a long UTM program "tape", where the GATC are the symbols for the program - and this "tape" controls the rest of the processes in the cell (ok, if you have followed this long - you can see I am *not* a biologist by any means - I likely have some things very incorrect).
I don't know - I may be wrong - but this just seems incredible (if true)...
The problem is that the ACLU selectively defends the constitution. They don't defend the rights of gun owners for one.
Which is why I am a card carrying member of both the ACLU and the NRA!
Yeah - it bothers me that I have to do this - I am still trying to find a party and/or political organization that understands and fights for our Constitution. The crazy thing is, there shouldn't be a need for such a thing - WE THE PEOPLE (all of us!) should be the ones understanding and defending it, for the rights of ALL - but few of us choose to do this.
In the end, I fear that this apathetical attitude of the rest of my fellow citizens will likely lead to one of two situations: A police state unlike any the world has ever seen (we may be firmly on this track, I dare think), or an armed uprising/revolution/civil war. I fear that one of these will come to pass in my lifetime. I know that the outcome of either will be massacre.
...you can only write your code on Windows and Mac, then cross-compile to Linux - there isn't a native Linux/X REALbasic environment available (yet - and I haven't seen any movement in that direction, either).
I believe the lack of a good version of the BASIC language is what is holding back Linux in a small manner. Microsoft, by making it easy to customise their regular applications (via VBScript) and write new applications (via VB), allowed companies and individuals to quickly roll out software for both profit and fun. Until Linux has this ability, we will continue to be a second-level player in many circles.
Fortunately, we do have a couple of languages that allow (after a sort) RAD software development - Perl, Python, and Tcl/Tk are all excellent languages for today's business application development. However, they lack the GUI IDE that has made VB what it is - the ability to rapidly slap together a form and some code behind controls, compile and run with a single click - and BAM! - an instant GUI application! Furthermore, none of these languages (ok, the exception would likely be Python) are as easy to learn as BASIC, and Python only wins out because it looks and feels a lot like BASIC in many respects.
I just don't understand the hatred people have of BASIC - it's a language syntax, people! I have often wondered how hard it would be to make a simplified version of BASIC that could be easily parsed/converted by Perl to C, then compiled with gcc (basically, it would be C, but with a lot of BASIC "look" to it). GOTO's were banished a long, long time ago. BASIC could easily be object-oriented - it's just a syntax.
Something makes me think people dislike BASIC because of the idea that it would make them less of programmers by using it (f'd up pyschology or something, I think) or knowing it. All it would do is make them faster programmers - as long as it compiles down to native, why not make the syntax of the language as simple as possible, provided it gets the job done. BASIC can do this!
Finally, there are some "good" BASIC's out there for Linux - one is XBasic, the other is Blassic. XBasic is a form of BASIC that looks and acts like a cross between VB, C and QBasic - fairly fast, compiles to native, and open-source (GPL, I believe) to boot!
Blassic is what could be called "classic BASIC" - fairly easy to port stuff from GWBASIC and some QBasic over to it. It is done pretty well (though the documentation could use some work/updating - I put out an update a long time ago while playing with it) - it is interpreted, but it runs very fast on today's systems, plus it has some extra features old BASICs didn't. Search for both of these with Google - I think you will be surprised at what is out there!
Right now I have a solar cooker, which I built and I am testing, sitting out in the sun. It is up to 130 degrees C (approx 250 F). It cost me a grand total of *zero* dollars for parts and labor - even the glass was given to me by Lowes (!). The energy input comes from the sun for *free*. In theory, I could bake a cake or cook some soup with it (haven't done this yet, but I have no doubt that it would work).
Yes, in many cases, free may mean "cheap and shoddy", but in the case of this solar cooker, and Linux (see, not totally off topic!) - free does sometimes equal great things...
Ok, I admit this is a pretty damn nice way to cool things - relatively simple, few moving parts, no CFCs or HFCs.
But did anyone notice what was missing? Did you see in the flash animation on the chart of refrigerants that the one refrigerant that isn't EPA approved is also (supposedly) the safest - ie, HC's? Now, I know the presentation wasn't about HC's - but why did they list them, but not talk about them - and why don't they have EPA approval if they are *better* than CFCs and HFCs?
There are other cooling technologies out there that are "environmentally friendly" - one such technology is used almost exclusively for cryo-cooling (you know, cooling to cryo temperatures - much colder than freezing), and could be used for regular cooling: the Stirling Cycle.
We have all heard of Sterling Cycle engines (or at least, I hope we have!), which are "external combustion" engines that utilize thermal energy transfer from hot to cold to create mechanical motion (all it needs is hot and cold - some small demo models can run on an ice cube and/or hot coffee - or the heat from a monitor!), which then can be used to do work.
