IBM Laywer: I'm thinking of a number. I'll write it down on a piece of paper. SCO Lawyer: OK
The IBM lawyer grabs a pen a scribbles on a sheet of paper, folds the paper in half, and slides it across the table. The SCO lawyer reaches, picks up the paper, unfolds it, and sees this:
Yeah, I'm responding twice to the same post... sorry.
In terms of "an obvious idea", what I've always wanted to see is a LiveCD/Knoppix offering that could read a FAT/NTFS partition on boot and run equivalents to the following software:
- Norton AV / ClamAV - AdAware - Spybot S&D
By the title of the story, I thought we might have actually gotten something close ("Seek and Destroy" vs "Search and Destroy").
I like Safari as much as the next guy, but I've started to find myself using Firefox G5 more and more. It's a G5-optimized version of Firefox. (There's also a G4 version for more recent G4s)
Frankly, it's a lot faster than Safari and does its thing with less processor load. Every time I use Safari to go to an SSL page or a page with heavy javascript my processor fans ramp up from 300/300 rpm to 2000/1000 rpm. The same pages with FFG5 (or even just FF) do not cause the fan speeds to change at all.
This really wouldn't be noteworthy if Safari was using that extra power to be speedy, but it is much, much slower than FF (especially on such pages).
Get a rubbermaid or similar box is just a tad wider than the computer case is tall, 18" taller than the computer is wide and about a foot longer than the computer is deep.
Put a few 2x4 spacers at the bottom of the box (to hold the computer off the "floor" of the box) and place the computer in on it's side.
Cut a few holes on the "back" side of the box to run wires into - use heavy foam, rubber, or "great stuff" to seal the holes after the wires have been run.
Mount a light (with ceramic base) to the back of the box, about halfway from the upper side of the computer and the top of the box. Wire this light to an extension cord. You probably wouldn't need more than a 40W light bulb to keep the computer warm in the coldest of weather.
Put the top on. An E Z Bake Over to keep your computer warm.
Of course, there is no guarantee that this will (a) work, (b) not fry your computer, (c) not electrocute you, and (d) not burn down your house and/or garage. So: USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
I think it's pretty funny that in an article about balance versus truth, the author does exactly what he says journalists shouldn't do:...human greenhouse gas emissions are probably... helping to fuel the greenhouse effect...
When people talk of "global warming", they are talking about a net increase in the Greenhouse Effect, not the effect itself. Unfortunately, most media outlets use "global warming" and "Greenhouse Effect" interchangeably, causing the widespread belief that the GE is bad.
In reality, the greenhouse effect is a good thing. Without it, we would all be dead as average temperature of the Earth would be about 30 deg C cooler.
When the author says "humans may be helping fuel the Greenhouse Effect", while technically accurate, casts a negative implication on the GE, when what he really meant was "humans may be helping fuel global warming".
Most new installations are "bird friendly" - larger, slower rotating blades, turbines designed to prevent birds from landing or nesting on the housing, and placement taking into account migratory patterns.
Using this as a reference, there are approximately 180 turbines in use or proposed by this provider. At full capacity, this would account for 1/3 of a percent of the US electrical demand.
Using Altamont Pass (not included in the above calcuation) as a reference, and this page for kill rates, you get about.126 kills / year / turbine. This is a worst case, since it is generally accepted that Altamont Pass has an unusually high kill rate because it was built without taking into consideration migration paths and bird friendly engineering.
So, 180 turbines * 300 (needed to supply the whole US) and you get 54,000 turbines. Which converts to:
54,000 *.126 kills / turbine year = 6804 dead birds a year
Sounds like a lot, right?
Well, according to this (note: facts from a wind energy provider), 57 million birds are killed by automobiles each year, 97 million die from "sudden plate glass deceleration", and 1.5 million die from running into things that aren't even moving.
I don't know about you, but 7000 birds a year to generate all US electricity via a renewable resource with no emissions seems to be a good deal. Especially when it only costs 2.54 cents / kWh above non-green power.
