as you say, they are paying interest on $380, getting interest on $280, so they do have to pay that money back, and thus get it back.
Once you multiply it out to the $2000, thier is just $1 out in someones pocket to be spent of the original $95, granted from that original $95 the banks are paying interest on $2000, and getting paid interest on $1800 (granted some of that money is really low interest, IE you checking account may draw no interest, and their only paying you in paper work, and services for your money.)
That still leaves the bank needing to get back their credit card debt in order to pay their creditors, but since they are making the difference in interest rates on more than the original $95 it happens quicker than otherwise expected.
Register--that beacon of journalistic insight and integrity--is misrepresenting what happened at the event?
to be fair, the Register did word it in a mannor that agrees with all other attendies, EG: "Kneuer lost his temper, and shouted back at the attendies." That does not rule out the attendies acting up first. It only means that Kneur, being a "official" is under a higher obligation to maintain his composure, than the audience. So the Register article may be a bit leading, but it is accurate. Still generally better than Fox news, IMHO.
while aluminum will deform in failure (converting most of the energy to heat) carbon fiber seems more likely to shatter.
of course their is a downside to most changes. by deform, you mean yield so, yes if you exceed the limit of carbon fibre you likely have snapped, where as aluminum, you have destroyed the structure of the frame. So if they both exceeded this limit at the same load, the aluminum may allow you to make it through one event.
For this to be obviously safer, you need:
1) the yield points would have to be very close.
2) it must be a single yield event (not repeated yield points, leading to a quick fatigue failure)
3) you must know the event occured so that you will replace the yieldied aluminium part, before the next event.
4) the yield event would still have to be in the yield strength of the aluminum, and not exceed it to the point of failure.
I think that is the issue, all of these are false. Carbon fibre has a much higher yield point, the aluminum wings constantly need inspected for fatigue cracks, and with each cycle they become closer to the point of failure.
With the carbon fibre, as the wing bends, it is probably designed to self limit the load. Since the aluminimum cannot survive the same amount of movement, it cannot self regulate (it bends, which makes it hot, which makes it softer, which makes it bend more which makes it hotter and softer,...)
of course it takes alott of energy to bend carbon fibre also, so it is releasing energy as heat as well. Granted aluminum is a much better heat conductor, so it would naturally transfer that heat better. But carbon fibre is known to stay stronger at high temperatures than aluminum.
I've always heard that it takes more wire to set up a good wireless network than it does to set up a wired network.
guess it really depends on a number of things. We have found that it works best for our critical deployment (and I do mean critical) that you need a seperate backbone than your network. You can setup a bunch of repeaters that are not wired (In AZ, their solar powered, battery backed) but then when you get something at high bandwith, the users at the end of the line ends up less reliable (data shaping and the like is where the best installers overcome this.)
So the extra wiring your talking about is for the backbone to the AP's. Since 802.11a hasn't really taken off in WiFi devices. What we did was ran a 802.11a backbone with directed antenna's that was eithernet connected to the 802.11b access point (3" ethernet cable, not 300' fiber optic)
That actually cures alott of things, since the 11.a backbone is higher bandwith, and because of higher gain antennas (fixed destinations) their is not a significant difference in bandwith to the last AP, and a minimal number of hops, and all the things used for discovery, authentication, etc, etc can be mostly disabled on the backbone (assuming you want your main WiFi to be open to discovery.)
Of course you need more power to do wireless, so if thats the wiring you mean, then absolutly.
I think in this case their is nothing in the License preventing XP (from anything I have read so far.) The game is advertised as for VISTA, so if MS doesn't want to support it on XP, that seams fair. But it also seams fair if anyone else whats to step up and say we will support you running this game on platform-x, if you buy a legal copy from microsoft that seams perfectly valid.
Actually it is even valid if MS does put in the Halo License a requirement only for VISTA. After all once you have bought the game, you do have some rights in the first sale docturine to use it in a reasonable mannor, playing the game on the equipment you have seams reasonable. That may not include online play if that servers licences excludes yoour platform, since online play is a service (in my opinion) and despite MS's objection a program sold in a box is not a service, its a product.
A national law fining companies thousands of dollars a day for each illegal worker would 'affect all competition equally'.
so that will affect growers in Brazil equally to those in the US? After all Brazil already produces 2* as many oranges as the US.
