From this article, it sounds like two beams (well, 1 split beam) are used for writing, whereas only 1 beam is used for reading. Also "By varying the reference beam angle, wavelength, or media position many different holograms can be recorded in the same volume of material."
Of course it's written by a reporter who may or may not have a firm grasp of the material.
And yet neither you nor your sibling posters noting that important piece of information are being modded up. I guess some people just want to believe the sky is falling no matter what.
I'm confused.. why would anyone go through the trouble of dressing up as an evil elf or direct Xena: Warrior Princess just to do a little nonsilent wailing?
Exactly. Despite the opinions of many New Orleaners I've met, the universe does not revolve solely around them, or their city. Hurricanes are rarely an issue in the U.S.., outside of the gulf states -- the only exception being the odd seasonal hurricane that comes up and the atlantic and strikes a northern state.
In any event, this seems like an issue that should be dealt with on the local municipal level, and certainly not on a Federal one. There are no hurricanes in my area, and I have no desire to subsidize the south when it wouldn't have any advantage to me and would just mean a lot of additional tax burden, and I would take a very dim view of any legislation that tried to force this. If people who choose to live in hurricane-prone places essentially unsuited to human habitation have problems with their weather, obviously their governments should address these issues. But it's not a universal problem, and it does no good to make it one artificially.
Were you trying to make a parody? Because that sounds 100% rational to me. It's local government's responsibility to prepare for disaster (through building codes and, say, not perpetuating a city below sea level right next to the ocean, a lake, and a river) and set up emergency response. There's no Federal Ambulance Squadron, or National Emergency Shelter Network, nor should there be. The Federal government can come in when necessary, but it's a last resort, and their role is mainly one of coordination and logistics, not first responders.
At any rate, I worked at a place with no-flush urinals and they were terrible. There was always a film of urine residue which smelled foul, and they required more cleaning than a normal urinal. There's no way a gravity filter will do an adequate job of passing and trapping all waste without water. Timed flushes would meet the goal of using less water while still maintining a semi-self cleansing system. A timer could be triggered by an infrared sensor so that the urinal flushes no more than once every 15 minutes or whatever.
Also, I don't know if anyone's aware of this, but people PUT THINGS in urinals. Especially drunk people. (Put things in urinals, not get put in urinals.. at least, that I've seen). Most objects will flush through in a normal urinal, but in a filtered urinal you now have a clogged system. And really, urinals are clogged often enough as it is, which means people will just have to use the normal toilets and waste 1.whatever gallons of water, or just piss in the same water and hope it doesn't splash much.
AFAIK, evidence from private entities is admissible even if it was obtained illegally (i.e., through tresspassing or the like). Only law enforcement agencies require warrants.
This story is now on the front page of Google News and other large news sources.. I can't help but picture the furniture flying in Redmond right now. It can't be pretty.
Why are you making exceptions for electricty and happiness?
Because they're a step removed from the directly observable. You can't use any of your senses, except perhaps getting shocked, to sense electricity; you have to build a device to indicate its presence. I agree that you're always observing effects, however I was merely trying to stem off the inaccurate argument that intangibles must not be a part of subjective reality since we can't directly perceive them. Electricity may not have been the best example, of something intangible, but I'll have to live with my post.
But in any case, you're making this complicated, as there are good, scientifically grounded answers. Physics (and cats) tell us that things don't have a defined state until they are observed.
Because it IS complicated. There is a whole discipline devoted to the study of objective reality, or truth as it's usually referred to, called Philosophy. It's arguably the root of all science. Also physics doesn't tell us anything; it's invented and written as we go along. It's a model for the interaction of matter and energy as we perceive it, and it doesn't contradict what I said at all, which was that observations are subjective by definition, therefore we all work with a subjective reality, which I also said is usually a workable substitute for objective reality.