Basically, we pay PECO to buy power for their grid from wind suppliers on our behalf based on either a contracted number of electrical blocks (100 kWh, 250 kWh, 500 kWh, etc) or on actual usage. The charge to do this is $.0254/kWh.
So, for about $15/mo, all our electrical "usage" will be from wind power. Obviously, our actual source of power hasn't changed, but, as a whole, PECO will have to generate 600 kWh less power from their non-green resources with us in the program.
Interestingly enough, even if your local provider does not offer such a program, you can buy blocks directly from the wind power generation company and those blocks will be added to some other grid in the country.
The electoral college does need to remove winner take all...but this aint gonna solve that.
That is a state mandate, not a federal one. Any state can change their method of distribution if they want... some are even voting on it this year (eg, CO).
Right now, I am for leaving the electoral college the way it is. Changing it would be like changing the rules of baseball so that a 7 game series is defined by who has more runs as opposed to who won 4 games... FWIW, the BoSox would have lost 41 - 45 in that bizarro world.
For a more practical reason: The only time it really is an issue is in a close race; a race where the "threat" of recounts is high. It was hard enough to have one state do a recount in 2000 (actually, I think one or two more besides FL had recounts), imagine if every vote needed to be counted again, by hand.
People have a hard time with something as simple as a butterfly ballot, and now you want them to rank their choices?
Wow, talk about being optimistic about the voting public.
Even if IRV is the most "accurate", I think Approval voting is lot simpler to understand, especially since it is used in many of the local elections (school board, etc), so it is familiar to most voters.
OK - I looked at my bill again and noticed that 7 cents didn't look right.
531 kWh / $75.92 = 6.99
which is "kWh / dollar", not "cents / kWh". D'oh! Sorry about that.
The correct calcs are:
173.33 hrs/mo * 98 W * (1 kW / 1000 W) * (14.3 cents / kWh) = $2.82 / mo
Which means I have to be 1 minute, 21.6 seconds more productive in a month to justify the electricity cost of the second monitor.
- Tony
Re:Movies while working are newsworthy & produ
on
A Dual Monitor Experiment
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I have 2 IBM P260 21" CRTs on my desk. I just happen to be messing with a plug-in electricity meter and discovered that each monitor requires.83 Amps, 99 VA, 98 W.
Assuming a 173.33 hours per month (2080 hours per year / 12 month per year), thats:
173.33 hrs/mo * 98 W * (1 kW / 1000 W) * (7 cents / kWh) = $1.19 / mo
If, in that month, I can get 40 seconds more work done due to the second monitor, the electricity will be paid for.
So, you are saying that a private property owner does not have the right to decide who is allowed on their property?
THEY WERE WEARING SHIRTS.
Irrelevant. I am not arguing that the organizer's action was right or that I agree with what transpired, only that they have to right to ask anyone to leave their property, with or without cause.
THEY DID HAVE TICKETS.
Once again, irrelevant. When you are on someone else's property, you can be asked to leave. Period.
Troll away.
I find it very interesting that I post supporting the right for a property owner to decide who is allowed on their property and I am termed a troll. Twice.
I've tried very hard to not comment on the action itself of removing the attendees; that is not germane to the discussion. I just didn't think that the difference between "a decision that was made" and "the right to make the decision" would be such a hard concept for people to understand.
That's not even remotely the same thing. First of all, nowhere have I heard that the women in question were being obnoxious or making a scene. A more apt analogy would be that at a Blur concert you get kicked out for wearing an Oasis t-shirt.
Irrelevant. All I have said is that at a private function, the owner (and the organizer) have every right to ask anyone to leave. I would go so far as to say they could do so without cause. Failure to do so would result is said person "trespassing" on the owner's property.
yes, they legally have the right to ask these women to leave, but that doesn't mean that apologists like you can make me and all believers in free speech shutup when we say that such tactics are thuggish, stupid, and petty.
