If you go to a camera shop that buys and sells used cameras, you can find some excellent deals. This can be better than eBay, because they will let you handle the camera, open all the little doors, push all the buttons, etc. You might even find a shop willing to let you shoot a roll of film and develop it right there.
Good cameras are Nikons and later Canons, but Minoltas aren't bad either. I've had good results with a Minolta X-700 which can be purchased for less than $200. Watch the light seals on the backs of older cameras, the foam rubber ones can get sticky, and velvet ones can wear down.
Why bother with remote-controlled? Why not gather a bunch of people around yourself and brainwash them until they believe that driving an explosive-laden vehicle into a crowded area will blow them straight into utopia? It's a wonder that no one has thought of this before.
The funny thing about that, is that it possibly did help him get the job. In a big corporation like Motorola, the resumes are scanned and then HR searches for keywords. Your friend managed to get in one extra hit for "C" in the programming section, and quite possibly came out on top of the search.
This is what I like about you. First you twist the argument around to a completely different angle, and then you make statements that are true in the context of the new argument. This provides the illusion of a punishing rebuttal, but it depends on the victim of the tactic not noticing the sleight-of-hand.
In this case, you twisted the argument away from home use to enterprise use. And then you begin to make obvious statements in the context of enterprise network conditions. However I fail to see what 14 years of enterprise Unix support and a $33 D-Link firewall appliance have to do with each other. Of course we were talking about a home network. The firewall/router setup I described was perfectly adequate for a home network, at least if any unauthorized wireless connections are blocked.
So what is it? Am I right, and the single-machine setup is great for a situation where you have physical control over access to the internal network? So far your only answer has been "I have 14 years of experience and a single-purpose firewall is the ONLY way to do it in a multi-user commercial installation, which has nothing to do with the fact that in my previous statement I was recommending such things as $33 firewall appliances for home use."
The services I mentioned were internal services, meaning they have nothing to do whatsoever with the outside world. The firewall has two network interfaces; one connects to the internal network, the other connects to the bandwidth. Caching DNS and DHCP on your internal network does not punch holes in your external security.
My firewall is the bottom half of an old HP network-enabled scanner, which means that it is a simple case with no drive bays, just big enough to house a standard motherboard. It has a 486-DX2/66 processor and small hard drive, and two 10MB/s network cards. The cost to me was zero, and it does not clamp down on bandwidth at all. In fact, it make the internet connection a little more zippy due to the caching DNS server. To the inside, it's a small web server, DHCP server, caching DNS, file server, and internet gateway. To the outside, it's an array of blocked ports.
It's a Linux distribution. It's just all set up and locked down for firewall use, with all the features installed that you might want to use.
Software firewalls are not that great, hardware firewalls are not as easily updated. By using an old box and a firewall distribution, you can set up a firewall and also have a nice local DNS, DHCP, time, file, and so on server for your network.
This looks a little heavy compared to the FreeSCO floppy distribution I use, but when it's no longer Slashdotted I'll see if it has anything worth reconfiguring my firewall for.
I don't think so. Programs that use the FAT filesystem have been out there for several coon's ages or the age of a really old coon.
FreeDOS does not distribute in the FAT filesystem, interestingly: the official distribution is a CD-ROM ISO image only. They also don't distribute product or media preformatted with FAT. I don't even think Microsoft is going after programs that can create a FAT filesystem, so FreeDOS can format a hard disk and you're good to go.
However, I wouldn't mind if they did make it ext2. If you're booting with FreeDOS, it doesn't really matter what the filesystem is. Just allow reading of FAT partitions and floppies, and you can copy over all the old DOS software you wanted to run. Might be a few bugs here and there, but I guess when Microsoft wants to play rough, you just get out of the way.
unable to find any record of a higher resolution photographic (i.e. non-scientific) digital image that has been created without resizing a smaller, lower resolution image or using an interpolated image.
Why not throw in resampled and stretched as well? How about expanded or even made bigger too?
I bet the funny thing about using anti-static polymer for data storage, is that it's sensitive to static. One little zap and a gigabyte of data is gone.
If your parents are as computer-unsavvy as you claim, they will not use this. Maybe, with your help, a couple family photos and a minimal blurb of self-awareness "Hey, this is our website and it works!"
After that, it will be as static as if it were etched in a stone tablet. Any updates will be done by you when you're visiting, you'll show them how to update the site, they'll nod and smile, and then it will be etched in stone again until you come back.
Just go ahead and buy them a new clock or a DVD player or a warm blanket. Better than saddling them with something that will be perceived as a responsibility and continual drudgery.
