To the AC who wanted to know the difference between the "United States of America" and the term "USA" - I point you an earlier comment of mine here - I hope this answers your questions, AC...
Well - yes, in every junk yard I have been in, there has been a lot of "localized" pollution (ie, leaky cars and parts). I am not naive enough to think that they get all the fluids out, but it isn't like they are just willy-nilly dumping everything on the ground, either (and just like everything else, I am sure there are places that do that, too).
There are some work left to be done - perhaps scrap yards need to be lined (like dumps and some refineries are) and dirt berms set up before construction/opening?
As far as the paint being burned off in the smelting process - yes, I know this happens too, but smelting as a process, whether new or old metal is used - causes a lot of pollution (nature of beast, I suppose). I would hope that the metal from the brake pads would be recycled, that hoses would be chipped for roadways or something, and the glass would be reprocessed - if not, it should. But I do know that a certain percentage does end up in the landfill.
The point is, the whole car doesn't end up in a landfill in most cases, that there is a ton of recycling done so that the pieces and materials can be reused. I know it isn't a clean process, and that there is room for improvement. It will probably never be a completely clean process, but at least it currently exists for cars, unlike many other products. I suppose part of the reason is because cars aren't so easily "thrown away" and forgotten about, unlike say an alluminum can, which can be easily recycled, but people generally just throw them away because of the ease, rather than going through the "hassle" of sorting trash and taking it to a recycling center.
I believe you and your countrymen are hardworking - this is not the problem with offshoring. The main problem with offshoring is that the market (that is, the potential employees) in America is unable to compete mainly because of cost of living.
You see, what we call "poor people" here in the US, with very few exceptions, would likely (comparatively) be considered at least "middle-class" in India (I could very well be very wrong here, I have never traveled to your country, and I appologize for any sweeping generalizations I may make or have made). The "poor" here have TV(s), cable, computer(s), food, clothing, shelter, cars - basically all the necessities of life and then some!
I have recently been researching solar energy usage for cooking - a lot of sites describe places in India which use various solar furnaces and ovens for cooking (and I have to say, many of these devices are VERY ingenious, especially in figuring out how to make and build parabolas for furnaces - but I digress), since fuel for cooking in rural areas tends to be scarce or otherwise difficult to come by.
The images I have seen of these people (and I don't know when some were taken, but some were from fairly recent times), while obviously very hard working, show that they are obviously impoverished.
That gives a baseline on what constitutes "poor" there - we haven't had a baseline of that level of "poor" since perhaps the Great Depression or further back, when people here were mainly subsistence farmers.
We cannot compete at all on the wage front - what your people are willing to work for, say in a yearly salary - many times doesn't even equal what is considered "poverty level" wages here in the USA (say $15-20,000 USD/year). This is considered "poverty" here (!!!).
The question isn't whether that is a lot of money - it is what can be bought with that amount, and the fact that if most people are earning a lot less, they can't buy as much, so employers here can't pay them as much - lowest common denominator, etc sets in...
I guess what I am trying to get at is that in order to compete for those jobs being outsourced, potential employees here would have to be willing to take the jobs at much, much less than what they were working for them - while knowing that they can't afford healthcare, shelter, food, clothing, etc - because those items don't drop in cost (heck, I have never seen prices on so called "durable goods" ever go down in my lifetime, yet) as fast as the wages would have to.
I think that is what has people the most upset about offshoring to India (or any other country) - the fact that in those countries, the standard of living is so low comparitively, there is absolutely no way to compete, and there isn't another skill or market they can transfer their skills to in order to continue to work (and it costs so much in money and time to learn something else - for anything else that might make money - I for example would love to learn something to go into biotech, like bioinformatics or something - but all of that could and is being easily offshored right now, so what else? - even if I could afford to get a real degree). This is causing a classic FUD reaction.
I know that sooner or later it will all settle out - some of us will stay, continue to have jobs, some of us will move on, and some of us will go under in one way or another. I don't harbor ill will toward someone in the world trying to get a leg up on their situation, so to speak - I applaud the effort and results. Personally, myself, I see this whole offshoring thing (along with all the other multitude upon multitude of fiascos and such) as part of larger issues, something which sometime, likely in 5-10 years, will cause the USA to implode, possibly sparking civil war and/or revolution - the outcome of either is likely to be a very, very bad thing.
That is, unless all of these problems are actually the result of peak oil issues - in which case the entire world is likely hosed as the last reservoirs are fought over. Sooner or later it is going to go nuclear over energy resources, if peak oil isn't a myth (and I don't think it is - even the oil companies know about peak oil, why do you think they are diversifying into alternate energy research, and changing names to move away from "oil" to "energy"?)...
Do you have any idea why our political system (the United States of America) is that of a representative republic, and not a true democracy? Have you not heard of "tyranny of the majority"? Do you not know what it means?
There is a reason why the "founding fathers" of our country made the decision that our country would be governed in this manner - these men were NOT simpletons, but rather some of the most learned men of their age (and I daresay, they would be among some of the most learned men of OUR age). They studied the history of governments up to their time, examining things in very minute details, gradually forming what they thought (in their analysis) would be a workable government that could last for a very long time with internal peace (ie, not having civil wars/unrest every few decades or whatnot).
Interestingly enough, their first attempt failed (utterly, and rather quickly) - so they had to go back to the drawing board. Their next attempt worked rather well - until it was honestly screwed by Lincoln during the Civil War - which radically changed what was a series of independent countries (States) governed under an "umbrella" government for certain needs - into one "country" (the "USA", as many people refer to it) - which has radically altered a lot of everything, and will likely lead to the downfall of our nation in the end.
If you don't understand the subtle difference between "United States" and the "USA" - don't worry, the vast majority of the populace doesn't know, and doesn't care, it seems. People have forgotten what it means to have sovereignty (even personal sovereignty) - so you are not alone.
I will tell you this - knowing all of this, knowing our *real* history, and knowing where we are likely headed (or, more likely, we are already there) - makes me feel frightened and unsure about our government and our future. All I can do is go about my business, help educate others where I can, and hope (and work) for the best...
would have liked the machine to somehow tell me (either through a display or by printing a little paper receipt) that I had voted for the right person.
