Also, you can get better quality paper and more destruction of data by using high-powered jets to spray the ink out of the paper.
I saw something similar, but it used a different technique - microcavitation. You put the paper in a fluid, sound waves make bubbles, and the subsequent collapse of the bubbles imparts energy to the nearby area. It's enough to vibrate the ink off the page, but didn't really damage the paper. Here is a short blurb about it.
This presupposes that a device could only have one mode, and that all planes (some models have been built for decades) have the same tolerances. You might be able to mark some things as not safe for air use, but after that it gets really vague.
See, with RIAA, they have artists do really bad, rehashed music, and they want you to pay for it. With Mojib Ribbon, you pay to make the music, and you listen to it, or give it to your friends (or enemies?) because you can pretty much guarantee that no one wants to pay for it...now if you could sue them for not wanting to pay you, maybe it would be the same.
What's with the slipshod attitude? You're half a continent off. Oops, that's probably just typical consulting errors. I can see it now...
GWB: "I want to bomb Asia!"
War Consultant: "That's wonderful! We've done some calculations, and the best way yo do this is to go East."
GWB: "Exxxcellent! Let's get going!"
A few months later...
War Consultant: "Given what we thought was the best direction to meet your desires previously, and the use of the budget so far, we can't make it to Asia. There's two choices - either increase the budget by 30%, or we can bomb the Middle East."
GWB: "I want to drop some bombs!"
War Consultant [smiles]: "Alright, we have Afganistan, Iraq--"
GWB: "Yeah, yeah, that's fine. We'll start there, and if we get enough support, maybe we can increase the budget and get to North Korea."
Not a bad idea, but how do you split control of the lowest 8 miles of airspace that every launch method requires you to go through one way or another (and contains pretty much all standard aviation)?
Given that most game makers are male, geeks, and therefore probably can't get dates more than twice a year, could we think of a demographic that is less likely to have insight into what women want to do in their spare time? Go figure.
It's a joke. Precise killing will mean less deaths. If one of the pastimes of the human race is killing others, then an indicator of success would be killing more people. Hence, live up to your full potential by killing more people. I'll admit that it was pretty vague, and in bad taste (it's/. after all!), but I wasn't trying to make any grand statement.
And the paranoid statement is my.sig, not a comment about you.
Actually, I think it was the map cheat. With his latest user mod, WinXP, he can see what's happening in millions of places without even having to produce spies...
Because Real Life has an upgrade pack called Unreal. Of course, I'm a geek, and play neither Unreal nor Real Life - my time is consumed with Work Life and No Life.
This is correct for software solutions. If I can obtain the source code, and the help of some l337 h4x0rz, I can probably determine how the system works, and how to obtain unintended results - hopefully leading to the person I want being elected.
This is not the case for physical systems. As an example, if I was given a route for taking a shipment of depleted uranium from one site to another (it must happen sometime, right?) 30 minutes before I had to leave, with a route determined somewhat at random, with certain checkpoints that may or may not be known to me, then I could benefit from obscurity in making my process secure. That's because the mechanics of the physical world make planning a synchronous event - if I don't know the details soon enough, I can't plan a hijack of a shipment. The synchronous nature isn't there for application/protocol use, because I can examine and prepare the application/protocol before the actual attack.
I've talked to clients in the agro business, and they mentioned GPS-mapped ariel surveys of their crop fields to determine where the weeds were growing (apparently they absorb - or don't - a specific IR range). This would be coupled with a GPS-equipped tractor, the data would be downloaded, and the GPS system would spray only the regions that showed as having a troublesome level of weeds. This may not have required 1-foot accuracy, but it was still GPS, and could reduce herbicide use to 1/3.
Humans will find inventive ways to kill each other as long as the species exists. In view of that fact, why not kill precisely rather than imprecisely?
Clearly, you aren't interested in iving up to your full potential as a human being. Start pulling your weight.
I agree with everything you say, with the exception of how small the risk is. For simplicity's sake, let's say there were 6000 diagnosed cases in 2002, that's more than recorded. 6000/300M = 0.002%. I'm likelier to die of exposure where I live, and there are only (only!;) 5 months of winter here. Besides, as you said yourself, if I wear repellent, my risks are lower. And I'm still 100 times likelier to die of the flu, and I don't worry about that too much either - more for my kids than myself.
If you read my comment two levels up, I class SARS and AIDS on the same level - new diseases with little or no immunity in the general population. Fortunately, excellent hygiene reduces your risks with SARS (and certain lifestyle choices reduce your risk of AIDS - and I'm not saying heterosexuality!), and it is survivable. That said, I would have been leery of going to TO in May or June.
Not insensitive, just sick of the hype. The average person in the US is 100 times likelier to die of the flu, yet they go on like this is the Black Death. I'm more interested in improving road safety awareness - you'll see better returns than you will with West Nile. Actually, I take that back - raising awareness of the importance of using DEET for at-risk groups is valuable. And I do have 3 very young children, and I live in an area that has tested positive for West Nile for the last two summers. They're still likelier to die in a car accident.