Take, for example, dropping an object. How do you know that it's going to fall? Because it's fallen every time you've dropped it in the past. That's not proof of the reality of gravity, it's only proof that your past experience has conditioned you to expect it to drop. In practical terms, we can assume that our past experiences are indicative of truth, (because we really have no other alternative) otherwise we'd have to spend the rest of our lives dropping stuff to see if it fell. At some point we have to just accept that we cannot know with 100% certainty, but our perception is "good enough."
It's an unsettling and unintuitive concept to be sure, but if you could work out a logical proof that we can ever know truth (objective reality), you'd be the first in history.
Anyway, I subjectively believe that it's time for me to go, so I don't have time to clean up this post.
Well.. there's limited evidence to suggest that all the subconscious techniques of advertising have an effect. From everything I've seen, the effectiveness is within the margin of error between a straightforward commercial, and a "tainted" commercial. The significant gap is between advertising or no advertising. Some studies suggest that the choices of one's parents has a far larger effect than advertising on a trip to the grocery store, but advertising was the second most frequent reason people chose a product. Interestingly, most people didn't notice their behavior until asked what brand their parents used.
But again, the reason people chose a more expensive brand that is heavily marketed is more a response to the fact that it was marketed, versus something like "Fruity-Ohs" which don't advertise at all.
But subliminal suggestion and posthypnotic suggestion are opposites -- one asserts that people are impressionable in their alert state below their level of consciousness, and the other asserts that people must be in a "trance." However, since only a small percent of the population is highly susceptible to hypnosis, and almost nobody is susceptible when unwilling, I don't think we have to worry about hypnotic advertising any time soon.
What you're discussing is morals, which are tangential to reality. More specifically you're talking about ethics, which are the arbitrary rules people create regarding what is and is not moral. It's difficult to define reality without being circular, but as I posted above, it's definately subjective. Only the irrationals can claim to have direct knowledge of reality.
Well if you want to get really picky about it, the "objective" characteristic of reality is usually one of the last definitions listed, meaning the least relevant or least often used. In one of the definitions at answers.com, reality is defined as "Meaning #1: all of your experiences that determine how things appear to you Synonym: world." So your own source conflicts with your assertion.
Further, it's impossible to make an objective observation since the act of observing requires perception. So for all practical purposes reality is perception, and vice versa, since we are incapable of deliberately interacting with things we cannot perceive. (Not to be confused with intangibles such as electricity or happiness, which are observed indirectly by their effects). Objective reality may arguably be a goal, but it is never achievable and our subjective realities are often a good enough substitute.
You may think your +1 post has been overlooked, but the real explanation is that we at/. don't like our discussions clouded by stuff like facts, especially from firsthand accounts. We prefer all our discussions to be based on heresay or speculation grounded firmly in imagination.
People pay for ringtones? You mean those little song snippets, usually in midi form, that you can transfer to most phones for free with a USB cable?
Re:Your show is great fun to watch and all, but...
on
Ask The Mythbusters
·
· Score: 1
I wish that were true.. unfortunately they're the "trendsetters" on a huge percent of legislation that ends up getting passed by other states. None of the good laws, mind you; just the laws that keep people from smoking in a drinking establishment.. stuff like that.
Slashdot Mirror
From this article, it sounds like two beams (well, 1 split beam) are used for writing, whereas only 1 beam is used for reading. Also "By varying the reference beam angle, wavelength, or media position many different holograms can be recorded in the same volume of material."
Of course it's written by a reporter who may or may not have a firm grasp of the material.
And yet neither you nor your sibling posters noting that important piece of information are being modded up. I guess some people just want to believe the sky is falling no matter what.
I'm confused.. why would anyone go through the trouble of dressing up as an evil elf or direct Xena: Warrior Princess just to do a little nonsilent wailing?
jst sv spc b rmvng vwls pncttn nmbrs nd mdfr ks
So will health insurance be free as in beer, or will beer be free as in cancer treatment? I'm so confused.