Slowly, people are "waking up" to the problem, but it is unclear whether enough will be done or recognized by the November elections (our presidential election time this year).
A voter-verifiable paper-trail is tantamount to running any form of democratic process (whether it is representative based, like here, or otherwise) - there needs to be a way for the voter to know that the machine recorded who they voted for correctly. That way, if there is a question of who won the election, a hand recount of ballots may be made.
With electronic machines (especially ones in which there is no publically auditable source code), though - all is up in the air. Only if a receipt is printed and given to the voter is there a way to really be sure (and this way is open to vote buying fraud, so it really shouldn't be implemented!). How are you to know that the screen and paper match what is really in memory (and/or on disk)? In a close election, unless there is major contestation done afterward, a cheating "winner" could skate by unless the population DEMANDED a recount of the printed record. Even then, who's to say the printer couldn't be controlled to print random "fake" votes not tallied in memory - in case of a recount (hopefully voter rolls would catch this - if open-source code was used, this code could be looked for as well - unless the compiler sticks it in, of course).
My biggest fear is that most voters (and even most votees!) will never understand these issues (and I haven't outlined them all - there have already been recorded "failures" of electronic voting machines, and our "mainstream" media has passed on most of these stories - so the voting constituency has NO CLUE), and the "elections" will continue to go on - and nothing (or everything, to our greatest detriment!!!) will change...
...for those applications where you can't (or don't need/want to) see the screen all the time - termed "heads down". Most of these kind of applications are typically vertical-market apps (you know, the huge b2b-style applications - claims processing, inventory control, etc). Historically because the users (data entry) are entering data from paper (invoices, claim forms) into the system, though this is becoming less and less with OCR input (though correction is still needed).
Text-based UIs tend to be fairly consistent in how they work - type in a field, tab/return to move to the next field (depending on if you are in "add" or "edit" mode), function keys to do various things, etc. A properly trained person can quickly move about the system, many times while on the phone, and looking away from the keyboard!
Such ease of use is not typical of GUIs, because of the mouse, which requires hand-eye coordination by definition. It is possible to build a GUI app that uses keystrokes, and even integrate a "heads down" system into it, but it tends to be clunky, because you are working against the GUI way of doing things, not with it. Furthermore, sometimes the widgets of the GUI will get in your way as a programmer. One example would be how some controls intercept the tab key (a requirement for heads down) - some may fire a defined event handler, others may interpret the tab in some other manner (popping a list down or whatever, without letting you override or intercept the tab), others may require you (as the programmer) to intercept it yourself at a higher level (leading to sometimes messy code, and always more work on your part).
Then, there is always the issue with how to deal with multiple "screens" - do you use a single form (ie, emulating a "terminal"), or do you switch between multiple forms? What about the forms not in focus - do you close them completely, or only hide them?
The list of issues can go on and on. It isn't that it is impossible to make a heads down GUI application - it is just that you are working against the flow of what a GUI is and is for.
So, it really comes down to the type of application being developed and the who the user is. In certain applications, it is better to have a simple green (or amber) screen heads down application - go to AutoZone or a similar place where they use VT100-style old-school terminals and you will see what I mean - in those environments (dirty hands, fat fingers, employees who aren't computer users most of the time), a simple terminal with simple keystrokes work best.
Other applications and users may require something different (and in certain very rare situations - it may not even be a keyboard/screen!)...
What do you mean by "a large array of very powerful lasers using spinning mirrors to make one of their spaceships to have NEGATIVE MASS"? Do you have references to current research showing this possibility (I dunno, maybe research showing lower mass by firing a laser at a spinning mirror or something)?
What I would like to know is what the kid was doing to roll the vehicle? Was the CG on the car too high (couldn't be, not on a regular car unless it was top loaded heavily on a roof rack or something)? It is very difficult to roll most cars, unless you are really trying (or very unlucky, I suppose)...
Modern engines rarely have carburetors or distributors, at least like they used to be. Instead, you have "throttle body" or "direct" fuel injection (with MAF sensors and numerous other junk), and "electronic ignitions" (which are technically computer-controlled, no-moving-parts distributors - but they are nothing like the geared moving blade design with dwell and points).
Some of the smartest and most knowledgable people I know are auto mechanics. Some of the most ignorant I know happen to be in IT, curiously enough...
If you can afford it, look into buying a used car off of someone (not a dealer). Look into an older model carbureted engine vehicle, then spend money to convert the system to propane (generally a DOT-approved tank, hoses/pipes for the fuel, and the ports on the carb need to be widened). Under $5000 if you shop right.
I will never buy a car from a dealer again, unless it being sold salvage or scrap. Knowing how to work on vehicles is a plus (as well as having the tools to do so). The longer I can keep my vehicles going after they are paid off, the more money is in my pocket (that I can stick in savings and earn interest on). Really, the repairs of most older vehicles is way less than what it would cost to buy the car new (if you have it paid for, that is).
So, get a beater car for those times when you really need one (not too beater - something that has acceptable milage and runs well - an old Honda or something like that), use those other forms of transportation when you don't. If you do get a vehicle for occasional use, it would probably be best to get a small truck (an old Toyota or Mazda) - that way you can haul stuff when you need to.
The second most polluting time in a car's life is when it's scrapped.
I agree with you on your first point - it takes a LOT of resources to make a car, and the production of those raw materials (and the energy used) is HUGE. With that said...
When an automobile is "scrapped", 99.9% of the car is recycled. I don't know about you, but I have been to scrap yards and auto yards in my life, and every time I go, I am amazed.
Amazed at the level of recycling: For an automobile, first all of the fluids are drained from the car. For those fluids that can be (gasoline and oils, mainly), they are recycled back into the oil industry and other oil-based manufacturers (asphalt, and similar, mainly). Then, any parts which may have resale or remanufacturing value are removed - typically the engine, transmission, radiator, drive shafts, etc - all removed, and tested. Some are set aside for direct sales out of the yard (fun places to go - a section here for engines, another here for driveshafts, over there for chassis' - on and on). Others are put in a pile to be sent on to remanufacturers, who will take the parts apart, recycle the bad parts as scrap metal, clean and repair the rest, and sell those to places like AutoZone and Checker. Seats are kept, dashboards are kept, motors and such are kept. Whatever is left over is then sent on to the shredder.