I am also aware that West Nile is of great risk to birds of the crow family (which is mentioned by the media as an indicator of risk, not an ecological issue), and to horses, which barely gets media attention in my area. I've never seen the media mention any other species at risk.
The issue I had is the parent of my previous reply worrying about SARS taking away from the attention given to West Nile, and my response being that you don't really have much to worry about unless you fall into an at-risk category. Even if you do, those categories are the same as for the flu, which is a greater risk.
Why are you worried about West Nile?
on
SARS Contained
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Take a look. Also, keep in mind that most people that get west nile don't know they're sick, and we still only have a death rate in diagnosed cases of about 7.5%. On a more sensationalist note, about as many people died in 9/11 as were diagnosed with West Nile in all of 2002, and even then, less than 300 died, out of about 300 million people. The flu(!) kills about 36000 per year in the US. It's going to be another 20 years or so before I worry about West Nile, and I'm paranoid;)
Re:One down...
on
SARS Contained
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Of course, isolation is a two-edged sword. It gives us protection from more dangerous diseases, but it also allows mutations that are sufficiently unique to form without immunity to go along with it. The flu is a perfect exmple. For the last 20 or 30 years, scientists have been predicting another major outbreak, in epidemic proportions. But it just doesn't happen, and they keep saying "real soon, now".
Sometimes, I question that. Maybe the reason we don't see them any more is that we aren't isolated for very many generations from any particular strain of the flu, and so it never has a chance to gain a large advantage over our immune systems. Hence, no epidemics.
I'm not saying this is a fact, but if you look at most of the epidemics we have nowadays, they fall into the following categories:
New diseases (for people at least), which almost no one has immunity to (AIDS, SARS).
Older diseases which are fairly virulent, but never seem to spread beyond their locale (ebola, dangerous e. coli variants).
Variants of older diseases which are more virulent, but still are fairly benign (west nile). I question calling a disease epidemic when it only kills tens out of millions of the local population, but they labelled it...
Superbugs, which have mutated to have anti-biotic resistance (staph, etc.)
Given my residence in North America, I'm not too worried about ebola, and it's class of diseases as described above. It's very hit-and-miss, and rarely spreads outside of it's initial range. This may be due to infection vectors or other things, but they never seem to really take over in general (thankfully).
I'm also not too worried about West Nile, and others like it. Let's be realistic - if you're not very old, very young, or immune-compromised, your odds of catching it and dying (or even knowing) are lower than being struck by lightning.
Superbugs and the new diseases that we have no immunity are a lot more worrisome. These are having the greatest impact worldwide, and have no simple cures. I'm aware that developing nations suffer a lot more deaths than either of these causes from very well-known diseases, but they are easily preventable through proper hygiene and such - that's why they disappeared in most industrialized countries.
So, flus and such don't even get on my list. As long as we keep getting our regular exposures to the worldwide variants (and exporting ours;), the risks of the population in general being introduced to a variant that is unrecognizable to our immune systems should be lower, in a way making the world a safer place, hopefully.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, you can get better quality paper and more destruction of data by using high-powered jets to spray the ink out of the paper.
I saw something similar, but it used a different technique - microcavitation. You put the paper in a fluid, sound waves make bubbles, and the subsequent collapse of the bubbles imparts energy to the nearby area. It's enough to vibrate the ink off the page, but didn't really damage the paper. Here is a short blurb about it.
It's not digital. You can be sure, though, that there is a company researching it...
This presupposes that a device could only have one mode, and that all planes (some models have been built for decades) have the same tolerances. You might be able to mark some things as not safe for air use, but after that it gets really vague.
See, with RIAA, they have artists do really bad, rehashed music, and they want you to pay for it. With Mojib Ribbon, you pay to make the music, and you listen to it, or give it to your friends (or enemies?) because you can pretty much guarantee that no one wants to pay for it...now if you could sue them for not wanting to pay you, maybe it would be the same.
What's with the slipshod attitude? You're half a continent off. Oops, that's probably just typical consulting errors. I can see it now...
GWB: "I want to bomb Asia!"
War Consultant: "That's wonderful! We've done some calculations, and the best way yo do this is to go East."
GWB: "Exxxcellent! Let's get going!"
A few months later...
War Consultant: "Given what we thought was the best direction to meet your desires previously, and the use of the budget so far, we can't make it to Asia. There's two choices - either increase the budget by 30%, or we can bomb the Middle East."
GWB: "I want to drop some bombs!"
War Consultant [smiles]: "Alright, we have Afganistan, Iraq--"
GWB: "Yeah, yeah, that's fine. We'll start there, and if we get enough support, maybe we can increase the budget and get to North Korea."
And the rest, as they say, is history...
Not a bad idea, but how do you split control of the lowest 8 miles of airspace that every launch method requires you to go through one way or another (and contains pretty much all standard aviation)?
Given that most game makers are male, geeks, and therefore probably can't get dates more than twice a year, could we think of a demographic that is less likely to have insight into what women want to do in their spare time? Go figure.
It's a joke. Precise killing will mean less deaths. If one of the pastimes of the human race is killing others, then an indicator of success would be killing more people. Hence, live up to your full potential by killing more people. I'll admit that it was pretty vague, and in bad taste (it's /. after all!), but I wasn't trying to make any grand statement.