There's no reason to do this. This is actually not hardware, this is just preinstalled software that you have no choice or control over.
Network functions in-BIOS? Remote manageability? Woohoo. Finally, the Feds will be able to control and spy on your computer with all the ease they are accustomed to with the telephone system.
Thank you very much, but I define "hardware" as the silicon I bought, and "software" to be program information that I can choose to run on that hardware. There is no reason to force all this software into the hardware purchase. No good reason, that is.
Nah, the $2 billion company "merged" with a $6 billion company, and the ritual cleansing by fire is underway. Since I'm only a contract/temp anyway, the axe fell in the path of least resistance.
I don't know if I really believe this article all that much. A couple years back, at the place I work (*cough* will be unemployed from after Wednesday), they upgraded the network to CAT-6 and three times the ports. That meant they had to rewire the entire front office cubefarm, which is two stores with a 6" subfloor each, and wiring columns running between stories.
When all those cables converge on a wiring closet, they start to get bundled up pretty high. There's almost no room to run additional cables, plus it would be a huge unsightly mess. We hired an outside contractor to do the job, so they did professional work and disposed of the old wiring. They almost had to...with a 6" subfloor, you either pull cables through with the old wiring, or rip up every single carpet square and floor tile. I can't imagine this situation being much different for other companies.
Yep...this is looking pretty attractive, even though my vision is fine.
Why? Because it's a phone where the designers are actually paying attention to how the user interface works! I'd love to have that on my current phone.
When the user interface is basically the image your company projects to the world, why do they apparently stick a solitary sophomore intern on the job of creating it? Wish I could program in my own interface.
If anything you do causes an object to fly away at high speed, your roommate will either be directly in the flight path OR in the reflected trajectory from one or more walls.
Addendum: when the object is thrown back at even higher speed, it will invariably bounce back and hit your roommate again.
No, if you read the page, he's advocating that everyone do this. And it's not even that remarkable from the hacking standpoint, since Mozilla's mouse gesture routines are written in Javascript anyway.
I'd also like to add that the submitter is merely spamming all of us with his own application. Check the email address. And he wants you to link to the JAR hosted by his site; is this another "make it popular and then charge for it" scheme?
This is a user interface feature that randomly turns on and off or changes behavior, depending on which web page you're on. How popular do you think the mouse would be, if for random periods it switched directions, reversed buttons, or turned off completely?
I'm not slamming the concept of mouse gestures in general; some people like them and do find them useful. What I'm looking at here is making the user interface decision up to the web developer, and not the user. Going from page to page and either having mouse gestures, not having them, or having some wierd implementation; that's annoying.
It will be the final straw that kills Javascript (if this becomes slightly popular), as people will turn off Javascript in order to take back control of their user interface. I already have....
Honestly, it's a pretty stupid idea. Let me illustrate why: scroller mice. Once you get used to a scroll mouse, then you have to use a computer that just has a normal mouse, it's a major pain.
If you depend on every web page to implement mouse gestures, then you'll get this effect from page to page while you're browsing! It would be annoying to no end. And it's not an easily visible thing you can check for, unless each web page also uses some kind of cheesy "Gestures Enabled" logo. And each site might implement it differently, so that strokes mean different things from page to page. I repeat: stupid idea.
A user interface tool should be just that: part of the user interface. Just like a keyboard or mouse, gestures take time to become accustomed to. A user interface feature needs to act the same way no matter what you're doing.
Put them all in a frame, each pointing at a phototransistor, and link to a frequency generator or microcontroller with MIDI output. Now you have a laser harp.
In fact, here's a very informative website on the subject: The 250 laser harp project. Includes links to different projects, schematics, part sources, etc.
There is no room for asking whether space mining is feasible or not; there simply is no other option for building large structures in space and on other planets. What we need to be looking at is what methods of space mining are feasible, as well as refining and processing options.
Back during the big anthrax scare, they were doing vaccine trials at the medical school at Vanderbilt University. My sisters had a few friends who were lured by the mad cash (about $200 or $500) and became guinea pigs...apparently some of them got sick, and from what I understand the vaccine had a certain risk of causing a heart condition.
So don't volunteer for these studies for the cash; only do it if you are prepared to become a medical sacrifice for the good of the world. Or something like that.
(as an aside, I checked out your ProfQuotes link. Any idea when that was started? The humor section of our newspaper at Rose-Hulman had a Wacky Prof Quotes section back in 1999 or so, and it was always the funniest part of the paper.)