It may not take much dis-incentive to shutdown all the orange growers in California. Since it can take 20 years for a tree to reach full production, once local growers decide to sell to a developer thats likely done for good.
pick fruit for $20.00 per hour. And the price of fruit would nowhere near 'double', as some doomsayers contend.
In a market or where all competition is all affected equally, and a highly elastic demand. what you say would be true, however people are free to choose other fruit/suppliers that wasn't hit by the same labor costs.
Grocery stores may decide to buy 0 California oranges due to something as slight as a 5% increase in cost (I have no idea what the real curve is.) Consumers may decide to mostly change to banana's for example.
So a 45% increase in the cost from one supplier (especially from a supplier that could sell their farm they paid a million dollars for 20 years ago could instead cut it up and sell for a million dollars a acre.)
could easily drive the price of one fruit up 10* (since the demand is way down.)
assume the small motors inside the wheels are gear free.
actually almost certainly false. I haven't actually seen any electric motors, of the size fit for vehicles, that make anywhere near the torque of a gas/diesel at low rpm's at the motor shaft. For instance we (company I work for) make both electric, and mechanical drive trucks behind 2000+ HP diesiels. The electric Truck has a fixed 50:1 gearing reduction where the mechanical drive is around 35:1 in first gear.
It only makes sense, electric motors are well known for making even torque across a wide RPM range, hence no need for multiple gear ratio. Since torque*distance=power (or torque*rpm with fixed gearing), a electric motor of the same HP as a gas motor is going to have a-lott lower peak torque than a lower RPM turning diesel (assuming the electric turns at higher RPM.)
As for no need for brakes, in the Generator world, torque=current, voltage=speed, so at low speeds you can't run the brakes in generator mode any where near peak torque, so you would have to run it in power mode to plug brake to a stop. Otherwise you have to run insane current, (is your motor to be made of super conductors?) at extremely low voltage, or change winding configurations dynamically.
similar to brake mode, you need insane current to get extreme torque, and since power = torque*rpm at 0 rpm you got 0 efficiency so you really get your motors extremely hot if you run them at (or near) stall RPMs for any length of time. So although it may makes good (maybe 60% of peak) torque at stall, you can't use it for long.
direct all web traffic to a page with information on how the customer can clean his machine
direct them to a site that they are now blocked from reaching, hmmm. I know you would un-block that 1 site, but then hackers patch to block that 1 patch...
One got past our firewall also (email attachment actually) the ISP (Qwest) sent us a automated warning letter that we were about to get kicked, I did have it fixed before the letter was received. Imagine how difficult for a admin to track while all traffic is blocked, so the bot is hibernating. Since the blocking could easily cause much greater financial harm (assuming the most valuable of assets hasn't been compromised)
Such as our case, it was a PC with internet access, but not VPN access to anything too important. It would have severed our VOIP to the main offices, and hampered my research into multiple options to fix the issue. Not to mention how many projects missing data would be put on hold. In my case I first got all the virus definitions up to date (also a laptop with its first day on the network in several months.) So it would be impolite to block norton, mcafee, what about clamwin, etc, etc? When I am not in office everything is remote admin from offsite (kill that also?)
so the first time our ISP shutdown our traffic due to a burst of virus like traffic we would be ISP shopping.
If there is not hardware or a service to sell then selling the program and giving away the source just will not work together.
I think that really depends on the product and target audience. IE most software projects probably never get noticed on a big enough scale to wory about posting your code to sourceforge, etc. Esentually it would be free advertising for your product, ie the people who find it their would never have otherwise found it and been customers, but some will contribute to a paypal link, some may contribute with enhancements adding value to your paying audience. With any consumer level product, 99% of (non corprate) customers will never do anything with source code given to them, even those that would know how.
Of course if the only people who would use your product are geeks already running linux, then ya back to the hope of paypal. Also if your product really takes off after you sell say 5000 units a competitor will likely say, hey I got the source code, I can enter that market too, You still got the advantage of first entry, track record, name (you did copyright your product name right?.)
with the properties of RAID 5 (or even 6), but with the added capabilities of different-sized disks, and total available space which automatically grows as you gradually swap or add bigger disks.
actually to a limited degree this is their. IE the dell server I (with the company money) over a year ago for ~$5000 came with redhat EL running on a LVM managed volume with RAID 5 all pre-configured (since I am the admin, and wasn't up to the task.) on a CERC 6 channel raid controller.