Well, if you reverse that, and instead put mechanical motion in, the hot side get *very* hot, and the cold side gets *very* cold (in an efficient Stirling Cycle engine).
There is a company out there that makes such Stirling Cycle heat pumps (which can also be used as an engine - they sell kits to experimentors) that use a solenoid-type electromagnetic driver system (run in reverse, the solenoid generates electricity!) - unfortunately I can't find the link to them, but they make cryo-coolers using the Stirling Cycle and electromagnetic drivers.
Stirling Cycle engines aren't the only environmentally friendly way to cool things - there are methods that use the power of the sun! One could run a refrigerator off of solar panels (not very efficient). A better method uses something called something like "ammonia sodium absorption" - which basically uses heat to expand ammonia in a closed system (similar to a propane refrigerator). Now, ammonia is a nasty substance (poisonous) if it gets out of the system, but it isn't the only method.
One could take two Stirling Engines, hook the shafts together, have one be driven by a solar concentrator, the other would act as the heat pump - this is likely to be more efficient than a solar electric version.
I have also heard of an innovative way of using wind power to cool something down (and heat something up - why "waste" the hot side?) - run an AC compressor directly from the blades (instead of a generator) and store the cold and heat in separate insulated water storage tanks, for use later to cool/heat the house or such.
Another method, while "solar" doesn't directly use the sun, but is similar to how the earth heats and cools - negative radiant energy. In fact, you can use a solar oven to make ice using this method - but I will describe a simpler manner: Get an old large freezer (doesn't need to work - we need an insulated box) - put a ton of extra insulation around it. Paint the inside black. Put about a half inch of water in the bottom. When the sun has set, open the lid wide open to the sky. Before the sun has risen the next morning, close the lid. Do this several times, and eventually the water in the bottom will freeze (note, this will likely not work during the summer months in hot climates, unless you can insulate the box extremely well during the day). By openning the box to the night sky (adding reflectors will help, just like on a solar cooker, to allow it to "see" more sky), the heat is let out, cooling the inside. Closing it in the morning "traps" the coolness inside, waiting for the next cycl
I was speaking of the GPL and GPL'd software in general. I was also speaking in a "what if" fashion - I don't have any code (that I know of, at least?) in anything Sun is distributing or plans to distribute. Without deeply investigating it (and you're right, I didn't read the article, but then again, as I noted, I wasn't responding to the Sun case, but rather the general case of GPL'd software), I can't say if Sun is infringing - therefore, AFAIK, they aren't.
AC, I know that the GPL doesn't mention "free", as in monetary cost - in fact, it doesn't mention anything regarding money (with the one possible exception about providing copies of the source for a reasonable sum or something like that). A GPL'd piece of software doesn't even have to be free - you could sell it (the binary) for $100,000.00 - just realize that if the purchaser wants the source, they must be able to get it - and they can take it, make changes to it, then give that away free (of course, they have to allow you then to get the changes in code - the source - from them as well)...
I "gave it away", under the GPL, as a developer with the understanding that should any changes to my code would be "paid back" to me and the community. I "gave it away" with the understanding that if someone has the binary, they can ask for and recieve the original source code, so they could compile it themselves, make changes (if needed or wanted), and release these changes back to the world under the GPL - thus making (on the whole) the entire piece of software all the more better.
What people seem to keep missing about the GPL is that it isn't just "free" - that is a minor point of the GPL. The greater point is that it is "Free" - as in FREEDOM, for both the user and the creator to ensure that the work stays available for future generations, regardless of the hardware. Of great importance to this stance is the availability of GPL or GPL-compatible development toolsets, like gcc or perl. Sure, you can write and GPL VC++ source code - but what is the point when the compiler itself isn't Free? What happens when (not if, someday it will happen) Microsoft ceases to exist as a company? What happens if the assets (VC++, etc) are not transferred to a party who will continue to develop them? Where does that get you in regards to your GPL'd VC++ source code?
The fact is, you are hosed (or the future is hosed) - with the GPL and GPL'd tools, you can have solace in the fact that the source for all will survive.
I mean, really - this has to be nothing more than a pork barrel project! How many times have we seen here on/. this or that "autonomous blimp for communications/high speed internet" story? Hell, we were seeing these things waaay long back - during the dotcom heyday. So...where are they?
Seriously, why does it seem so difficult and expensive to put a 100+ year old technology back up into the sky? I understand that there are going to be costs, license and approval needs (both FAA and FCC - I bet that is a crazy process - one or the other is bad enough, but both? Gack!) - but what is really taking so long?