Yeah, that's right - they SHRED the car. First the car is mashed flat (they don't do blocks anymore, I don't think). Up a conveyor belt, over and down into the hopper. At the bottom of the hopper are these huge hammers turning at crazy speeds (you would not want to fall in), which litterally pounds the vehicle apart. Over a series of grates to separate large chunks from small chunks, the chunks go through a series of magnets and air jets to separate light materials from heavy materials, ferrous from non-ferrous. All sorted into piles.
These piles are then sent on by rail for recycling - generally via ship (not much smelting done here in the States anymore) to China or something, where they are re-smelted into raw materials which we buy back to make into - TADA! - new cars.
Now, I am not saying that no pollution occurs because of this, nor am I saying that it is an "energy efficient" process. But it isn't nearly as bad as going with completely raw materials, and in a lot of cases, those remanufactured/recycled "whole parts" keep existing cars going on the road, sometimes long, long after the model (and sometimes the "dealer" - think International Pickups) has ceased to exist - thus helping the environment even more.
It simply isn't the days of throw-it-away-and-bury-it (never really was with automobiles - the automobile industry is a major recycler, always has been). Regular scrapyards do a similar thing, but with all sorts of scrap metal, not just vehicles (though many don't do one-off to-the-public sales of stuff, like many auto-yards will)...
However, I would say that the founders knew exactly what they were doing - only by today's time, we have perverted it in our collective ignorance.
Remember, it is the "United States of America" - not just "America", or the "Country of America", or the "State of America", or anything silly like that, but the "United States". Notice the capitalization of "States".
You see, each of the States of the Union *is* a country, with laws and constitutions drawn up by representatives of the People of that State. These laws and constitutions are supposed to reflect and be based upon (but not in entirety) the overarching Constitution of the United States. Each of these States, as they came into being, and gradually gained "Statehood", were given the option of joining the "United States". Invariably, the individual States signed on to become part of the greater Union (however, I believe some of the late joiners only did so not because of an educated reasoning, but because "all the others have" - ie, herd mentality) - safety in numbers?
All of this really is moot, though - the whole idea of what a State is truely dissolved with Lincoln and the Civil War. The Civil War had very little to do with slavery, and everything to do with States Rights. Since the Union was voluntarily entered into by citizens of States that are technically Sovereign, they also had the right (since this right is not (was not?) in the United States Constitution, thus goes to the States and People) to secceed from that Union. A bunch of States got together, said "yea", and decided they wanted to branch off and form a different Union (supposedly within their rights as Sovereign States). The reason this occurred was because Lincoln was telling the States how to run things - instead of letting these States run their own business as how they saw fit.
The people in those times could see what was happenning (not sure how, they didn't have TV or internet - just newspapers and telegraphs - but perhaps they were more interested in how they governed themselves, or less satiated, or something - ah, what am I saying - THEY WEREN'T F'N SHEEP, THAT'S WHY!) - and decided to change it. Unfortunately (for all of the States, and the people governed within), they lost - big.
So now we have the "United States of America", but in name only. Even that is fading - more often than not we are called, and call ourselves, the "US", "USA", "America" (forget the fact that America is a region), and to a lesser extent, the "United States".
I am in the middle of reading Quicksilver, reread Crypto prior to munching into it so I knew where everything was. As I was rereading it, then reading Quicksilver - I can't help but wonder if Stephenson isn't trying to teach the reader something. Something fundamental, something needed in this world...
I am not sure what it could be, but I know it has to do with business, technology, finance, governments (past, current, and future) - and where it is all headed - or could head, if we geeks of the world would just get our damn act together and make it happen...
But he feels that we lack some information - information about the world that we could only gain if we were all super-well read (some of us are, but not all of us), versed in world history and business, and how it all interelates.
I wonder if he is doing this to spur on such things like the Free State project, or something similar? How many of you have thought "How can I escape from the tyranny that is our world?" - but didn't know how? Where to get the resources, the money, everything needed to start a country? Is it even possible today?
In Crypto, he showed one possible way. In Quicksilver - he is showing how it was done long ago. We cringe and wonder today over how corporations are controlling our world, but we have yet to see (and pray we never do!) something on the order of the East India Company - a world dominating corporation that lasted nearly 200 years, had a standing army and navy, and it's own country to boot (India) - before the British finally ousted them and broke them up.
Does anyone here think such a thing couldn't happen again? Have any of you paid attention to the rise of private companies that provide private "security" training and weapons systems? What about all the of the oil companies gradually buying each other up - could Standard Oil come back from the dead?
I think Neal may be trying to teach us something, if only we would look and learn...
I use a system to gauge when the light is going to turn red. It works most of the time, and in the downtown area it is even simpler...
Instead of looking at the light - I look at the crosswalk signs. They blink only so many times - if I am coming up to a stale green and the crosswalk is blinking red (don't walk), I will typically slow down and stop if I am more than 100-150 feet or so away. If the crosswalk is still "white" (walk), but as I approach it goes blinking - then I know I still have several seconds to get through - a tap or more on the accelerator and I am through.
In the downtown area (where the speed limit is like 25-30 MPH), the crosswalk signals, when they are blinking "don't walk", count down the seconds as well! Very handy in my system (I wish they were all like this).
Now, in some areas this doesn't work well - "don't walk" will pop, but the light will stay green a few seconds longer, so you have to keep both in mind. Other problems are sometimes the "don't walk" is blinking, but then it will go back to "walk" (auto sensing lights that sense when a car on the cross street comes up, starting the timedown, but then the car turns right, so it resets).
Other techniques I use involve judging the traffic - because of all the other lights, and how traffic flows, if there is a red light ahead, I can tell if it is just about to change because of the traffic crossing, and alter my speed prior to getting to the light so I don't have to stop. Works pretty well, except in rush hour traffic.
You want to know the crazy thing about all of this? For some reason, most people don't seem to understand all of this, even though they typically have been driving longer than me (I didn't learn how to drive, nor get a license, until I was 21 - I am 30 now, with three vehicles, go figure). People are idiots...
Re:gl pipeline not for raytracing
on
The State of OpenGL
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Interesting - is this REYES micropolygon algorithm in any way related to the old (late 80's?) computer graphic entitled "Road to Point Reyes" (I think that is right)?