I am certainly not apologizing for their actions. I don't need to agree with what they did to support their rights to do so.
The fact that these people can't tolerate the idea that civil liberties might need protecting only further convinces me that the current Republican leadership is borderline fascist.
You believe what you want. My primary reason for posting has not been to defend the actions taken by the organizers, but to defend their right to take the actions they did.
There appeared to be a belief that such actions could only be taken because it was a political function and the President was speaking, I merely wanted to make sure that it was understood that, while it might be "bullshit", "thuggish", "stupid", and "petty", no rights were harmed in the execution of such actions.
Anybody want to take a guess at what proportion of any political party's stage time occurs at public events where some good old fashioned peaceful dissent would be constitutionally protected?
Slashdot Mirror
IBM Laywer: I'm thinking of a number. I'll write it down on a piece of paper.
SCO Lawyer: OK
The IBM lawyer grabs a pen a scribbles on a sheet of paper, folds the paper in half, and slides it across the table. The SCO lawyer reaches, picks up the paper, unfolds it, and sees this:
----------------
| |
| _ |
| / \ |
| / \ |
| | | |
| | | |
| \ / |
| \_/ |
| |
|______________|
IBM Laywer: Do we have an agreement?
- Tony
Yeah, I'm responding twice to the same post... sorry.
In terms of "an obvious idea", what I've always wanted to see is a LiveCD/Knoppix offering that could read a FAT/NTFS partition on boot and run equivalents to the following software:
- Norton AV / ClamAV
- AdAware
- Spybot S&D
By the title of the story, I thought we might have actually gotten something close ("Seek and Destroy" vs "Search and Destroy").
- Tony
Evidently, the CD can read updates to the Virus DB and the application off of a USB drive.
- Tony
I like Safari as much as the next guy, but I've started to find myself using Firefox G5 more and more. It's a G5-optimized version of Firefox. (There's also a G4 version for more recent G4s)
Frankly, it's a lot faster than Safari and does its thing with less processor load. Every time I use Safari to go to an SSL page or a page with heavy javascript my processor fans ramp up from 300/300 rpm to 2000/1000 rpm. The same pages with FFG5 (or even just FF) do not cause the fan speeds to change at all.
This really wouldn't be noteworthy if Safari was using that extra power to be speedy, but it is much, much slower than FF (especially on such pages).
Two letters and two words:
E Z Bake Oven
Seriously.
Get a rubbermaid or similar box is just a tad wider than the computer case is tall, 18" taller than the computer is wide and about a foot longer than the computer is deep.
Put a few 2x4 spacers at the bottom of the box (to hold the computer off the "floor" of the box) and place the computer in on it's side.
Cut a few holes on the "back" side of the box to run wires into - use heavy foam, rubber, or "great stuff" to seal the holes after the wires have been run.
Mount a light (with ceramic base) to the back of the box, about halfway from the upper side of the computer and the top of the box. Wire this light to an extension cord. You probably wouldn't need more than a 40W light bulb to keep the computer warm in the coldest of weather.
Put the top on. An E Z Bake Over to keep your computer warm.
Of course, there is no guarantee that this will (a) work, (b) not fry your computer, (c) not electrocute you, and (d) not burn down your house and/or garage. So: USE AT YOUR OWN RISK.
- Tony
(nothing like going to school when it's -40 out!)
Is that -40 C or -40 F?
(Yes, I know....)
- Tony
Or, if you actually want to control the cache, get a box from ServerBeach or EV1 Servers, and install Squid as an accelerator.
Can we mod the whole project "(-1, Redundant)"?
So, what you are saying is that P. Diddy has his work cut out for him?
I think it's pretty funny that in an article about balance versus truth, the author does exactly what he says journalists shouldn't do: ...human greenhouse gas emissions are probably ... helping to fuel the greenhouse effect...