How many of these do you suppose are stuffed behind the entertainment center with the rest of the wall warts?
Probably not more than 1 per X-Box.
Exactly. Despite the opinions of many New Orleaners I've met, the universe does not revolve solely around them, or their city. Hurricanes are rarely an issue in the U.S.., outside of the gulf states -- the only exception being the odd seasonal hurricane that comes up and the atlantic and strikes a northern state.
In any event, this seems like an issue that should be dealt with on the local municipal level, and certainly not on a Federal one. There are no hurricanes in my area, and I have no desire to subsidize the south when it wouldn't have any advantage to me and would just mean a lot of additional tax burden, and I would take a very dim view of any legislation that tried to force this. If people who choose to live in hurricane-prone places essentially unsuited to human habitation have problems with their weather, obviously their governments should address these issues. But it's not a universal problem, and it does no good to make it one artificially.
Were you trying to make a parody? Because that sounds 100% rational to me. It's local government's responsibility to prepare for disaster (through building codes and, say, not perpetuating a city below sea level right next to the ocean, a lake, and a river) and set up emergency response. There's no Federal Ambulance Squadron, or National Emergency Shelter Network, nor should there be. The Federal government can come in when necessary, but it's a last resort, and their role is mainly one of coordination and logistics, not first responders.
At any rate, I worked at a place with no-flush urinals and they were terrible. There was always a film of urine residue which smelled foul, and they required more cleaning than a normal urinal. There's no way a gravity filter will do an adequate job of passing and trapping all waste without water. Timed flushes would meet the goal of using less water while still maintining a semi-self cleansing system. A timer could be triggered by an infrared sensor so that the urinal flushes no more than once every 15 minutes or whatever.
Also, I don't know if anyone's aware of this, but people PUT THINGS in urinals. Especially drunk people. (Put things in urinals, not get put in urinals.. at least, that I've seen). Most objects will flush through in a normal urinal, but in a filtered urinal you now have a clogged system. And really, urinals are clogged often enough as it is, which means people will just have to use the normal toilets and waste 1.whatever gallons of water, or just piss in the same water and hope it doesn't splash much.
At least you only cut off a finger. This guy took obviously thought sexual reproduction would now be a thing of the past.
What kind of fuel does a search engine run on?
I don't think a paper model of a combustion engine turned by an electric motor qualifies as a "Functional V8 Engine." But that's just me...
AFAIK, evidence from private entities is admissible even if it was obtained illegally (i.e., through tresspassing or the like). Only law enforcement agencies require warrants.
This story is now on the front page of Google News and other large news sources.. I can't help but picture the furniture flying in Redmond right now. It can't be pretty.
I wish they'd let me pay my bills to an accuracy of 10%..
Me: "I know my loan payment is $300, but how about I just give you $270 and we call it even."
Bank: "Done And Done!"
Seriously, 10% isn't anywhere near accurate in any science that I know of.
Overshoot your max depth in a sub by 5% and you probably won't see daylight again.
A 90% success rate for birth control would be about the same as not using protection.
"I'm fired?!? But I'm only late every other week!"
Your 1024x768 LCD must have at least 78,643 dead pixels before it's considered defective.
I mean, what are the odds of guessing the rate of expansion of the universe to within ten percent? Something like, I dunno.. one in ten??
It's apparently a device that will spit out gibberish when you are talking on the phone.
Thanks, but I already have a girlfriend.
That, ladies and gentlemen, was the sound of one AC completely missing the joke, followed by a transcript of the gibberish device in action.
Why are you making exceptions for electricty and happiness?
Because they're a step removed from the directly observable. You can't use any of your senses, except perhaps getting shocked, to sense electricity; you have to build a device to indicate its presence. I agree that you're always observing effects, however I was merely trying to stem off the inaccurate argument that intangibles must not be a part of subjective reality since we can't directly perceive them. Electricity may not have been the best example, of something intangible, but I'll have to live with my post.