I remember seeing an image of that in an old computer graphics "coffee table"-type book back in high school - and you mentioning that popped it in my head...
If you ever see reproductions of period articles (or the real articles if you can find copies!), you always notice a few things when the article is about Tesla:
1. Pictures of airships 2. Large searchlights
Invariably, these searchlights are "trained" on the airships - leading to a couple of possible conclusions, given the technology level of Tesla's day:
1. The airships are somehow being powered by the "searchlights", or 2. The airships are being "disabled" by the "searchlights"
In reality, both theories stem from the same technology, which Tesla likely knew about, and possibly developed (though I haven't seen much on this - I think some things are mentioned in some of his studies).
This technology would be using large, high-power arc-lamp searchlights, with UV filters over them, then using a Tesla coil to send energy (resonant, high-frequency AC current) down the "beam". The energy could both power the airships, transmit information wirelessly, and likely disable airplanes (and other airships), by disrupting their electrical systems (among other effects).
Tesla spoke a lot about his "death ray" in his later years, up until his death. He made offers to the US government to develop this technology, but they wouldn't take him up on it (who knows why - maybe they thought he was a crackpot, too eccentric, too unreliable, or maybe they just wanted to get the tech after he died).
When he dies, many of his papers were seized by the US Government (as well as by the Soviets, from Eastern Bloc countries (Czecloslovakia?)). The FOIA papers (pdf's) I have show a great interest in this "death ray" device, but most of what Tesla was thinking died with him.
Interestingly, the US DIA site had some "artist renderings" of Soviet "star-wars" weaponry from the 1980's - much of it looked *very* similar to what has been portrayed around Tesla, and his "death ray" machine...
Hmm - on my Model M at home, I actually have the tabs down, so that it is "flat" - I like it better that way. As I noted in my original posting, I don't have a wrist rest there...
At work, I use an AST keyboard (probably the "next best" keyboard I have used and liked because of it's "feel"), but with the tabs up, and a wrist rest - I find that if I put the tabs down, it feels "wrong"...
Hmm - maybe I will try with the tabs up again, and see if things are really as bad as I think...
I know this is late, but I have copies of FOIA information related to Tesla - two large PDF files, in fact. I can't remember where I obtained them from (heck, maybe from the FOIA site?), but it definitely shows that the US government was very interested in his ideas (specifically his ideas on "death rays", which seem to be a method of using UV light to ionize the air, as a conductive path for electricity), and even with the FOIA release, there is still a lot more that our gov't hasn't released (as shown by the tons of redacted/blacked-out lines in the FOIA PDFs).
Every now and then we see stories about ergonomic this, rsi that, carpal tunnel, etc. I have no doubt that people are experiencing pain, and that they are experiencing it while using a keyboard or mouse.
However, I wonder if there isn't something more with CT/RSI. Why, for instance, do some people suffer from it, while others don't? For instance, I have never had (and here's hoping I don't ever have, from what I have read of the pain, it is HORRIBLE) any form of wrist or hand pain on a recurring, repeatable basis.
I have been using computers for almost 20 years now. If anything, I should be a case for "computer ailments". My first computer was a TRS-80 Color Computer 2 when I was 10 years old. I had it hooked up to a 19 inch color TV in my bedroom that I sat right in front of ("don't sit too close or you'll go blind" - I guess my parents didn't believe that applied with a computer - I used that TV as a *monitor*. MMM...32x16 black on green - ok, I'll admit, I am pretty nearsighted). From that time on I have pretty much sat in front of a computer of one sort or another coding.
Twenty plus years later here I am typing some more, and I haven't had any carpal flareups or anything like I have heard described. I have had minor pain in one wrist, that went away when I stopped - so I would stop, but that hasn't happened to me in months, if not over a year. It wasn't anything like the pain I hear described by sufferers of CT/RSI - so I think I just was tired, so I rested - seemed simple (or, maybe I did, and I did the right thing to stop?).
I have a wristrest in front of my keyboard at work, and at home I use a Model M (yay, clicky!)...
Is it me, am I lucky? Could it be a genetic predisposition for some folks? Are they doing something or working in a manner different from me that causes it? I will admit that I don't have a normal typing style, it is kinda "homegrown" over the years - is this the reason? Do people with CT/RSI who use keyboards tend to be those who practice real typing skills? Could these skills, being applied to a type of keyboard (that is, soft electronic, not mechanical) not in existence when the style of teaching was thought up (ie, back when typewriters were first being made), be the problem?
Must admit that in today's fancy cars a do-it-yourself aproach to fixing the brakes can land you in intensive care.
What do you mean? Have you ever fixed your own brakes on an automobile?
I can guarantee you that brakes are one of the easiest parts on a vehicle to fix - especially disc brakes. I just replaced the pads on the front brakes of my wife's Neon this weekend - about an hour's worth of time for both sides.
Granted, drum brakes are more difficult beasts (all those damn springs) - but if you jack up both sides of the vehicle, and remember that each side is opposite of each other (that is, the parts are located opposite - hard to explain until you look) - and the fact that they typically color-code the springs (and if they aren't, it would do you good to code them yourself for next time 'round) - even those are easy to fix (ok, invest in some brake tools, too - makes getting those springs and other bits on and off fairly easy).
If you do it right, there isn't any danger. Now, if you are doing a master cylinder replacement, or anything where you "break" the system - you need to bleed out the brake hydraulics and make sure there isn't any air bubbles trapped, but they do make one-man bleeder kits for that, which work fairly well. Finally, I always take the vehicle out for a small "test-run" around the neighborhood at slower speeds, then out onto the street - to check it all out before I let others drive.
Try fixing your brakes next time - you will find it is fairly easy, and not too expensive (and damn cheap compared to taking it into a shop)...
I have heard (from a reputable source, though I haven't seen confirmation) that currently it is cheaper to bore underground the same amount of volume as it would cost to build aboveground.
In other words, it would be cheaper to build a city underground (if starting from near-scratch), than it would be to build all of the buildings, etc aboveground for the same size city.