I would think someone could throw a few million at this problem and have it solved (by a "few million", I mean something like 10-20 million - I think that is realistic). How much has been spent by various people on getting to the X-Prize? Why couldn't a similar amount be spent on these supposed blimps - the engineering can't be as rigorous (it isn't like you are building a dirigable needing an internal airframe - a blimp is a couple of bags filled with helium inside a larger bag). Even if a Hindenburg-style machine was needed, they built them once a long time ago, before commercial air transport - so where is the holdup?
I can only think of one reason - there isn't a real need for these things. Money is spent "studying" all of this, maybe prototypes are made - but in the end it all comes down to lining a few pockets with money for nothing that is really needed. A definition of pork spending if there ever was one...
Once, when I was in high school, and 12 inch woofers were expensive (for a HS student), I set about building my own "sub". Now, don't get me wrong - it SUCKED! But I did learn how to build a real speaker.
I started out with a largish cardboard box, and traced a large circle on the front, and cut it out with a steak knife. I then made a paper flattened "cone" out of construction paper (a little larger than the hole), made a bunch of radial slits along the edge, then bent, formed, and glued this to the hole. At the apex of the cone (inside the box), I had glued a piece of toilet paper tubing upon which I had wound a mess of wire I had gotten from the windings on a motor armature (as I remember, I didn't do a very neat job of winding it). On the backside of the cardboard, underneath the tube, I mounted (with a bunch of duct tape) a piece of speaker magnet I had (for some reason, when I was a kid, it was far easier to get speaker magnets than whole, large speakers - but I digress). I hooked the wires from the coil up to a radio - and it worked!
Not much bass, but it was definitely a working "loudspeaker". You could probably take this same technique and apply it to build a much better speaker, perhaps even something to act as a demonstration model. With a little thought, you could even put together a bunch of "speaker kits", if you are teaching a class or something...
After the essentials (ie, X11 and a Window Manager, of which I typically have KDE set up) - I try to always add Mozilla (I like the tighter integration than the separate apps - both browser and mail are open at the same time anyhow on my box, so it doesn't matter), perl (though this is rapidly becoming "standard" on most installs), cdrx (dead simple perl-based cdrecord interface burning software - though I am giving xcdroast a shot), gimp (gotta have it), gqview (so far, it is the best and simplest image viewing util I have found), j-pilot (though, once again, I am trying out other options), rdesktop (connecting to work), nedit (though kate is pretty cool), xmms (so far it holds on, haven't seen anything that beats it yet and runs stable and fast on my limited hardware).
I also have a plethora of small homebrew tools (most done in perl) and other apps that I play with - but the above are the main ones I have and use on a very regular basis. They likely won't stay constant (ok, perl likely will - but I am playing on and off with python as well), as I have noted I am seeking/do seek alternatives as time and need allows...
You know, as a company, I don't trust them on principle - they are larger than me as an individual, and corporate ethos is "make more money for the shareholders" - they are amoral by definition.
With that said, though - there are some bright spots at this company. My personal story is that I recently got an IBM NetStation PC (one of the really old ones) from my work. No drivers, nothing - but I wanted to get it working. The problem is, all the info about getting it to work using a Linux server to boot was out of date - all the links in FAQs to IBM were broken, no longer supported. I searched and searched, found only a little information - so I decided to contact IBM directly.
I thought it was going to be a dead end - likely they would ask if I had a service agreement (or would I like to purchase one), so they could help me. But surprise, surprise!
Not only did they help me, and quickly, they pointed me to the source for all the PDF documentation and drivers, and old TurboLinux install software for the boot server and everything - all in the span of a week!
I have so rarely received service like that - I was (and still am) greatly impressed. Technically, they didn't have to help me - I wasn't another company (I explicitly told them I was a hobbiest), but they supported me anyway - on their own dime.
THANK YOU, IBM (though I still hold my reservations about corporations)...
I know what you are talking about - I have seen my parents' cards: The back used to say something to the effect of "Not for use as an identification number, under no circustances should you share this number with anyone other than the SSA".
However, they dropped that (quietly) off the back of the cards a long time ago, even though the law is still in effect. Thus, many, many organizations, people, agencies, etc - are breaking federal law - AND NONE OF THEM CARE, NOT EVEN THE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.
I don't mean to "yell" at you, so please forgive me - my anger is not at you personally.
People - when are we going to say "Enough is ENOUGH!"? How often are we going to continue to hear about news on/. (and on Fark, and on K5, and on regular news reports, and from our neighbors, and our friends, and on and on) about this or that right being trampled in the name of security, or safety, or "for the children" - until we do something about it?