Slashdot Mirror
If you go to a camera shop that buys and sells used cameras, you can find some excellent deals. This can be better than eBay, because they will let you handle the camera, open all the little doors, push all the buttons, etc. You might even find a shop willing to let you shoot a roll of film and develop it right there.
Good cameras are Nikons and later Canons, but Minoltas aren't bad either. I've had good results with a Minolta X-700 which can be purchased for less than $200. Watch the light seals on the backs of older cameras, the foam rubber ones can get sticky, and velvet ones can wear down.
Why bother with remote-controlled? Why not gather a bunch of people around yourself and brainwash them until they believe that driving an explosive-laden vehicle into a crowded area will blow them straight into utopia? It's a wonder that no one has thought of this before.
The funny thing about that, is that it possibly did help him get the job. In a big corporation like Motorola, the resumes are scanned and then HR searches for keywords. Your friend managed to get in one extra hit for "C" in the programming section, and quite possibly came out on top of the search.
This is what I like about you. First you twist the argument around to a completely different angle, and then you make statements that are true in the context of the new argument. This provides the illusion of a punishing rebuttal, but it depends on the victim of the tactic not noticing the sleight-of-hand.
In this case, you twisted the argument away from home use to enterprise use. And then you begin to make obvious statements in the context of enterprise network conditions. However I fail to see what 14 years of enterprise Unix support and a $33 D-Link firewall appliance have to do with each other. Of course we were talking about a home network. The firewall/router setup I described was perfectly adequate for a home network, at least if any unauthorized wireless connections are blocked.
So what is it? Am I right, and the single-machine setup is great for a situation where you have physical control over access to the internal network? So far your only answer has been "I have 14 years of experience and a single-purpose firewall is the ONLY way to do it in a multi-user commercial installation, which has nothing to do with the fact that in my previous statement I was recommending such things as $33 firewall appliances for home use."
Um, you don't know anything. At all.
The services I mentioned were internal services, meaning they have nothing to do whatsoever with the outside world. The firewall has two network interfaces; one connects to the internal network, the other connects to the bandwidth. Caching DNS and DHCP on your internal network does not punch holes in your external security.
My firewall is the bottom half of an old HP network-enabled scanner, which means that it is a simple case with no drive bays, just big enough to house a standard motherboard. It has a 486-DX2/66 processor and small hard drive, and two 10MB/s network cards. The cost to me was zero, and it does not clamp down on bandwidth at all. In fact, it make the internet connection a little more zippy due to the caching DNS server. To the inside, it's a small web server, DHCP server, caching DNS, file server, and internet gateway. To the outside, it's an array of blocked ports.
It's a Linux distribution. It's just all set up and locked down for firewall use, with all the features installed that you might want to use.
Software firewalls are not that great, hardware firewalls are not as easily updated. By using an old box and a firewall distribution, you can set up a firewall and also have a nice local DNS, DHCP, time, file, and so on server for your network.
This looks a little heavy compared to the FreeSCO floppy distribution I use, but when it's no longer Slashdotted I'll see if it has anything worth reconfiguring my firewall for.
I don't think so. Programs that use the FAT filesystem have been out there for several coon's ages or the age of a really old coon.
FreeDOS does not distribute in the FAT filesystem, interestingly: the official distribution is a CD-ROM ISO image only. They also don't distribute product or media preformatted with FAT. I don't even think Microsoft is going after programs that can create a FAT filesystem, so FreeDOS can format a hard disk and you're good to go.
However, I wouldn't mind if they did make it ext2. If you're booting with FreeDOS, it doesn't really matter what the filesystem is. Just allow reading of FAT partitions and floppies, and you can copy over all the old DOS software you wanted to run. Might be a few bugs here and there, but I guess when Microsoft wants to play rough, you just get out of the way.
unable to find any record of a higher resolution photographic (i.e. non-scientific) digital image that has been created without resizing a smaller, lower resolution image or using an interpolated image.
Why not throw in resampled and stretched as well? How about expanded or even made bigger too?
I bet the funny thing about using anti-static polymer for data storage, is that it's sensitive to static. One little zap and a gigabyte of data is gone.
If your parents are as computer-unsavvy as you claim, they will not use this. Maybe, with your help, a couple family photos and a minimal blurb of self-awareness "Hey, this is our website and it works!"
After that, it will be as static as if it were etched in a stone tablet. Any updates will be done by you when you're visiting, you'll show them how to update the site, they'll nod and smile, and then it will be etched in stone again until you come back.
Just go ahead and buy them a new clock or a DVD player or a warm blanket. Better than saddling them with something that will be perceived as a responsibility and continual drudgery.
There's no reason to do this. This is actually not hardware, this is just preinstalled software that you have no choice or control over.