Now, as I noted, I am not sure on the reality of this, only that my source told it to me third-hand, noting that there was an article on some site somewhere (he thought it was/. - I don't think it was?) - plus there is the issue of needing mineral rights to the land to bore deeply ( > 100 feet? Where do mineral rights needs begin?), and a host of other issues (ie, would people want to live underground, even if it were cheaper, took less time to travel in the city, and made all the aboveground land available for farming?)...
It's an interest-free loan on the overpayment you gave them that you shouldn't have.
Amen to that!
I have often wondered if it would be worth my time (and if I could convince my employer) to not take out ANY TAXES at all, calculate my rate, etc - then take the money that would be for taxes and deposit it into my money market account.
Thus, I could accrue interest on it myself (make my money work for me!), then when tax time comes around, knowing what I owe - pay that sum to the government.
Instead of the G getting the interest, I would get it. I don't know if this is possible without a lot of hassle (probably could be done with a good accountant, perhaps?) - but it would be great to do so...
Last time I got a modem working with linux, it was a modem in a Compaq Presario 1610 laptop - Debian Woody. This was late last year, Oct-Nov timeframe.
Amazingly, it worked - I don't know if it was used the LinModem drivers (Lucent), or what - but I was able to dial out just fine with it, which surprised the hell out of me.
For those that don't know, the modem in a 1610 is a "built-in" modem, has a jack on the left side of the laptop, next to the floppy drive. It almost has to be a win-modem type of setup, but once again, I can't remember off-hand.
As far as external hardware modems are concerned, they are still made, but it is rare to find them at retail outlets...
Slashdot Mirror
AC, I made a reply to this thread, for your answer...
To the AC who wanted to know the difference between the "United States of America" and the term "USA" - I point you an earlier comment of mine here - I hope this answers your questions, AC...
There are some work left to be done - perhaps scrap yards need to be lined (like dumps and some refineries are) and dirt berms set up before construction/opening?
As far as the paint being burned off in the smelting process - yes, I know this happens too, but smelting as a process, whether new or old metal is used - causes a lot of pollution (nature of beast, I suppose). I would hope that the metal from the brake pads would be recycled, that hoses would be chipped for roadways or something, and the glass would be reprocessed - if not, it should. But I do know that a certain percentage does end up in the landfill.
The point is, the whole car doesn't end up in a landfill in most cases, that there is a ton of recycling done so that the pieces and materials can be reused. I know it isn't a clean process, and that there is room for improvement. It will probably never be a completely clean process, but at least it currently exists for cars, unlike many other products. I suppose part of the reason is because cars aren't so easily "thrown away" and forgotten about, unlike say an alluminum can, which can be easily recycled, but people generally just throw them away because of the ease, rather than going through the "hassle" of sorting trash and taking it to a recycling center.
You see, what we call "poor people" here in the US, with very few exceptions, would likely (comparatively) be considered at least "middle-class" in India (I could very well be very wrong here, I have never traveled to your country, and I appologize for any sweeping generalizations I may make or have made). The "poor" here have TV(s), cable, computer(s), food, clothing, shelter, cars - basically all the necessities of life and then some!
I have recently been researching solar energy usage for cooking - a lot of sites describe places in India which use various solar furnaces and ovens for cooking (and I have to say, many of these devices are VERY ingenious, especially in figuring out how to make and build parabolas for furnaces - but I digress), since fuel for cooking in rural areas tends to be scarce or otherwise difficult to come by.
The images I have seen of these people (and I don't know when some were taken, but some were from fairly recent times), while obviously very hard working, show that they are obviously impoverished.
That gives a baseline on what constitutes "poor" there - we haven't had a baseline of that level of "poor" since perhaps the Great Depression or further back, when people here were mainly subsistence farmers.
We cannot compete at all on the wage front - what your people are willing to work for, say in a yearly salary - many times doesn't even equal what is considered "poverty level" wages here in the USA (say $15-20,000 USD/year). This is considered "poverty" here (!!!).
The question isn't whether that is a lot of money - it is what can be bought with that amount, and the fact that if most people are earning a lot less, they can't buy as much, so employers here can't pay them as much - lowest common denominator, etc sets in...
I guess what I am trying to get at is that in order to compete for those jobs being outsourced, potential employees here would have to be willing to take the jobs at much, much less than what they were working for them - while knowing that they can't afford healthcare, shelter, food, clothing, etc - because those items don't drop in cost (heck, I have never seen prices on so called "durable goods" ever go down in my lifetime, yet) as fast as the wages would have to.
I think that is what has people the most upset about offshoring to India (or any other country) - the fact that in those countries, the standard of living is so low comparitively, there is absolutely no way to compete, and there isn't another skill or market they can transfer their skills to in order to continue to work (and it costs so much in money and time to learn something else - for anything else that might make money - I for example would love to learn something to go into biotech, like bioinformatics or something - but all of that could and is being easily offshored right now, so what else? - even if I could afford to get a real degree). This is causing a classic FUD reaction.
I know that sooner or later it will all settle out - some of us will stay, continue to have jobs, some of us will move on, and some of us will go under in one way or another. I don't harbor ill will toward someone in the world trying to get a leg up on their situation, so to speak - I applaud the effort and results. Personally, myself, I see this whole offshoring thing (along with all the other multitude upon multitude of fiascos and such) as part of larger issues, something which sometime, likely in 5-10 years, will cause the USA to implode, possibly sparking civil war and/or revolution - the outcome of either is likely to be a very, very bad thing.
That is, unless all of these problems are actually the result of peak oil issues - in which case the entire world is likely hosed as the last reservoirs are fought over. Sooner or later it is going to go nuclear over energy resources, if peak oil isn't a myth (and I don't think it is - even the oil companies know about peak oil, why do you think they are diversifying into alternate energy research, and changing names to move away from "oil" to "energy"?)...
There is a reason why the "founding fathers" of our country made the decision that our country would be governed in this manner - these men were NOT simpletons, but rather some of the most learned men of their age (and I daresay, they would be among some of the most learned men of OUR age). They studied the history of governments up to their time, examining things in very minute details, gradually forming what they thought (in their analysis) would be a workable government that could last for a very long time with internal peace (ie, not having civil wars/unrest every few decades or whatnot).