How LONG?
Are we going to wait until the jackboots bust down our doors looking for (by then) illegal crypto, unauthorized soldering irons, and non-sanctioned pen and paper?
The time is coming, and it is coming fast - we either do something, or WE LOSE IT ALL. What is it going to take?
A friend of mine has set up in his "living room" an old Infocus LP720. Running under optimal conditions, the thing throws a very nice picture, but its resolution isn't the best. For regular television and the occasional game, though - it is pretty nice. The big beef with it, though, is the bulb costs. Life on the bulbs has been pretty good (according to him he doesn't really change the bulb much), but the bulbs themselves run about $300 (or so he says). He would probably have a better picture if he used a real screen - right now, he projects on a wall he painted with "pearlescent" white paint (to simulate a beaded screen, I guess?) - its better than a plain white wall, but not as good as a screen (plus the wall looks wrong when viewed regularly - but that isn't a problem for him).
Myself, I picked up Fujix P401 Mini Projector a long while back. I had to get it fixed, but it works great now. No bigger than a couple of stacked VHS tapes. Unfortunately, the bulbs are very hard to obtain (6 volt), and the resolution is very poor (320 x 200 or something). But it looks OK if you keep the screen size down (below 50" diagonal), and games play OK on it. I found that a shower curtain works OK for a screen, if you can get all of the wrinkles out. But what works fabulous for a screen, comes in a variety of sizes, rolls up, and is very cheap - is a blackout blind! I bought mine from Home Depot, I think I spent $15.00 or so on it. I think it was 60 inches wide or so. Mounted it to the ceiling, and it can pull down, lock, then pull and retract away. Very smooth surface, white and reflective. Not as good as a Da Lite, but much cheaper!
For a screen, look into getting a Da Lite. One thing to do is go to garage sales (tag sales), and see if you can find a foldable slide projector screen. If you can get a good silver one, with little or no damage (an old Da Lite, for instance) - don't pay more than $20.00 (I have seen them for much, much less) - and you will have a great screen.
As far as homebrew projectors are concerned: ask yourself what is more important, a good viewing experience, or the quest to build your own projector? I have no doubt that a homebrew projector could be built, that works great and is cheap. Maybe not as good output as a real projector (though a gutted 15-17" LCD monitor laid on an overhead projector would look nice), but acceptable. If you are looking to give a good movie-like experience, crisp and bright - stick to a bought projector. Your eyes and your guests will thank you.
Oh - one more thing. Those 100 inch TV plans you see - while not a scam (it is possible to get an OK picture), I wouldn't bother with them other than to play or as a "party trick" (ie, an "Acid Warp" display - for those old schoolers who know what I mean)...
The old memory is likely not made anymore, or if it is, it is only done by a very few suppliers. However, there is still demand out there - so the "new" old stock (and any new stock) gets priced accordingly.
Until the demand drops to nothing - then the supply becomes "worthless", and we start seeing "memory key fobs"...
Bravo to California for standing up for its citizens rights to vote.
The State is the *last* place citizens should look toward to fix problems relating to their rights. Had people acted and thought this way in the mid-late 1700's, we would likely still be a British colony - at the least, we wouldn't be the country we are today (though with our current situation in the world, maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing?)...
So, how do they keep "Guido" from holding a gun to your head as you fill out the ballot with "your choices"?
This is the purpose of polling places - a place where you can go cast your vote, in private, without *anyone* knowing who you voted for - no receipt, no one looking over your shoulder - nothing.
Any other form of voting can easily lend itself to vote "buying" (or forcing of votes by a third party) - which is why I don't really like vote by mail (though there is the ability to actually go to the polls after sending the ballot by mail - in which case your physical vote is supposed to override the mail vote - which is likely what happens in Oregon, I hope - but you didn't mention it)...
That's exactly the thing - I have never seen one of these punch hole voting machines, so I can only guess here - but I bet the trays are at most one inch or so deep, by so many inches square.
Why didn't the engineers instead design them to be say, six inches deep (increasing volume greatly) - so that there was *no chance* of them filling up in current or future elections? Only if they were incompetent, or doing so would eat into the profitability of the machines for the makers...
From what I understand, the "hanging chad" issue in FL occurred not so much because of incompetent voters, but because of incompetent poll workers (and one could argue, incompetent engineers who designed the machines).
You see, the punch machine had a tray that held all of the cut bits of paper - the "chads". Just like a regular paper hole punch, every once in a while you have to empty the tray so that more chads can be punched. This was supposed to be the job of the poll workers. However, due to any number of factors (maybe they were just overworked, and not incompetent?) - those trays did not get empty, thus they didn't allow the ballots to be punched properly.
