This is from the CNET article on MSN blocking access to their web site:
...Microsoft admitted that its technology was watching for Opera strings--but
only because the company wanted to encourage people to use standard-compliant browsers....
It was my understanding that Opera was by definition W3C compliant. In fact, I was using it as a reference browser for a web site I'm developing for my neighborhood civic association.
...Have I been mis-informed about Opera or is Microsoft lying?
For the time being, I have an MSN account (provided free with my Dell computer). Anyway, two days ago I checked my e-mail to find 34 messages. Only four of these were *NOT* spam. I have repeatedly complained to MSN and have even send detailed header information. The consistent reply I get is that "it's not our problem".
Perhaps Microsoft is getting serious about spam. It's too late for me though as I'm switching to Earthlink.
Actually, I understand NASA has a pretty efficient rotary but you won't see that in a car. The big advantage of Wankels is that you can get monster ponies out of a relatively small barn. They had a seal problem but I understand that's pretty much been solved by throwing technology at it. In general Wankels have a hotter exhaust than piston engines of the same output. As a result, they are not as efficient. It's not a bad engine design, but the best streetable piston engines out there are more efficient than the best streetable rotaries so far. A good case in point would be to look at the fuel efficiency of the last RX-7 vs. turbocharged (like the Mazda) piston in the 250-300HP range.
Years ago, there was all this hoopla about the "Gill Carb." and the supposed conspiricy to keep it out of production. This was supposed to give a normal car over 400 mpg. Eventually, it was finally shut down when it was demonstrated that there simply is not that much thermal energy in a gallon of gas. I've been fortunate enough to see a lot of these alternative engine designs. Many of them are pretty innovative and downright ingenious. So far, though, you always seem to run into something that doesn't work as planned. Bottom line is that the 4-cycle piston engine is hard to beat in terms of practicality and Carnot efficiency. So, this guy is telling me that his motor will not require a drive train. That tells me the engine is high torque with a really flat curve, already I'm skeptical. Add in no lubrication and I must assume his rpm's are low. I won't dismiss his engine out of hand, but I'd need to see the design.
I have observed with these Star Trek based series that the characters tend to develop nicely as the show progresses. Even when ST:TNG, I remember people saying that Picard was a bad character for the captain, Data was too deadpan and contrived, etc. I mean, the writers appear to be just be playing out formulas they've used in the past right now, but give it time. Remember, it was almost Star Trek 90210;)
...On the other hand....don't believe I've ever seen a Vulcan go to high beams before......;)
You seem to have a strong opinion in favor of the GPL and, from what I can determine, it looks like a fantastic concept that is applicable to more than just computer code. However, I am somewhat inexperienced with open licenses and have a few questions as I consider publishing software that I am currently developing.
Short story is as follows, the program I'm working on is being coded in Python (latest GPL OK version). It is designed for accessing damage and/or fatigue life for aging commercial aircraft. The math engine is developed by myself and I'd like to make it available to other experts in the field so that it can grow. I would also like input from experienced programmers since I am self taught (this is in fact my first Python program).
On the other hand, I need to keep that math model under tight control. I am concerned that someone who is a good programmer but not experienced in aircraft fatigue my modify the math engine in such a way as to make it unsafe for use. Can the GPL protect from this scenario?
Slashdot Mirror
This is from the CNET article on MSN blocking access to their web site:
...Microsoft admitted that its technology was watching for Opera strings--but
only because the company wanted to encourage people to use standard-compliant browsers....
It was my understanding that Opera was by definition W3C compliant. In fact, I was using it as a reference browser for a web site I'm developing for my neighborhood civic association.
...Have I been mis-informed about Opera or is Microsoft lying?
For the time being, I have an MSN account (provided free with my Dell computer). Anyway, two days ago I checked my e-mail to find 34 messages. Only four of these were *NOT* spam. I have repeatedly complained to MSN and have even send detailed header information. The consistent reply I get is that "it's not our problem".
Perhaps Microsoft is getting serious about spam. It's too late for me though as I'm switching to Earthlink.
Actually, I understand NASA has a pretty efficient rotary but you won't see that in a car. The big advantage of Wankels is that you can get monster ponies out of a relatively small barn. They had a seal problem but I understand that's pretty much been solved by throwing technology at it. In general Wankels have a hotter exhaust than piston engines of the same output. As a result, they are not as efficient. It's not a bad engine design, but the best streetable piston engines out there are more efficient than the best streetable rotaries so far. A good case in point would be to look at the fuel efficiency of the last RX-7 vs. turbocharged (like the Mazda) piston in the 250-300HP range.
Years ago, there was all this hoopla about the "Gill Carb." and the supposed conspiricy to keep it out of production. This was supposed to give a normal car over 400 mpg. Eventually, it was finally shut down when it was demonstrated that there simply is not that much thermal energy in a gallon of gas. I've been fortunate enough to see a lot of these alternative engine designs. Many of them are pretty innovative and downright ingenious. So far, though, you always seem to run into something that doesn't work as planned. Bottom line is that the 4-cycle piston engine is hard to beat in terms of practicality and Carnot efficiency. So, this guy is telling me that his motor will not require a drive train. That tells me the engine is high torque with a really flat curve, already I'm skeptical. Add in no lubrication and I must assume his rpm's are low. I won't dismiss his engine out of hand, but I'd need to see the design.
I have observed with these Star Trek based series that the characters tend to develop nicely as the show progresses. Even when ST:TNG, I remember people saying that Picard was a bad character for the captain, Data was too deadpan and contrived, etc. I mean, the writers appear to be just be playing out formulas they've used in the past right now, but give it time. Remember, it was almost Star Trek 90210 ;)
;)
...On the other hand....don't believe I've ever seen a Vulcan go to high beams before......
You seem to have a strong opinion in favor of the GPL and, from what I can determine, it looks like a fantastic concept that is applicable to more than just computer code. However, I am somewhat inexperienced with open licenses and have a few questions as I consider publishing software that I am currently developing. Short story is as follows, the program I'm working on is being coded in Python (latest GPL OK version). It is designed for accessing damage and/or fatigue life for aging commercial aircraft. The math engine is developed by myself and I'd like to make it available to other experts in the field so that it can grow. I would also like input from experienced programmers since I am self taught (this is in fact my first Python program). On the other hand, I need to keep that math model under tight control. I am concerned that someone who is a good programmer but not experienced in aircraft fatigue my modify the math engine in such a way as to make it unsafe for use. Can the GPL protect from this scenario?