Interestingly enough, their first attempt failed (utterly, and rather quickly) - so they had to go back to the drawing board. Their next attempt worked rather well - until it was honestly screwed by Lincoln during the Civil War - which radically changed what was a series of independent countries (States) governed under an "umbrella" government for certain needs - into one "country" (the "USA", as many people refer to it) - which has radically altered a lot of everything, and will likely lead to the downfall of our nation in the end.
If you don't understand the subtle difference between "United States" and the "USA" - don't worry, the vast majority of the populace doesn't know, and doesn't care, it seems. People have forgotten what it means to have sovereignty (even personal sovereignty) - so you are not alone.
I will tell you this - knowing all of this, knowing our *real* history, and knowing where we are likely headed (or, more likely, we are already there) - makes me feel frightened and unsure about our government and our future. All I can do is go about my business, help educate others where I can, and hope (and work) for the best...
This is something that is being fought for here in the USA - a voter verifiable paper trail.
Slowly, people are "waking up" to the problem, but it is unclear whether enough will be done or recognized by the November elections (our presidential election time this year).
A voter-verifiable paper-trail is tantamount to running any form of democratic process (whether it is representative based, like here, or otherwise) - there needs to be a way for the voter to know that the machine recorded who they voted for correctly. That way, if there is a question of who won the election, a hand recount of ballots may be made.
With electronic machines (especially ones in which there is no publically auditable source code), though - all is up in the air. Only if a receipt is printed and given to the voter is there a way to really be sure (and this way is open to vote buying fraud, so it really shouldn't be implemented!). How are you to know that the screen and paper match what is really in memory (and/or on disk)? In a close election, unless there is major contestation done afterward, a cheating "winner" could skate by unless the population DEMANDED a recount of the printed record. Even then, who's to say the printer couldn't be controlled to print random "fake" votes not tallied in memory - in case of a recount (hopefully voter rolls would catch this - if open-source code was used, this code could be looked for as well - unless the compiler sticks it in, of course).
My biggest fear is that most voters (and even most votees!) will never understand these issues (and I haven't outlined them all - there have already been recorded "failures" of electronic voting machines, and our "mainstream" media has passed on most of these stories - so the voting constituency has NO CLUE), and the "elections" will continue to go on - and nothing (or everything, to our greatest detriment!!!) will change...
Text-based UIs tend to be fairly consistent in how they work - type in a field, tab/return to move to the next field (depending on if you are in "add" or "edit" mode), function keys to do various things, etc. A properly trained person can quickly move about the system, many times while on the phone, and looking away from the keyboard!
Such ease of use is not typical of GUIs, because of the mouse, which requires hand-eye coordination by definition. It is possible to build a GUI app that uses keystrokes, and even integrate a "heads down" system into it, but it tends to be clunky, because you are working against the GUI way of doing things, not with it. Furthermore, sometimes the widgets of the GUI will get in your way as a programmer. One example would be how some controls intercept the tab key (a requirement for heads down) - some may fire a defined event handler, others may interpret the tab in some other manner (popping a list down or whatever, without letting you override or intercept the tab), others may require you (as the programmer) to intercept it yourself at a higher level (leading to sometimes messy code, and always more work on your part).
Then, there is always the issue with how to deal with multiple "screens" - do you use a single form (ie, emulating a "terminal"), or do you switch between multiple forms? What about the forms not in focus - do you close them completely, or only hide them?
The list of issues can go on and on. It isn't that it is impossible to make a heads down GUI application - it is just that you are working against the flow of what a GUI is and is for.
So, it really comes down to the type of application being developed and the who the user is. In certain applications, it is better to have a simple green (or amber) screen heads down application - go to AutoZone or a similar place where they use VT100-style old-school terminals and you will see what I mean - in those environments (dirty hands, fat fingers, employees who aren't computer users most of the time), a simple terminal with simple keystrokes work best.
Other applications and users may require something different (and in certain very rare situations - it may not even be a keyboard/screen!)...
What do you mean by "a large array of very powerful lasers using spinning mirrors to make one of their spaceships to have NEGATIVE MASS"? Do you have references to current research showing this possibility (I dunno, maybe research showing lower mass by firing a laser at a spinning mirror or something)?
What I would like to know is what the kid was doing to roll the vehicle? Was the CG on the car too high (couldn't be, not on a regular car unless it was top loaded heavily on a roof rack or something)? It is very difficult to roll most cars, unless you are really trying (or very unlucky, I suppose)...
Some of the smartest and most knowledgable people I know are auto mechanics. Some of the most ignorant I know happen to be in IT, curiously enough...
I will never buy a car from a dealer again, unless it being sold salvage or scrap. Knowing how to work on vehicles is a plus (as well as having the tools to do so). The longer I can keep my vehicles going after they are paid off, the more money is in my pocket (that I can stick in savings and earn interest on). Really, the repairs of most older vehicles is way less than what it would cost to buy the car new (if you have it paid for, that is).
So, get a beater car for those times when you really need one (not too beater - something that has acceptable milage and runs well - an old Honda or something like that), use those other forms of transportation when you don't. If you do get a vehicle for occasional use, it would probably be best to get a small truck (an old Toyota or Mazda) - that way you can haul stuff when you need to.
I agree with you on your first point - it takes a LOT of resources to make a car, and the production of those raw materials (and the energy used) is HUGE. With that said...
When an automobile is "scrapped", 99.9% of the car is recycled. I don't know about you, but I have been to scrap yards and auto yards in my life, and every time I go, I am amazed.
Amazed at the level of recycling: For an automobile, first all of the fluids are drained from the car. For those fluids that can be (gasoline and oils, mainly), they are recycled back into the oil industry and other oil-based manufacturers (asphalt, and similar, mainly). Then, any parts which may have resale or remanufacturing value are removed - typically the engine, transmission, radiator, drive shafts, etc - all removed, and tested. Some are set aside for direct sales out of the yard (fun places to go - a section here for engines, another here for driveshafts, over there for chassis' - on and on). Others are put in a pile to be sent on to remanufacturers, who will take the parts apart, recycle the bad parts as scrap metal, clean and repair the rest, and sell those to places like AutoZone and Checker. Seats are kept, dashboards are kept, motors and such are kept. Whatever is left over is then sent on to the shredder.