Now, what about the engineers of the machines? Well - for starters: Why did they make it a tray, instead of a very deep bin, or a bag, or something similar - something that no matter how many votes occurred on any one machine, it couldn't be filled in the course of an election day?
Only a few answers likely suffice: They were lazy, they were incompetent, or (likely) they were told not to by the company they worked for because such a larger recepticle would add a few pennies to the cost of manufacture which could instead be PROFIT (greedy bastard syndrome).
Does anybody know where one could find a reprint (digital or otherwise) of any of Heron's works (particularly Pneumatics - spelling is probably wrong)?
Ideally, what I would like to see is like what was done with Da Vinci's notebooks - original on one side, translation (to English) opposite. Even so - I will take what I can find (and it doesn't have to be a recent reprint, either - anthing from about 1850 forward I could probably afford)...
Slashdot Mirror
I only wish they would own up to what they are believing in. Why is it that Santa Clause can't exist (and is a children's story), but "God" can (isn't the notion of "God" merely a comforting story for adults)? Both are invisible, both live in "mysterious" places, both have "amazing" powers (ok, one's powers is much more amazing than the other) - so whats the difference. Further more, since no one can prove that any of this exists (for any so-called "god"), why can't all have a place in the world? Why do we kill each other over what amount to "fantasies"?
Are we as adults really this childish...?
If this story is true, then these researchers may have unlocked a "secret" that is incredible in scope: They have learned (in a limited manner) how to code in DNA - they have hacked nature's UTM.
Such a discovery and the applications of its use would lead to incredible things - both for good and ill! Incredible "cures" and horrific weapons all at once! Instant death and neverending life at our fingertips! In some ways - I think this may have come too soon, and will end up killing off life on this planet - we can't even agree to disagree on our religion (never mind the fact that religion is nothing more than mythology and fantasy for grown adults), instead choosing to kill ourselves over which invisible man in the sky is better!
DNA (and the attendent processes for its replication - heliocase, RNA primase, DNA polymerase, etc) is nothing more than a long UTM program "tape", where the GATC are the symbols for the program - and this "tape" controls the rest of the processes in the cell (ok, if you have followed this long - you can see I am *not* a biologist by any means - I likely have some things very incorrect).
I don't know - I may be wrong - but this just seems incredible (if true)...
Which is why I am a card carrying member of both the ACLU and the NRA!
Yeah - it bothers me that I have to do this - I am still trying to find a party and/or political organization that understands and fights for our Constitution. The crazy thing is, there shouldn't be a need for such a thing - WE THE PEOPLE (all of us!) should be the ones understanding and defending it, for the rights of ALL - but few of us choose to do this.
In the end, I fear that this apathetical attitude of the rest of my fellow citizens will likely lead to one of two situations: A police state unlike any the world has ever seen (we may be firmly on this track, I dare think), or an armed uprising/revolution/civil war. I fear that one of these will come to pass in my lifetime. I know that the outcome of either will be massacre.
I believe the lack of a good version of the BASIC language is what is holding back Linux in a small manner. Microsoft, by making it easy to customise their regular applications (via VBScript) and write new applications (via VB), allowed companies and individuals to quickly roll out software for both profit and fun. Until Linux has this ability, we will continue to be a second-level player in many circles.
Fortunately, we do have a couple of languages that allow (after a sort) RAD software development - Perl, Python, and Tcl/Tk are all excellent languages for today's business application development. However, they lack the GUI IDE that has made VB what it is - the ability to rapidly slap together a form and some code behind controls, compile and run with a single click - and BAM! - an instant GUI application! Furthermore, none of these languages (ok, the exception would likely be Python) are as easy to learn as BASIC, and Python only wins out because it looks and feels a lot like BASIC in many respects.
I just don't understand the hatred people have of BASIC - it's a language syntax, people! I have often wondered how hard it would be to make a simplified version of BASIC that could be easily parsed/converted by Perl to C, then compiled with gcc (basically, it would be C, but with a lot of BASIC "look" to it). GOTO's were banished a long, long time ago. BASIC could easily be object-oriented - it's just a syntax.
Something makes me think people dislike BASIC because of the idea that it would make them less of programmers by using it (f'd up pyschology or something, I think) or knowing it. All it would do is make them faster programmers - as long as it compiles down to native, why not make the syntax of the language as simple as possible, provided it gets the job done. BASIC can do this!
Finally, there are some "good" BASIC's out there for Linux - one is XBasic, the other is Blassic. XBasic is a form of BASIC that looks and acts like a cross between VB, C and QBasic - fairly fast, compiles to native, and open-source (GPL, I believe) to boot!