I am not sure what parts of the system provides what. but it automatically does things like: rebuild the array if a drive is replaced (blinking red LED lets you know while the full system isn't back up to 100%) grows the array when possible (so if you swap in 3 new 1TB drives from 750GB drives when the last one gets built the array is expanded without interaction. Although not automatic, with a GUI you can use some odd sized drives. IE if you had a 500GB+2*750GB+2*1TB drives, it is capable of making the 2*750GB+500GB drives behave like 2*1TB drives. So you could easily set them up to have a 4x1TB raid 5 (3 TB of storage.) instead of the normal max RAID 5 size of 5*500GB or 2TB of storage from the same drive. Or you can combine arrays with LVM so if you had 250GB+3*500GB+2*1TB drives you can setup a 5x500GB raid 5, and a 3x250GB raid 5, and combine them into a single volume with LVM giving 2.5 TB of RAID storage.
pretty sure,thats for N (number of drives) greater than 3 only.
you can run raid 5 with 3 drives, but with 3 drives, not knowing which drive will fail, you have to duplicate all data 2x. With 4 or more drives and parity you can only lose 20% of your data at one time, so then you can start playing statistics games.
So (for ease of math) in a RAID 5 configuration:
3 1Tb = 2Tb , 5 1Tb = 4Tb , 6 1Tb = 5Tb
thus 3*1TB drives RAID 5 is 1.5TB. the rest are correct (ignoring overhead.) so 4 drives makes better economic sense than 3 (ignoring controller cost.)
OK, I'll bite. Which (current?) dell systems are you talking about? The parent is talking about desktops, clearly you must be talking about their servers. Since all the Dimension, etc box's I have seen use all the standard mounting, plates, connections, etc. Granted they have in the past kicked out some non-standard stuff, but who hasn't (that was around when you bought those Pentium's?)
I can get a replacement at NewEgg. Can't do that with proprietary hardware.
You are correct that the PowerEdge server I am running at work has a dell specific motherboard, but everything plugged into it can be purchased at newegg (IE they will all plug into many newegg motherboards.) The Dell system is really pretty, it wouldn't be pretty with the newegg board swapped in, but I would be surprised if it wouldn't mount (if it doesn't, then I need a $20 case along with a motherboard.)
I am not a huge dell fan, I do buy a few dell PC's at home/work when they are within $20-30. I have had better luck with them than any other brand (well the 1 Penguin Computing box I bought in 00' has been impressive, but a motherboard replacement is no longer available anywhere if it fails, but what do I care just save the data.)
your saving the PIII system sounds like fun (I would have done the same), but I doubt it truly saved your company much over swapping the HD into a modern box and tossing the rest (assuming a supported OS.)
having any possible income you may ever in the future make secured automatically for Microsoft.
well, not if he lives (now, or in the future) in Florida, California, overseas, or a few others.
If I did it Legal experts theorized that Simpson might be able to avoid paying the Goldmans or Browns any money. "I think it's going to be difficult if [Simpson] arranges to have [book profits] deposited abroad," said lawyer Tom Mesereau, who successfully defended Michael Jackson in his child molestation trial in 2005. "It's one thing to enforce a judgment in America, and another to enforce it overseas."
when the creator expires. When they can no longer benefit from their work then the work should enter the public domain.
I think most people want to be remembered long after they die for their good things. now, very few know that Ub Iwerks created Mcikey mouse, but at least they (like me) can still look it up. Thats why copyright doesn't need to expire, Ideally I would like the original author to be credited for as long as their original work is still contributing. (I am not a believer in a conscious after life, but I think it makes death much less shocking to the living if you society doesn't just say their dead they don't matter anymore.) but I do agree with you that the financial attributions should end within a short period of time.
If all copyrights fell back to a BSD style license after some time frame, say 20 years, and started out by default to be a BSD style license then I agree.
Of course by BSD style, I mean you always have to give credit to the original author (Not to a university, or some RIAA that bought the rights.)
unless they state upfront which patents are being violated.
you would think any reasonable judge (ok thier is probably at least one of them) would do something like: (judge) so microsoft you stated in 1982 you knew OSS violated your patents. (ms) sure (judge) what action did you take? (ms) we sent out letters to our investors. (judge) no, who did you notify? (ms) our investors. (judge) when did you tell the defendent what patents they violate. (ms) we'll be detailing those patents soon. (judge) all software shipped from 1982 until 6 months after you detail the infringed patents is now exempt from any infringement claim.