Yeah, that's right - they SHRED the car. First the car is mashed flat (they don't do blocks anymore, I don't think). Up a conveyor belt, over and down into the hopper. At the bottom of the hopper are these huge hammers turning at crazy speeds (you would not want to fall in), which litterally pounds the vehicle apart. Over a series of grates to separate large chunks from small chunks, the chunks go through a series of magnets and air jets to separate light materials from heavy materials, ferrous from non-ferrous. All sorted into piles.
These piles are then sent on by rail for recycling - generally via ship (not much smelting done here in the States anymore) to China or something, where they are re-smelted into raw materials which we buy back to make into - TADA! - new cars.
Now, I am not saying that no pollution occurs because of this, nor am I saying that it is an "energy efficient" process. But it isn't nearly as bad as going with completely raw materials, and in a lot of cases, those remanufactured/recycled "whole parts" keep existing cars going on the road, sometimes long, long after the model (and sometimes the "dealer" - think International Pickups) has ceased to exist - thus helping the environment even more.
It simply isn't the days of throw-it-away-and-bury-it (never really was with automobiles - the automobile industry is a major recycler, always has been). Regular scrapyards do a similar thing, but with all sorts of scrap metal, not just vehicles (though many don't do one-off to-the-public sales of stuff, like many auto-yards will)...
Remember, it is the "United States of America" - not just "America", or the "Country of America", or the "State of America", or anything silly like that, but the "United States". Notice the capitalization of "States".
You see, each of the States of the Union *is* a country, with laws and constitutions drawn up by representatives of the People of that State. These laws and constitutions are supposed to reflect and be based upon (but not in entirety) the overarching Constitution of the United States. Each of these States, as they came into being, and gradually gained "Statehood", were given the option of joining the "United States". Invariably, the individual States signed on to become part of the greater Union (however, I believe some of the late joiners only did so not because of an educated reasoning, but because "all the others have" - ie, herd mentality) - safety in numbers?
All of this really is moot, though - the whole idea of what a State is truely dissolved with Lincoln and the Civil War. The Civil War had very little to do with slavery, and everything to do with States Rights. Since the Union was voluntarily entered into by citizens of States that are technically Sovereign, they also had the right (since this right is not (was not?) in the United States Constitution, thus goes to the States and People) to secceed from that Union. A bunch of States got together, said "yea", and decided they wanted to branch off and form a different Union (supposedly within their rights as Sovereign States). The reason this occurred was because Lincoln was telling the States how to run things - instead of letting these States run their own business as how they saw fit.
The people in those times could see what was happenning (not sure how, they didn't have TV or internet - just newspapers and telegraphs - but perhaps they were more interested in how they governed themselves, or less satiated, or something - ah, what am I saying - THEY WEREN'T F'N SHEEP, THAT'S WHY!) - and decided to change it. Unfortunately (for all of the States, and the people governed within), they lost - big.
So now we have the "United States of America", but in name only. Even that is fading - more often than not we are called, and call ourselves, the "US", "USA", "America" (forget the fact that America is a region), and to a lesser extent, the "United States".
I am not sure what it could be, but I know it has to do with business, technology, finance, governments (past, current, and future) - and where it is all headed - or could head, if we geeks of the world would just get our damn act together and make it happen...
But he feels that we lack some information - information about the world that we could only gain if we were all super-well read (some of us are, but not all of us), versed in world history and business, and how it all interelates.
I wonder if he is doing this to spur on such things like the Free State project, or something similar? How many of you have thought "How can I escape from the tyranny that is our world?" - but didn't know how? Where to get the resources, the money, everything needed to start a country? Is it even possible today?
In Crypto, he showed one possible way. In Quicksilver - he is showing how it was done long ago. We cringe and wonder today over how corporations are controlling our world, but we have yet to see (and pray we never do!) something on the order of the East India Company - a world dominating corporation that lasted nearly 200 years, had a standing army and navy, and it's own country to boot (India) - before the British finally ousted them and broke them up.
Does anyone here think such a thing couldn't happen again? Have any of you paid attention to the rise of private companies that provide private "security" training and weapons systems? What about all the of the oil companies gradually buying each other up - could Standard Oil come back from the dead?
I think Neal may be trying to teach us something, if only we would look and learn...
Cool! Now, where would one find a full scale rendering (wasn't it 4096 x 4096? - don't know the bit depth)...
Instead of looking at the light - I look at the crosswalk signs. They blink only so many times - if I am coming up to a stale green and the crosswalk is blinking red (don't walk), I will typically slow down and stop if I am more than 100-150 feet or so away. If the crosswalk is still "white" (walk), but as I approach it goes blinking - then I know I still have several seconds to get through - a tap or more on the accelerator and I am through.
In the downtown area (where the speed limit is like 25-30 MPH), the crosswalk signals, when they are blinking "don't walk", count down the seconds as well! Very handy in my system (I wish they were all like this).
Now, in some areas this doesn't work well - "don't walk" will pop, but the light will stay green a few seconds longer, so you have to keep both in mind. Other problems are sometimes the "don't walk" is blinking, but then it will go back to "walk" (auto sensing lights that sense when a car on the cross street comes up, starting the timedown, but then the car turns right, so it resets).
Other techniques I use involve judging the traffic - because of all the other lights, and how traffic flows, if there is a red light ahead, I can tell if it is just about to change because of the traffic crossing, and alter my speed prior to getting to the light so I don't have to stop. Works pretty well, except in rush hour traffic.
You want to know the crazy thing about all of this? For some reason, most people don't seem to understand all of this, even though they typically have been driving longer than me (I didn't learn how to drive, nor get a license, until I was 21 - I am 30 now, with three vehicles, go figure). People are idiots...
I remember seeing an image of that in an old computer graphics "coffee table"-type book back in high school - and you mentioning that popped it in my head...
If you ever see reproductions of period articles (or the real articles if you can find copies!), you always notice a few things when the article is about Tesla:
1. Pictures of airships
2. Large searchlights
Invariably, these searchlights are "trained" on the airships - leading to a couple of possible conclusions, given the technology level of Tesla's day:
1. The airships are somehow being powered by the "searchlights", or
2. The airships are being "disabled" by the "searchlights"
In reality, both theories stem from the same technology, which Tesla likely knew about, and possibly developed (though I haven't seen much on this - I think some things are mentioned in some of his studies).