Blassic is what could be called "classic BASIC" - fairly easy to port stuff from GWBASIC and some QBasic over to it. It is done pretty well (though the documentation could use some work/updating - I put out an update a long time ago while playing with it) - it is interpreted, but it runs very fast on today's systems, plus it has some extra features old BASICs didn't. Search for both of these with Google - I think you will be surprised at what is out there!
Right now I have a solar cooker, which I built and I am testing, sitting out in the sun. It is up to 130 degrees C (approx 250 F). It cost me a grand total of *zero* dollars for parts and labor - even the glass was given to me by Lowes (!). The energy input comes from the sun for *free*. In theory, I could bake a cake or cook some soup with it (haven't done this yet, but I have no doubt that it would work).
Yes, in many cases, free may mean "cheap and shoddy", but in the case of this solar cooker, and Linux (see, not totally off topic!) - free does sometimes equal great things...
But did anyone notice what was missing? Did you see in the flash animation on the chart of refrigerants that the one refrigerant that isn't EPA approved is also (supposedly) the safest - ie, HC's? Now, I know the presentation wasn't about HC's - but why did they list them, but not talk about them - and why don't they have EPA approval if they are *better* than CFCs and HFCs?
There are other cooling technologies out there that are "environmentally friendly" - one such technology is used almost exclusively for cryo-cooling (you know, cooling to cryo temperatures - much colder than freezing), and could be used for regular cooling: the Stirling Cycle.
We have all heard of Sterling Cycle engines (or at least, I hope we have!), which are "external combustion" engines that utilize thermal energy transfer from hot to cold to create mechanical motion (all it needs is hot and cold - some small demo models can run on an ice cube and/or hot coffee - or the heat from a monitor!), which then can be used to do work.
Well, if you reverse that, and instead put mechanical motion in, the hot side get *very* hot, and the cold side gets *very* cold (in an efficient Stirling Cycle engine).
There is a company out there that makes such Stirling Cycle heat pumps (which can also be used as an engine - they sell kits to experimentors) that use a solenoid-type electromagnetic driver system (run in reverse, the solenoid generates electricity!) - unfortunately I can't find the link to them, but they make cryo-coolers using the Stirling Cycle and electromagnetic drivers.
More information and kits for Stirling Cycle engines can be found here.
Also note that google can help you find a lot of links on the subject, too.
Stirling Cycle engines aren't the only environmentally friendly way to cool things - there are methods that use the power of the sun! One could run a refrigerator off of solar panels (not very efficient). A better method uses something called something like "ammonia sodium absorption" - which basically uses heat to expand ammonia in a closed system (similar to a propane refrigerator). Now, ammonia is a nasty substance (poisonous) if it gets out of the system, but it isn't the only method.
One could take two Stirling Engines, hook the shafts together, have one be driven by a solar concentrator, the other would act as the heat pump - this is likely to be more efficient than a solar electric version.
I have also heard of an innovative way of using wind power to cool something down (and heat something up - why "waste" the hot side?) - run an AC compressor directly from the blades (instead of a generator) and store the cold and heat in separate insulated water storage tanks, for use later to cool/heat the house or such.
Another method, while "solar" doesn't directly use the sun, but is similar to how the earth heats and cools - negative radiant energy. In fact, you can use a solar oven to make ice using this method - but I will describe a simpler manner: Get an old large freezer (doesn't need to work - we need an insulated box) - put a ton of extra insulation around it. Paint the inside black. Put about a half inch of water in the bottom. When the sun has set, open the lid wide open to the sky. Before the sun has risen the next morning, close the lid. Do this several times, and eventually the water in the bottom will freeze (note, this will likely not work during the summer months in hot climates, unless you can insulate the box extremely well during the day). By openning the box to the night sky (adding reflectors will help, just like on a solar cooker, to allow it to "see" more sky), the heat is let out, cooling the inside. Closing it in the morning "traps" the coolness inside, waiting for the next cycl
I was speaking of the GPL and GPL'd software in general. I was also speaking in a "what if" fashion - I don't have any code (that I know of, at least?) in anything Sun is distributing or plans to distribute. Without deeply investigating it (and you're right, I didn't read the article, but then again, as I noted, I wasn't responding to the Sun case, but rather the general case of GPL'd software), I can't say if Sun is infringing - therefore, AFAIK, they aren't.
AC, I know that the GPL doesn't mention "free", as in monetary cost - in fact, it doesn't mention anything regarding money (with the one possible exception about providing copies of the source for a reasonable sum or something like that). A GPL'd piece of software doesn't even have to be free - you could sell it (the binary) for $100,000.00 - just realize that if the purchaser wants the source, they must be able to get it - and they can take it, make changes to it, then give that away free (of course, they have to allow you then to get the changes in code - the source - from them as well)...