Network functions in-BIOS? Remote manageability? Woohoo. Finally, the Feds will be able to control and spy on your computer with all the ease they are accustomed to with the telephone system.
Thank you very much, but I define "hardware" as the silicon I bought, and "software" to be program information that I can choose to run on that hardware. There is no reason to force all this software into the hardware purchase. No good reason, that is.
Nah, the $2 billion company "merged" with a $6 billion company, and the ritual cleansing by fire is underway. Since I'm only a contract/temp anyway, the axe fell in the path of least resistance.
;-)
Or maybe it was for mixing too many metaphors.
I don't know if I really believe this article all that much. A couple years back, at the place I work (*cough* will be unemployed from after Wednesday), they upgraded the network to CAT-6 and three times the ports. That meant they had to rewire the entire front office cubefarm, which is two stores with a 6" subfloor each, and wiring columns running between stories.
When all those cables converge on a wiring closet, they start to get bundled up pretty high. There's almost no room to run additional cables, plus it would be a huge unsightly mess. We hired an outside contractor to do the job, so they did professional work and disposed of the old wiring. They almost had to...with a 6" subfloor, you either pull cables through with the old wiring, or rip up every single carpet square and floor tile. I can't imagine this situation being much different for other companies.
Yep...this is looking pretty attractive, even though my vision is fine.
Why? Because it's a phone where the designers are actually paying attention to how the user interface works! I'd love to have that on my current phone.
When the user interface is basically the image your company projects to the world, why do they apparently stick a solitary sophomore intern on the job of creating it? Wish I could program in my own interface.
Murphy's Corollary of Dorm Room Physics:
If anything you do causes an object to fly away at high speed, your roommate will either be directly in the flight path OR in the reflected trajectory from one or more walls.
Addendum: when the object is thrown back at even higher speed, it will invariably bounce back and hit your roommate again.
No, if you read the page, he's advocating that everyone do this. And it's not even that remarkable from the hacking standpoint, since Mozilla's mouse gesture routines are written in Javascript anyway.
I'd also like to add that the submitter is merely spamming all of us with his own application. Check the email address. And he wants you to link to the JAR hosted by his site; is this another "make it popular and then charge for it" scheme?
This is a user interface feature that randomly turns on and off or changes behavior, depending on which web page you're on. How popular do you think the mouse would be, if for random periods it switched directions, reversed buttons, or turned off completely?
I'm not slamming the concept of mouse gestures in general; some people like them and do find them useful. What I'm looking at here is making the user interface decision up to the web developer, and not the user. Going from page to page and either having mouse gestures, not having them, or having some wierd implementation; that's annoying.
It will be the final straw that kills Javascript (if this becomes slightly popular), as people will turn off Javascript in order to take back control of their user interface. I already have....
Honestly, it's a pretty stupid idea. Let me illustrate why: scroller mice. Once you get used to a scroll mouse, then you have to use a computer that just has a normal mouse, it's a major pain.
If you depend on every web page to implement mouse gestures, then you'll get this effect from page to page while you're browsing! It would be annoying to no end. And it's not an easily visible thing you can check for, unless each web page also uses some kind of cheesy "Gestures Enabled" logo. And each site might implement it differently, so that strokes mean different things from page to page. I repeat: stupid idea.
A user interface tool should be just that: part of the user interface. Just like a keyboard or mouse, gestures take time to become accustomed to. A user interface feature needs to act the same way no matter what you're doing.
Put them all in a frame, each pointing at a phototransistor, and link to a frequency generator or microcontroller with MIDI output. Now you have a laser harp.
In fact, here's a very informative website on the subject: The 250 laser harp project. Includes links to different projects, schematics, part sources, etc.
I RTFA. One word: Lame.
There is no room for asking whether space mining is feasible or not; there simply is no other option for building large structures in space and on other planets. What we need to be looking at is what methods of space mining are feasible, as well as refining and processing options.
Back during the big anthrax scare, they were doing vaccine trials at the medical school at Vanderbilt University. My sisters had a few friends who were lured by the mad cash (about $200 or $500) and became guinea pigs...apparently some of them got sick, and from what I understand the vaccine had a certain risk of causing a heart condition.
So don't volunteer for these studies for the cash; only do it if you are prepared to become a medical sacrifice for the good of the world. Or something like that.
Even more pathetic is the fact that it worked.
(as an aside, I checked out your ProfQuotes link. Any idea when that was started? The humor section of our newspaper at Rose-Hulman had a Wacky Prof Quotes section back in 1999 or so, and it was always the funniest part of the paper.)