When you have sat-nav, or point-to-point directions, you're SOL if you make a mistake or things aren't clear. If you have a MAP and some basic skills you can always know "i'm here, and i need to be there, so I need to generally be going X direction."
not all maps, and not all satnav are equal. I have yet to end up fording a river in a car with satnav, but I have eneded up with that on a map (road was a minor road on the map, but I wouldn't have guessed no bridge even on a minor road through a major stream. The sat nav has the advantage of having every map on a 2"x2" memory card. an atlas is very large, doesn't have the minor roads in most city's and is not a complete navigation (to know general directions, you need a clear sky, or a compass, and you have to keep track of where your at, read signs at all times, very difficult to recover without road signs, compass, etc.)
example: before GPS I was traveling across country, hit a wet snow for 60 miles. road was fine, but every sign was coated and unreadable, no sun or stars to be seen. I knew from the map that I wanted exit 279 but a hour out of my way later I learned I went too far.
the GPS I have, has the choice of hitting detour, and a distance or turn to the detour, so if you don't like a turn you hit detour next turn, then your re-routed before the next turn. If you want to know a general direction, and see a map, just hit off-road mode, it gives a compass with compass direction to your destination, and your current heading...
example: last week I was heading back from phoenix airport, a 150 mile trip I had done a dozen times, outside a tiny town a accident shut me down, hit detour on the GPS, same distance as the warning sign said, it directed me on a few backroads, past the accident back to the interstate. I had a state map, but I wasn't going to get it out and find where I was at, and find a route in pitch black by myself, before I hit the exit ramp (even though we were only averaging 2 MPH) without either backing up traffic more, or pulling off the road, and hopening someone would let me back on.
(IE GPS, and MAPS have flaws, it is smartest to have both, when possible.)
I don't think the time of use rate is such a problem. If you size your system correctly, it will be just as "economical" as it was..
I think you got it right, the rate essentially doubles during peek hours, so for your energy bill to go down you have to put in a big enough system to supply 1/2 of your power during peek (thats also when the suns out.) but thats just to come out even, on the electric bill, you gotta go bigger than that to get payback.
it also starts getting bad as it goes below 1500 RPM, and gets worse the further down it goes.
I didn't believe you, until I pulled the stats on the engine, that is a high revving engine (both the 4 and the 6 cylinder) so ya a peek torque at 4900 and not much low end torque on the 4 cylinder pretty much means to me that car is setup to run more efficiently at a pretty good speed. It also explains to me why a fairly light and aerodynamic car with a small (but relatively powerful engine) would get below 30 MPG.
all engines - gasoline and electric are turned to have max efficiency at X rpms.
Max efficiency is only at X rpms, when at optimum fuel mixture (IE full throttle in all EFI cars.) some people don't realize a gas pedal in a gas engine is a intake restriction, so obviously more restriction = less efficiency. IE if you want 20 HP from a engine whos max efficiency is at 2000 rpm/100 HP you would be at a much higher efficiency running full throttle at 1000 RPM than half throttle at 2000 rpm.
With gasoline engines it's usually tuned to 2-3000 rpms.
It is always at/before peak torque. I think it is almost always very near peak torque (with non turbo/super charger...)
Basically the only way to always run at peak efficiency is to have a engine that is perfectly sized for your typical speed and gear ratio to barely pull the car their.
I'm pretty sure most of it deals with how they *expect* you to use the engine
so actually the Gear ratio should be set to have wide open throttle at top gear at the most common speed. However almost nobody wants a car that slows down with every dip/breeze and that requires a down shift on a grade, they would choose a couple less MPG for performance (at least I do.) However unlike most people I prefer a manual on highway, so I can lock in the top gear, hold the throttle wide open, but not worry about a downshift (Tacoma pickup I4, tall tires). but have a low gear to pass if I need to.
he production of a fake ID is still illegal even if it is never used.
(IANL) in the US almost all criminal statues require Mens rea IE a "guilty mind", or a clearly negligent act, so even if you broke "a law" creating a fake ID, that doesn't make it a criminal act. For example I have recieved "fake id's" in email of the bush family as a joke. IE they were clearly fake, to make them funney (IE a Dictator title, etc.) but those creating them obviously had no intent of the fake id being used for a criminal purpose...