When people talk of "global warming", they are talking about a net increase in the Greenhouse Effect, not the effect itself. Unfortunately, most media outlets use "global warming" and "Greenhouse Effect" interchangeably, causing the widespread belief that the GE is bad.
In reality, the greenhouse effect is a good thing. Without it, we would all be dead as average temperature of the Earth would be about 30 deg C cooler.
When the author says "humans may be helping fuel the Greenhouse Effect", while technically accurate, casts a negative implication on the GE, when what he really meant was "humans may be helping fuel global warming".
- Tony
Most new installations are "bird friendly" - larger, slower rotating blades, turbines designed to prevent birds from landing or nesting on the housing, and placement taking into account migratory patterns.
.126 kills / year / turbine. This is a worst case, since it is generally accepted that Altamont Pass has an unusually high kill rate because it was built without taking into consideration migration paths and bird friendly engineering.
.126 kills / turbine year = 6804 dead birds a year
Using this as a reference, there are approximately 180 turbines in use or proposed by this provider. At full capacity, this would account for 1/3 of a percent of the US electrical demand.
Using Altamont Pass (not included in the above calcuation) as a reference, and this page for kill rates, you get about
So, 180 turbines * 300 (needed to supply the whole US) and you get 54,000 turbines. Which converts to:
54,000 *
Sounds like a lot, right?
Well, according to this (note: facts from a wind energy provider), 57 million birds are killed by automobiles each year, 97 million die from "sudden plate glass deceleration", and 1.5 million die from running into things that aren't even moving.
I don't know about you, but 7000 birds a year to generate all US electricity via a renewable resource with no emissions seems to be a good deal. Especially when it only costs 2.54 cents / kWh above non-green power.
- Tony
so can someone tell me what konfabulator does?
It's pretty ingenious.
Konfabulator takes a Dual G5/2.0 with 1.5G of RAM and makes it run like an Apple IIc.
At least, that's what I found when I tried it.
I didn't realized that is wasn't out for Windows yet, because XP had the same effect when I installed it on my PC.
- Tony
It's interesting you mention wind power.
We are thinking about joining PECO's Wind program.
Basically, we pay PECO to buy power for their grid from wind suppliers on our behalf based on either a contracted number of electrical blocks (100 kWh, 250 kWh, 500 kWh, etc) or on actual usage. The charge to do this is $.0254/kWh.
So, for about $15/mo, all our electrical "usage" will be from wind power. Obviously, our actual source of power hasn't changed, but, as a whole, PECO will have to generate 600 kWh less power from their non-green resources with us in the program.
Interestingly enough, even if your local provider does not offer such a program, you can buy blocks directly from the wind power generation company and those blocks will be added to some other grid in the country.
- Tony
Is it possible that Slashdot is being "Yahoo-ed"? It is one of the first links in a "Top Story" on Yahoo's front page:
Your Own Election Night Newsroom
- Tony
You have a very good point, but it also begs the question:
Are you supposed to vote for who you think will do a better overall job or who best represents your beliefs and opinions?
Personally, I was really torn by this very question for the last few weeks...
- Tony
The electoral college does need to remove winner take all...but this aint gonna solve that.
... some are even voting on it this year (eg, CO).
... FWIW, the BoSox would have lost 41 - 45 in that bizarro world.
That is a state mandate, not a federal one. Any state can change their method of distribution if they want
Right now, I am for leaving the electoral college the way it is. Changing it would be like changing the rules of baseball so that a 7 game series is defined by who has more runs as opposed to who won 4 games
For a more practical reason: The only time it really is an issue is in a close race; a race where the "threat" of recounts is high. It was hard enough to have one state do a recount in 2000 (actually, I think one or two more besides FL had recounts), imagine if every vote needed to be counted again, by hand.
People have a hard time with something as simple as a butterfly ballot, and now you want them to rank their choices?
Wow, talk about being optimistic about the voting public.
Even if IRV is the most "accurate", I think Approval voting is lot simpler to understand, especially since it is used in many of the local elections (school board, etc), so it is familiar to most voters.