This technology would be using large, high-power arc-lamp searchlights, with UV filters over them, then using a Tesla coil to send energy (resonant, high-frequency AC current) down the "beam". The energy could both power the airships, transmit information wirelessly, and likely disable airplanes (and other airships), by disrupting their electrical systems (among other effects).
Tesla spoke a lot about his "death ray" in his later years, up until his death. He made offers to the US government to develop this technology, but they wouldn't take him up on it (who knows why - maybe they thought he was a crackpot, too eccentric, too unreliable, or maybe they just wanted to get the tech after he died).
When he dies, many of his papers were seized by the US Government (as well as by the Soviets, from Eastern Bloc countries (Czecloslovakia?)). The FOIA papers (pdf's) I have show a great interest in this "death ray" device, but most of what Tesla was thinking died with him.
Interestingly, the US DIA site had some "artist renderings" of Soviet "star-wars" weaponry from the 1980's - much of it looked *very* similar to what has been portrayed around Tesla, and his "death ray" machine...
At work, I use an AST keyboard (probably the "next best" keyboard I have used and liked because of it's "feel"), but with the tabs up, and a wrist rest - I find that if I put the tabs down, it feels "wrong"...
Hmm - maybe I will try with the tabs up again, and see if things are really as bad as I think...
I know this is late, but I have copies of FOIA information related to Tesla - two large PDF files, in fact. I can't remember where I obtained them from (heck, maybe from the FOIA site?), but it definitely shows that the US government was very interested in his ideas (specifically his ideas on "death rays", which seem to be a method of using UV light to ionize the air, as a conductive path for electricity), and even with the FOIA release, there is still a lot more that our gov't hasn't released (as shown by the tons of redacted/blacked-out lines in the FOIA PDFs).
However, I wonder if there isn't something more with CT/RSI. Why, for instance, do some people suffer from it, while others don't? For instance, I have never had (and here's hoping I don't ever have, from what I have read of the pain, it is HORRIBLE) any form of wrist or hand pain on a recurring, repeatable basis.
I have been using computers for almost 20 years now. If anything, I should be a case for "computer ailments". My first computer was a TRS-80 Color Computer 2 when I was 10 years old. I had it hooked up to a 19 inch color TV in my bedroom that I sat right in front of ("don't sit too close or you'll go blind" - I guess my parents didn't believe that applied with a computer - I used that TV as a *monitor*. MMM...32x16 black on green - ok, I'll admit, I am pretty nearsighted). From that time on I have pretty much sat in front of a computer of one sort or another coding.
Twenty plus years later here I am typing some more, and I haven't had any carpal flareups or anything like I have heard described. I have had minor pain in one wrist, that went away when I stopped - so I would stop, but that hasn't happened to me in months, if not over a year. It wasn't anything like the pain I hear described by sufferers of CT/RSI - so I think I just was tired, so I rested - seemed simple (or, maybe I did, and I did the right thing to stop?).
I have a wristrest in front of my keyboard at work, and at home I use a Model M (yay, clicky!)...
Is it me, am I lucky? Could it be a genetic predisposition for some folks? Are they doing something or working in a manner different from me that causes it? I will admit that I don't have a normal typing style, it is kinda "homegrown" over the years - is this the reason? Do people with CT/RSI who use keyboards tend to be those who practice real typing skills? Could these skills, being applied to a type of keyboard (that is, soft electronic, not mechanical) not in existence when the style of teaching was thought up (ie, back when typewriters were first being made), be the problem?
you in intensive care.
What do you mean? Have you ever fixed your own brakes on an automobile?
I can guarantee you that brakes are one of the easiest parts on a vehicle to fix - especially disc brakes. I just replaced the pads on the front brakes of my wife's Neon this weekend - about an hour's worth of time for both sides.
Granted, drum brakes are more difficult beasts (all those damn springs) - but if you jack up both sides of the vehicle, and remember that each side is opposite of each other (that is, the parts are located opposite - hard to explain until you look) - and the fact that they typically color-code the springs (and if they aren't, it would do you good to code them yourself for next time 'round) - even those are easy to fix (ok, invest in some brake tools, too - makes getting those springs and other bits on and off fairly easy).
If you do it right, there isn't any danger. Now, if you are doing a master cylinder replacement, or anything where you "break" the system - you need to bleed out the brake hydraulics and make sure there isn't any air bubbles trapped, but they do make one-man bleeder kits for that, which work fairly well. Finally, I always take the vehicle out for a small "test-run" around the neighborhood at slower speeds, then out onto the street - to check it all out before I let others drive.
Try fixing your brakes next time - you will find it is fairly easy, and not too expensive (and damn cheap compared to taking it into a shop)...
In other words, it would be cheaper to build a city underground (if starting from near-scratch), than it would be to build all of the buildings, etc aboveground for the same size city.
Now, as I noted, I am not sure on the reality of this, only that my source told it to me third-hand, noting that there was an article on some site somewhere (he thought it was /. - I don't think it was?) - plus there is the issue of needing mineral rights to the land to bore deeply ( > 100 feet? Where do mineral rights needs begin?), and a host of other issues (ie, would people want to live underground, even if it were cheaper, took less time to travel in the city, and made all the aboveground land available for farming?)...
Amen to that!
I have often wondered if it would be worth my time (and if I could convince my employer) to not take out ANY TAXES at all, calculate my rate, etc - then take the money that would be for taxes and deposit it into my money market account.
Thus, I could accrue interest on it myself (make my money work for me!), then when tax time comes around, knowing what I owe - pay that sum to the government.
Instead of the G getting the interest, I would get it. I don't know if this is possible without a lot of hassle (probably could be done with a good accountant, perhaps?) - but it would be great to do so...
Amazingly, it worked - I don't know if it was used the LinModem drivers (Lucent), or what - but I was able to dial out just fine with it, which surprised the hell out of me.
For those that don't know, the modem in a 1610 is a "built-in" modem, has a jack on the left side of the laptop, next to the floppy drive. It almost has to be a win-modem type of setup, but once again, I can't remember off-hand.
As far as external hardware modems are concerned, they are still made, but it is rare to find them at retail outlets...