Conversely every time you get in an accident your insurance increases 10% above the base rate
But it then ceases to be insurance, now it's paying a monthly premium so that you can finance any accidents through increased rates going forward. If your selling accident insurance you should be forced to cover the costs of having a accident, if part of the cost is increased insurance rates, then they need to cover that as well. the "you can switch insurance companys", no they basically collude with their claim information to make sure no one can avoid paying after the fact, granted your allowed to switcg and pay back Geico for a claim payed by State Farm. Your only choice to avoid paying back for any accident you have, is to sell your car, and quit driving for 3 -5 years, because otherwise the states require you to carry insurance (most states anyway.)
(as hackers have created a hack that CAN'T be revoked).
yes, but it is not as usefull. IE for that hack you have to download a different "Volume Unique Keys" for every disk you want access to. And currently the only way they are getting these "Volume Unique Keys" is either from a modified X-Box360 Drive(HD-DVD), or the "Host Private Key" from the win-DVD that has already been revoked (on some un-specified new movie, some day). So rest assured this "CAN't be revoked", will be revoked, simply re-voking the "HPK" for the X-Box 360 will prevent the retrievel of the "VUK" with the XBOX drive for new movie releases. Just because the hacker doesn't know, and haven't seen the HPK for the X-box 360, and thus the key isn't being circulated, doesn't mean that no one knows the "HPK" and won't revoke it. This will break playback from a un-updated X-Box drive, but I am sure microsoft is already close to fixing this in firmware, and will have everyone downloading new firmware to see the latest movies through X-Box live (now I am equally sure it will take many a try by microsoft before this stays fixed for more than a month continuously, or MS gives up.)
Slashdot Mirror
to be fair, the Register did word it in a mannor that agrees with all other attendies, EG: "Kneuer lost his temper, and shouted back at the attendies." That does not rule out the attendies acting up first. It only means that Kneur, being a "official" is under a higher obligation to maintain his composure, than the audience.
So the Register article may be a bit leading, but it is accurate. Still generally better than Fox news, IMHO.
of course their is a downside to most changes.
by deform, you mean yield so, yes if you exceed the limit of carbon fibre you likely have snapped, where as aluminum, you have destroyed the structure of the frame. So if they both exceeded this limit at the same load, the aluminum may allow you to make it through one event.
For this to be obviously safer, you need:
1) the yield points would have to be very close.
2) it must be a single yield event (not repeated yield points, leading to a quick fatigue failure)
3) you must know the event occured so that you will replace the yieldied aluminium part, before the next event.
4) the yield event would still have to be in the yield strength of the aluminum, and not exceed it to the point of failure.
I think that is the issue, all of these are false. Carbon fibre has a much higher yield point, the aluminum wings constantly need inspected for fatigue cracks, and with each cycle they become closer to the point of failure.
With the carbon fibre, as the wing bends, it is probably designed to self limit the load. Since the aluminimum cannot survive the same amount of movement, it cannot self regulate (it bends, which makes it hot, which makes it softer, which makes it bend more which makes it hotter and softer,...)
of course it takes alott of energy to bend carbon fibre also, so it is releasing energy as heat as well. Granted aluminum is a much better heat conductor, so it would naturally transfer that heat better. But carbon fibre is known to stay stronger at high temperatures than aluminum.
guess it really depends on a number of things. We have found that it works best for our critical deployment (and I do mean critical) that you need a seperate backbone than your network. You can setup a bunch of repeaters that are not wired (In AZ, their solar powered, battery backed) but then when you get something at high bandwith, the users at the end of the line ends up less reliable (data shaping and the like is where the best installers overcome this.)
So the extra wiring your talking about is for the backbone to the AP's. Since 802.11a hasn't really taken off in WiFi devices. What we did was ran a 802.11a backbone with directed antenna's that was eithernet connected to the 802.11b access point (3" ethernet cable, not 300' fiber optic)
That actually cures alott of things, since the 11.a backbone is higher bandwith, and because of higher gain antennas (fixed destinations) their is not a significant difference in bandwith to the last AP, and a minimal number of hops, and all the things used for discovery, authentication, etc, etc can be mostly disabled on the backbone (assuming you want your main WiFi to be open to discovery.)
Of course you need more power to do wireless, so if thats the wiring you mean, then absolutly.
I think in this case their is nothing in the License preventing XP (from anything I have read so far.) The game is advertised as for VISTA, so if MS doesn't want to support it on XP, that seams fair. But it also seams fair if anyone else whats to step up and say we will support you running this game on platform-x, if you buy a legal copy from microsoft that seams perfectly valid.