- Tony
* Firefox can't render custom scrollbars or formfields
:)
There are a host of User Interface people that would count this as a plus.
* Having to restart the browser everytime you install an extension
Yeah, because it is so much nicer to have BonzaiBuddy install itself and not require a restart.
* The TalkBack agent appears way too often for my tastes.
Disable the talkback agent. Problem solved.
- Tony
I picked them up from (...checking email...) Computer Geeks in Feb '03 for $129/ea.
They are great monitors.
I do find myself using Exposé a lot less now, though...
I find myself keeping more windows open on my G5 (where the monitors are) than when I am on my iBook, meaning I use it about the same amount.
- Tony
OK - I looked at my bill again and noticed that 7 cents didn't look right.
/mo * 98 W * (1 kW / 1000 W) * (14.3 cents / kWh) = $2.82 / mo
531 kWh / $75.92 = 6.99
which is "kWh / dollar", not "cents / kWh". D'oh! Sorry about that.
The correct calcs are:
173.33 hrs
Which means I have to be 1 minute, 21.6 seconds more productive in a month to justify the electricity cost of the second monitor.
- Tony
I have 2 IBM P260 21" CRTs on my desk. I just happen to be messing with a plug-in electricity meter and discovered that each monitor requires .83 Amps, 99 VA, 98 W.
/mo * 98 W * (1 kW / 1000 W) * (7 cents / kWh) = $1.19 / mo
Assuming a 173.33 hours per month (2080 hours per year / 12 month per year), thats:
173.33 hrs
If, in that month, I can get 40 seconds more work done due to the second monitor, the electricity will be paid for.
- Tony
So, you are saying that a private property owner does not have the right to decide who is allowed on their property?
THEY WERE WEARING SHIRTS.
Irrelevant. I am not arguing that the organizer's action was right or that I agree with what transpired, only that they have to right to ask anyone to leave their property, with or without cause.
THEY DID HAVE TICKETS.
Once again, irrelevant. When you are on someone else's property, you can be asked to leave. Period.
Troll away.
I find it very interesting that I post supporting the right for a property owner to decide who is allowed on their property and I am termed a troll. Twice.
I've tried very hard to not comment on the action itself of removing the attendees; that is not germane to the discussion. I just didn't think that the difference between "a decision that was made" and "the right to make the decision" would be such a hard concept for people to understand.
That's not even remotely the same thing. First of all, nowhere have I heard that the women in question were being obnoxious or making a scene. A more apt analogy would be that at a Blur concert you get kicked out for wearing an Oasis t-shirt.
Irrelevant. All I have said is that at a private function, the owner (and the organizer) have every right to ask anyone to leave. I would go so far as to say they could do so without cause. Failure to do so would result is said person "trespassing" on the owner's property.
yes, they legally have the right to ask these women to leave, but that doesn't mean that apologists like you can make me and all believers in free speech shutup when we say that such tactics are thuggish, stupid, and petty.
I am certainly not apologizing for their actions. I don't need to agree with what they did to support their rights to do so.
The fact that these people can't tolerate the idea that civil liberties might need protecting only further convinces me that the current Republican leadership is borderline fascist.
You believe what you want. My primary reason for posting has not been to defend the actions taken by the organizers, but to defend their right to take the actions they did.
There appeared to be a belief that such actions could only be taken because it was a political function and the President was speaking, I merely wanted to make sure that it was understood that, while it might be "bullshit", "thuggish", "stupid", and "petty", no rights were harmed in the execution of such actions.
- Tony
That's pretty funny. I hadn't heard of Godwin's Law before and had to look it up.
I am somewhat saddened that my poor choice of example has clouded the point of what would have otherwise been a spirited discussion.
- Tony
Why limit it to the current president?
Anybody want to take a guess at what proportion of any political party's stage time occurs at public events where some good old fashioned peaceful dissent would be constitutionally protected?
- Tony