But in any case, you're making this complicated, as there are good, scientifically grounded answers. Physics (and cats) tell us that things don't have a defined state until they are observed.
Because it IS complicated. There is a whole discipline devoted to the study of objective reality, or truth as it's usually referred to, called Philosophy. It's arguably the root of all science. Also physics doesn't tell us anything; it's invented and written as we go along. It's a model for the interaction of matter and energy as we perceive it, and it doesn't contradict what I said at all, which was that observations are subjective by definition, therefore we all work with a subjective reality, which I also said is usually a workable substitute for objective reality.
Take, for example, dropping an object. How do you know that it's going to fall? Because it's fallen every time you've dropped it in the past. That's not proof of the reality of gravity, it's only proof that your past experience has conditioned you to expect it to drop. In practical terms, we can assume that our past experiences are indicative of truth, (because we really have no other alternative) otherwise we'd have to spend the rest of our lives dropping stuff to see if it fell. At some point we have to just accept that we cannot know with 100% certainty, but our perception is "good enough."
It's an unsettling and unintuitive concept to be sure, but if you could work out a logical proof that we can ever know truth (objective reality), you'd be the first in history.
Anyway, I subjectively believe that it's time for me to go, so I don't have time to clean up this post.
Well.. there's limited evidence to suggest that all the subconscious techniques of advertising have an effect. From everything I've seen, the effectiveness is within the margin of error between a straightforward commercial, and a "tainted" commercial. The significant gap is between advertising or no advertising. Some studies suggest that the choices of one's parents has a far larger effect than advertising on a trip to the grocery store, but advertising was the second most frequent reason people chose a product. Interestingly, most people didn't notice their behavior until asked what brand their parents used.
But again, the reason people chose a more expensive brand that is heavily marketed is more a response to the fact that it was marketed, versus something like "Fruity-Ohs" which don't advertise at all.
But subliminal suggestion and posthypnotic suggestion are opposites -- one asserts that people are impressionable in their alert state below their level of consciousness, and the other asserts that people must be in a "trance." However, since only a small percent of the population is highly susceptible to hypnosis, and almost nobody is susceptible when unwilling, I don't think we have to worry about hypnotic advertising any time soon.
What you're discussing is morals, which are tangential to reality. More specifically you're talking about ethics, which are the arbitrary rules people create regarding what is and is not moral. It's difficult to define reality without being circular, but as I posted above, it's definately subjective. Only the irrationals can claim to have direct knowledge of reality.
Well if you want to get really picky about it, the "objective" characteristic of reality is usually one of the last definitions listed, meaning the least relevant or least often used. In one of the definitions at answers.com, reality is defined as "Meaning #1: all of your experiences that determine how things appear to you Synonym: world." So your own source conflicts with your assertion.
Further, it's impossible to make an objective observation since the act of observing requires perception. So for all practical purposes reality is perception, and vice versa, since we are incapable of deliberately interacting with things we cannot perceive. (Not to be confused with intangibles such as electricity or happiness, which are observed indirectly by their effects). Objective reality may arguably be a goal, but it is never achievable and our subjective realities are often a good enough substitute.
You may think your +1 post has been overlooked, but the real explanation is that we at /. don't like our discussions clouded by stuff like facts, especially from firsthand accounts. We prefer all our discussions to be based on heresay or speculation grounded firmly in imagination.
Real tech on CSI? Better start from something a lot higher than 5, or start counting fractions like parents trying to scare their kids.
People pay for ringtones? You mean those little song snippets, usually in midi form, that you can transfer to most phones for free with a USB cable?
I wish that were true.. unfortunately they're the "trendsetters" on a huge percent of legislation that ends up getting passed by other states. None of the good laws, mind you; just the laws that keep people from smoking in a drinking establishment.. stuff like that.
I have to wonder why the FBI would have tons of high powered explosives..