Actually it is even valid if MS does put in the Halo License a requirement only for VISTA. After all once you have bought the game, you do have some rights in the first sale docturine to use it in a reasonable mannor, playing the game on the equipment you have seams reasonable. That may not include online play if that servers licences excludes yoour platform, since online play is a service (in my opinion) and despite MS's objection a program sold in a box is not a service, its a product.
so that will affect growers in Brazil equally to those in the US? After all Brazil already produces 2* as many oranges as the US.
It may not take much dis-incentive to shutdown all the orange growers in California. Since it can take 20 years for a tree to reach full production, once local growers decide to sell to a developer thats likely done for good.
In a market or where all competition is all affected equally, and a highly elastic demand. what you say would be true, however people are free to choose other fruit/suppliers that wasn't hit by the same labor costs.
Grocery stores may decide to buy 0 California oranges due to something as slight as a 5% increase in cost (I have no idea what the real curve is.) Consumers may decide to mostly change to banana's for example.
So a 45% increase in the cost from one supplier (especially from a supplier that could sell their farm they paid a million dollars for 20 years ago could instead cut it up and sell for a million dollars a acre.)
could easily drive the price of one fruit up 10* (since the demand is way down.)
actually almost certainly false. I haven't actually seen any electric motors, of the size fit for vehicles, that make anywhere near the torque of a gas/diesel at low rpm's at the motor shaft. For instance we (company I work for) make both electric, and mechanical drive trucks behind 2000+ HP diesiels. The electric Truck has a fixed 50:1 gearing reduction where the mechanical drive is around 35:1 in first gear.
It only makes sense, electric motors are well known for making even torque across a wide RPM range, hence no need for multiple gear ratio. Since torque*distance=power (or torque*rpm with fixed gearing), a electric motor of the same HP as a gas motor is going to have a-lott lower peak torque than a lower RPM turning diesel (assuming the electric turns at higher RPM.)
As for no need for brakes, in the Generator world, torque=current, voltage=speed, so at low speeds you can't run the brakes in generator mode any where near peak torque, so you would have to run it in power mode to plug brake to a stop. Otherwise you have to run insane current, (is your motor to be made of super conductors?) at extremely low voltage, or change winding configurations dynamically.
similar to brake mode, you need insane current to get extreme torque, and since power = torque*rpm at 0 rpm you got 0 efficiency so you really get your motors extremely hot if you run them at (or near) stall RPMs for any length of time. So although it may makes good (maybe 60% of peak) torque at stall, you can't use it for long.
direct them to a site that they are now blocked from reaching, hmmm.
I know you would un-block that 1 site, but then hackers patch to block that 1 patch...
One got past our firewall also (email attachment actually) the ISP (Qwest) sent us a automated warning letter that we were about to get kicked, I did have it fixed before the letter was received. Imagine how difficult for a admin to track while all traffic is blocked, so the bot is hibernating. Since the blocking could easily cause much greater financial harm (assuming the most valuable of assets hasn't been compromised)
Such as our case, it was a PC with internet access, but not VPN access to anything too important. It would have severed our VOIP to the main offices, and hampered my research into multiple options to fix the issue. Not to mention how many projects missing data would be put on hold. In my case I first got all the virus definitions up to date (also a laptop with its first day on the network in several months.) So it would be impolite to block norton, mcafee, what about clamwin, etc, etc? When I am not in office everything is remote admin from offsite (kill that also?)
so the first time our ISP shutdown our traffic due to a burst of virus like traffic we would be ISP shopping.
I think that really depends on the product and target audience. IE most software projects probably never get noticed on a big enough scale to wory about posting your code to sourceforge, etc. Esentually it would be free advertising for your product, ie the people who find it their would never have otherwise found it and been customers, but some will contribute to a paypal link, some may contribute with enhancements adding value to your paying audience. With any consumer level product, 99% of (non corprate) customers will never do anything with source code given to them, even those that would know how.
Of course if the only people who would use your product are geeks already running linux, then ya back to the hope of paypal. Also if your product really takes off after you sell say 5000 units a competitor will likely say, hey I got the source code, I can enter that market too, You still got the advantage of first entry, track record, name (you did copyright your product name right?.)
actually to a limited degree this is their. IE the dell server I (with the company money) over a year ago for ~$5000 came with redhat EL running on a LVM managed volume with RAID 5 all pre-configured (since I am the admin, and wasn't up to the task.) on a CERC 6 channel raid controller.