What people seem to keep missing about the GPL is that it isn't just "free" - that is a minor point of the GPL. The greater point is that it is "Free" - as in FREEDOM, for both the user and the creator to ensure that the work stays available for future generations, regardless of the hardware. Of great importance to this stance is the availability of GPL or GPL-compatible development toolsets, like gcc or perl. Sure, you can write and GPL VC++ source code - but what is the point when the compiler itself isn't Free? What happens when (not if, someday it will happen) Microsoft ceases to exist as a company? What happens if the assets (VC++, etc) are not transferred to a party who will continue to develop them? Where does that get you in regards to your GPL'd VC++ source code?
The fact is, you are hosed (or the future is hosed) - with the GPL and GPL'd tools, you can have solace in the fact that the source for all will survive.
This is the true point of the GPL...
Seriously, why does it seem so difficult and expensive to put a 100+ year old technology back up into the sky? I understand that there are going to be costs, license and approval needs (both FAA and FCC - I bet that is a crazy process - one or the other is bad enough, but both? Gack!) - but what is really taking so long?
I would think someone could throw a few million at this problem and have it solved (by a "few million", I mean something like 10-20 million - I think that is realistic). How much has been spent by various people on getting to the X-Prize? Why couldn't a similar amount be spent on these supposed blimps - the engineering can't be as rigorous (it isn't like you are building a dirigable needing an internal airframe - a blimp is a couple of bags filled with helium inside a larger bag). Even if a Hindenburg-style machine was needed, they built them once a long time ago, before commercial air transport - so where is the holdup?
I can only think of one reason - there isn't a real need for these things. Money is spent "studying" all of this, maybe prototypes are made - but in the end it all comes down to lining a few pockets with money for nothing that is really needed. A definition of pork spending if there ever was one...
I started out with a largish cardboard box, and traced a large circle on the front, and cut it out with a steak knife. I then made a paper flattened "cone" out of construction paper (a little larger than the hole), made a bunch of radial slits along the edge, then bent, formed, and glued this to the hole. At the apex of the cone (inside the box), I had glued a piece of toilet paper tubing upon which I had wound a mess of wire I had gotten from the windings on a motor armature (as I remember, I didn't do a very neat job of winding it). On the backside of the cardboard, underneath the tube, I mounted (with a bunch of duct tape) a piece of speaker magnet I had (for some reason, when I was a kid, it was far easier to get speaker magnets than whole, large speakers - but I digress). I hooked the wires from the coil up to a radio - and it worked!
Not much bass, but it was definitely a working "loudspeaker". You could probably take this same technique and apply it to build a much better speaker, perhaps even something to act as a demonstration model. With a little thought, you could even put together a bunch of "speaker kits", if you are teaching a class or something...
I also have a plethora of small homebrew tools (most done in perl) and other apps that I play with - but the above are the main ones I have and use on a very regular basis. They likely won't stay constant (ok, perl likely will - but I am playing on and off with python as well), as I have noted I am seeking/do seek alternatives as time and need allows...
With that said, though - there are some bright spots at this company. My personal story is that I recently got an IBM NetStation PC (one of the really old ones) from my work. No drivers, nothing - but I wanted to get it working. The problem is, all the info about getting it to work using a Linux server to boot was out of date - all the links in FAQs to IBM were broken, no longer supported. I searched and searched, found only a little information - so I decided to contact IBM directly.
I thought it was going to be a dead end - likely they would ask if I had a service agreement (or would I like to purchase one), so they could help me. But surprise, surprise!
Not only did they help me, and quickly, they pointed me to the source for all the PDF documentation and drivers, and old TurboLinux install software for the boot server and everything - all in the span of a week!
I have so rarely received service like that - I was (and still am) greatly impressed. Technically, they didn't have to help me - I wasn't another company (I explicitly told them I was a hobbiest), but they supported me anyway - on their own dime.
THANK YOU, IBM (though I still hold my reservations about corporations)...
And?
I know what you are talking about - I have seen my parents' cards: The back used to say something to the effect of "Not for use as an identification number, under no circustances should you share this number with anyone other than the SSA".
However, they dropped that (quietly) off the back of the cards a long time ago, even though the law is still in effect. Thus, many, many organizations, people, agencies, etc - are breaking federal law - AND NONE OF THEM CARE, NOT EVEN THE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES.
I don't mean to "yell" at you, so please forgive me - my anger is not at you personally.