I am not sure what parts of the system provides what. but it automatically does things like: rebuild the array if a drive is replaced (blinking red LED lets you know while the full system isn't back up to 100%) grows the array when possible (so if you swap in 3 new 1TB drives from 750GB drives when the last one gets built the array is expanded without interaction. Although not automatic, with a GUI you can use some odd sized drives. IE if you had a 500GB+2*750GB+2*1TB drives, it is capable of making the 2*750GB+500GB drives behave like 2*1TB drives. So you could easily set them up to have a 4x1TB raid 5 (3 TB of storage.) instead of the normal max RAID 5 size of 5*500GB or 2TB of storage from the same drive. Or you can combine arrays with LVM so if you had 250GB+3*500GB+2*1TB drives you can setup a 5x500GB raid 5, and a 3x250GB raid 5, and combine them into a single volume with LVM giving 2.5 TB of RAID storage.
ok, I was wrong, scratch that. It is valid for 3 drives as well.
you can run raid 5 with 3 drives, but with 3 drives, not knowing which drive will fail, you have to duplicate all data 2x. With 4 or more drives and parity you can only lose 20% of your data at one time, so then you can start playing statistics games.
thus 3*1TB drives RAID 5 is 1.5TB. the rest are correct (ignoring overhead.) so 4 drives makes better economic sense than 3 (ignoring controller cost.)
You are correct that the PowerEdge server I am running at work has a dell specific motherboard, but everything plugged into it can be purchased at newegg (IE they will all plug into many newegg motherboards.) The Dell system is really pretty, it wouldn't be pretty with the newegg board swapped in, but I would be surprised if it wouldn't mount (if it doesn't, then I need a $20 case along with a motherboard.)
I am not a huge dell fan, I do buy a few dell PC's at home/work when they are within $20-30. I have had better luck with them than any other brand (well the 1 Penguin Computing box I bought in 00' has been impressive, but a motherboard replacement is no longer available anywhere if it fails, but what do I care just save the data.)
your saving the PIII system sounds like fun (I would have done the same), but I doubt it truly saved your company much over swapping the HD into a modern box and tossing the rest (assuming a supported OS.)
well, not if he lives (now, or in the future) in Florida, California, overseas, or a few others.
If I did it
Legal experts theorized that Simpson might be able to avoid paying the Goldmans or Browns any money. "I think it's going to be difficult if [Simpson] arranges to have [book profits] deposited abroad," said lawyer Tom Mesereau, who successfully defended Michael Jackson in his child molestation trial in 2005. "It's one thing to enforce a judgment in America, and another to enforce it overseas."
I think most people want to be remembered long after they die for their good things.
now, very few know that Ub Iwerks created Mcikey mouse, but at least they (like me) can still look it up.
Thats why copyright doesn't need to expire, Ideally I would like the original author to be credited for as long as their original work is still contributing. (I am not a believer in a conscious after life, but I think it makes death much less shocking to the living if you society doesn't just say their dead they don't matter anymore.)
but I do agree with you that the financial attributions should end within a short period of time.
If all copyrights fell back to a BSD style license after some time frame, say 20 years, and started out by default to be a BSD style license then I agree.
Of course by BSD style, I mean you always have to give credit to the original author (Not to a university, or some RIAA that bought the rights.)
you would think any reasonable judge (ok thier is probably at least one of them) would do something like:
(judge) so microsoft you stated in 1982 you knew OSS violated your patents.
(ms) sure
(judge) what action did you take?
(ms) we sent out letters to our investors.
(judge) no, who did you notify?
(ms) our investors.
(judge) when did you tell the defendent what patents they violate.
(ms) we'll be detailing those patents soon.
(judge) all software shipped from 1982 until 6 months after you detail the infringed patents is now exempt from any infringement claim.
not all maps, and not all satnav are equal. I have yet to end up fording a river in a car with satnav, but I have eneded up with that on a map (road was a minor road on the map, but I wouldn't have guessed no bridge even on a minor road through a major stream.