People - when are we going to say "Enough is ENOUGH!"? How often are we going to continue to hear about news on /. (and on Fark, and on K5, and on regular news reports, and from our neighbors, and our friends, and on and on) about this or that right being trampled in the name of security, or safety, or "for the children" - until we do something about it?
How LONG?
Are we going to wait until the jackboots bust down our doors looking for (by then) illegal crypto, unauthorized soldering irons, and non-sanctioned pen and paper?
The time is coming, and it is coming fast - we either do something, or WE LOSE IT ALL. What is it going to take?
I was beaten to it...
It's oobleck (also "ooblick") armor!
Myself, I picked up Fujix P401 Mini Projector a long while back. I had to get it fixed, but it works great now. No bigger than a couple of stacked VHS tapes. Unfortunately, the bulbs are very hard to obtain (6 volt), and the resolution is very poor (320 x 200 or something). But it looks OK if you keep the screen size down (below 50" diagonal), and games play OK on it. I found that a shower curtain works OK for a screen, if you can get all of the wrinkles out. But what works fabulous for a screen, comes in a variety of sizes, rolls up, and is very cheap - is a blackout blind! I bought mine from Home Depot, I think I spent $15.00 or so on it. I think it was 60 inches wide or so. Mounted it to the ceiling, and it can pull down, lock, then pull and retract away. Very smooth surface, white and reflective. Not as good as a Da Lite, but much cheaper!
For a screen, look into getting a Da Lite. One thing to do is go to garage sales (tag sales), and see if you can find a foldable slide projector screen. If you can get a good silver one, with little or no damage (an old Da Lite, for instance) - don't pay more than $20.00 (I have seen them for much, much less) - and you will have a great screen.
As far as homebrew projectors are concerned: ask yourself what is more important, a good viewing experience, or the quest to build your own projector? I have no doubt that a homebrew projector could be built, that works great and is cheap. Maybe not as good output as a real projector (though a gutted 15-17" LCD monitor laid on an overhead projector would look nice), but acceptable. If you are looking to give a good movie-like experience, crisp and bright - stick to a bought projector. Your eyes and your guests will thank you.
Oh - one more thing. Those 100 inch TV plans you see - while not a scam (it is possible to get an OK picture), I wouldn't bother with them other than to play or as a "party trick" (ie, an "Acid Warp" display - for those old schoolers who know what I mean)...
The old memory is likely not made anymore, or if it is, it is only done by a very few suppliers. However, there is still demand out there - so the "new" old stock (and any new stock) gets priced accordingly.
Until the demand drops to nothing - then the supply becomes "worthless", and we start seeing "memory key fobs"...
The State is the *last* place citizens should look toward to fix problems relating to their rights. Had people acted and thought this way in the mid-late 1700's, we would likely still be a British colony - at the least, we wouldn't be the country we are today (though with our current situation in the world, maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing?)...
This is the purpose of polling places - a place where you can go cast your vote, in private, without *anyone* knowing who you voted for - no receipt, no one looking over your shoulder - nothing.
Any other form of voting can easily lend itself to vote "buying" (or forcing of votes by a third party) - which is why I don't really like vote by mail (though there is the ability to actually go to the polls after sending the ballot by mail - in which case your physical vote is supposed to override the mail vote - which is likely what happens in Oregon, I hope - but you didn't mention it)...
Why didn't the engineers instead design them to be say, six inches deep (increasing volume greatly) - so that there was *no chance* of them filling up in current or future elections? Only if they were incompetent, or doing so would eat into the profitability of the machines for the makers...
You see, the punch machine had a tray that held all of the cut bits of paper - the "chads". Just like a regular paper hole punch, every once in a while you have to empty the tray so that more chads can be punched. This was supposed to be the job of the poll workers. However, due to any number of factors (maybe they were just overworked, and not incompetent?) - those trays did not get empty, thus they didn't allow the ballots to be punched properly.
Now, what about the engineers of the machines? Well - for starters: Why did they make it a tray, instead of a very deep bin, or a bag, or something similar - something that no matter how many votes occurred on any one machine, it couldn't be filled in the course of an election day?
Only a few answers likely suffice: They were lazy, they were incompetent, or (likely) they were told not to by the company they worked for because such a larger recepticle would add a few pennies to the cost of manufacture which could instead be PROFIT (greedy bastard syndrome).
Gas tanks which don't explode...
Perhaps you're right - but only time will tell in the end...
Ideally, what I would like to see is like what was done with Da Vinci's notebooks - original on one side, translation (to English) opposite. Even so - I will take what I can find (and it doesn't have to be a recent reprint, either - anthing from about 1850 forward I could probably afford)...