The sat nav has the advantage of having every map on a 2"x2" memory card. an atlas is very large, doesn't have the minor roads in most city's and is not a complete navigation (to know general directions, you need a clear sky, or a compass, and you have to keep track of where your at, read signs at all times, very difficult to recover without road signs, compass, etc.)
example: before GPS I was traveling across country, hit a wet snow for 60 miles. road was fine, but every sign was coated and unreadable, no sun or stars to be seen. I knew from the map that I wanted exit 279 but a hour out of my way later I learned I went too far.
the GPS I have, has the choice of hitting detour, and a distance or turn to the detour, so if you don't like a turn you hit detour next turn, then your re-routed before the next turn. If you want to know a general direction, and see a map, just hit off-road mode, it gives a compass with compass direction to your destination, and your current heading...
example: last week I was heading back from phoenix airport, a 150 mile trip I had done a dozen times, outside a tiny town a accident shut me down, hit detour on the GPS, same distance as the warning sign said, it directed me on a few backroads, past the accident back to the interstate. I had a state map, but I wasn't going to get it out and find where I was at, and find a route in pitch black by myself, before I hit the exit ramp (even though we were only averaging 2 MPH) without either backing up traffic more, or pulling off the road, and hopening someone would let me back on.
(IE GPS, and MAPS have flaws, it is smartest to have both, when possible.)
I think you got it right, the rate essentially doubles during peek hours, so for your energy bill to go down you have to put in a big enough system to supply 1/2 of your power during peek (thats also when the suns out.)
but thats just to come out even, on the electric bill, you gotta go bigger than that to get payback.
I didn't believe you, until I pulled the stats on the engine, that is a high revving engine (both the 4 and the 6 cylinder) so ya a peek torque at 4900 and not much low end torque on the 4 cylinder pretty much means to me that car is setup to run more efficiently at a pretty good speed. It also explains to me why a fairly light and aerodynamic car with a small (but relatively powerful engine) would get below 30 MPG.
Max efficiency is only at X rpms, when at optimum fuel mixture (IE full throttle in all EFI cars.) some people don't realize a gas pedal in a gas engine is a intake restriction, so obviously more restriction = less efficiency. IE if you want 20 HP from a engine whos max efficiency is at 2000 rpm/100 HP you would be at a much higher efficiency running full throttle at 1000 RPM than half throttle at 2000 rpm.
It is always at/before peak torque. I think it is almost always very near peak torque (with non turbo/super charger...)
Basically the only way to always run at peak efficiency is to have a engine that is perfectly sized for your typical speed and gear ratio to barely pull the car their.
so actually the Gear ratio should be set to have wide open throttle at top gear at the most common speed. However almost nobody wants a car that slows down with every dip/breeze and that requires a down shift on a grade, they would choose a couple less MPG for performance (at least I do.) However unlike most people I prefer a manual on highway, so I can lock in the top gear, hold the throttle wide open, but not worry about a downshift (Tacoma pickup I4, tall tires). but have a low gear to pass if I need to.
(IANL) in the US almost all criminal statues require Mens rea IE a "guilty mind", or a clearly negligent act, so even if you broke "a law" creating a fake ID, that doesn't make it a criminal act. For example I have recieved "fake id's" in email of the bush family as a joke. IE they were clearly fake, to make them funney (IE a Dictator title, etc.) but those creating them obviously had no intent of the fake id being used for a criminal purpose...
But it then ceases to be insurance, now it's paying a monthly premium so that you can finance any accidents through increased rates going forward. If your selling accident insurance you should be forced to cover the costs of having a accident, if part of the cost is increased insurance rates, then they need to cover that as well.
the "you can switch insurance companys", no they basically collude with their claim information to make sure no one can avoid paying after the fact, granted your allowed to switcg and pay back Geico for a claim payed by State Farm. Your only choice to avoid paying back for any accident you have, is to sell your car, and quit driving for 3 -5 years, because otherwise the states require you to carry insurance (most states anyway.)
yes, but it is not as usefull. IE for that hack you have to download a different "Volume Unique Keys" for every disk you want access to. And currently the only way they are getting these "Volume Unique Keys" is either from a modified X-Box360 Drive(HD-DVD), or the "Host Private Key" from the win-DVD that has already been revoked (on some un-specified new movie, some day). So rest assured this "CAN't be revoked", will be revoked, simply re-voking the "HPK" for the X-Box 360 will prevent the retrievel of the "VUK" with the XBOX drive for new movie releases. Just because the hacker doesn't know, and haven't seen the HPK for the X-box 360, and thus the key isn't being circulated, doesn't mean that no one knows the "HPK" and won't revoke it. This will break playback from a un-updated X-Box drive, but I am sure microsoft is already close to fixing this in firmware, and will have everyone downloading new firmware to see the latest movies through X-Box live (now I am equally sure it will take many a try by microsoft before this stays fixed for more than a month continuously, or MS gives up.)