.sig, not a comment about you.
And the paranoid statement is my
One word: counting. Two words: prior art. Bonus word: spelling. Fix the .sig already.
after which it typically spends time as essentially an item in the mother's inventory
It's worth noting that the admins get upset if you drop this item. Also, although its worth is very high, the admins will visit if you try to sell it.
Probably playing in 'easy' or 'moderate' skill level, in the 'United States' locale...
Actually, I think it was the map cheat. With his latest user mod, WinXP, he can see what's happening in millions of places without even having to produce spies...
I hear the shotgun account deletion method is effective, but it could be hearsay - I only have third-hand reports.
Because Real Life has an upgrade pack called Unreal. Of course, I'm a geek, and play neither Unreal nor Real Life - my time is consumed with Work Life and No Life.
Yeah, they're likelier to screw up and let some of the "incorrect" votes through...
Okay, that horse is quite dead, and thoroughly flogged, to boot...
This is correct for software solutions. If I can obtain the source code, and the help of some l337 h4x0rz, I can probably determine how the system works, and how to obtain unintended results - hopefully leading to the person I want being elected.
This is not the case for physical systems. As an example, if I was given a route for taking a shipment of depleted uranium from one site to another (it must happen sometime, right?) 30 minutes before I had to leave, with a route determined somewhat at random, with certain checkpoints that may or may not be known to me, then I could benefit from obscurity in making my process secure. That's because the mechanics of the physical world make planning a synchronous event - if I don't know the details soon enough, I can't plan a hijack of a shipment. The synchronous nature isn't there for application/protocol use, because I can examine and prepare the application/protocol before the actual attack.
There's a lot of worthless spite in this article, but if you can look past that, you might see something worth thinking about.
That comment almost made me break down and click the article link, but I figured I would get enough spite reading the comments...
I've talked to clients in the agro business, and they mentioned GPS-mapped ariel surveys of their crop fields to determine where the weeds were growing (apparently they absorb - or don't - a specific IR range). This would be coupled with a GPS-equipped tractor, the data would be downloaded, and the GPS system would spray only the regions that showed as having a troublesome level of weeds. This may not have required 1-foot accuracy, but it was still GPS, and could reduce herbicide use to 1/3.
What will ever happen to human progress if we start all being nice to each other?
;)
Who cares, we'll all be so happy
Humans will find inventive ways to kill each other as long as the species exists. In view of that fact, why not kill precisely rather than imprecisely?
Clearly, you aren't interested in iving up to your full potential as a human being. Start pulling your weight.
I agree with everything you say, with the exception of how small the risk is. For simplicity's sake, let's say there were 6000 diagnosed cases in 2002, that's more than recorded. 6000/300M = 0.002%. I'm likelier to die of exposure where I live, and there are only (only! ;) 5 months of winter here. Besides, as you said yourself, if I wear repellent, my risks are lower. And I'm still 100 times likelier to die of the flu, and I don't worry about that too much either - more for my kids than myself.
If you read my comment two levels up, I class SARS and AIDS on the same level - new diseases with little or no immunity in the general population. Fortunately, excellent hygiene reduces your risks with SARS (and certain lifestyle choices reduce your risk of AIDS - and I'm not saying heterosexuality!), and it is survivable. That said, I would have been leery of going to TO in May or June.
Not insensitive, just sick of the hype. The average person in the US is 100 times likelier to die of the flu, yet they go on like this is the Black Death. I'm more interested in improving road safety awareness - you'll see better returns than you will with West Nile. Actually, I take that back - raising awareness of the importance of using DEET for at-risk groups is valuable. And I do have 3 very young children, and I live in an area that has tested positive for West Nile for the last two summers. They're still likelier to die in a car accident.
I am also aware that West Nile is of great risk to birds of the crow family (which is mentioned by the media as an indicator of risk, not an ecological issue), and to horses, which barely gets media attention in my area. I've never seen the media mention any other species at risk.
The issue I had is the parent of my previous reply worrying about SARS taking away from the attention given to West Nile, and my response being that you don't really have much to worry about unless you fall into an at-risk category. Even if you do, those categories are the same as for the flu, which is a greater risk.
Take a look. Also, keep in mind that most people that get west nile don't know they're sick, and we still only have a death rate in diagnosed cases of about 7.5%. On a more sensationalist note, about as many people died in 9/11 as were diagnosed with West Nile in all of 2002, and even then, less than 300 died, out of about 300 million people. The flu(!) kills about 36000 per year in the US. It's going to be another 20 years or so before I worry about West Nile, and I'm paranoid ;)
Sometimes, I question that. Maybe the reason we don't see them any more is that we aren't isolated for very many generations from any particular strain of the flu, and so it never has a chance to gain a large advantage over our immune systems. Hence, no epidemics.
I'm not saying this is a fact, but if you look at most of the epidemics we have nowadays, they fall into the following categories:
Given my residence in North America, I'm not too worried about ebola, and it's class of diseases as described above. It's very hit-and-miss, and rarely spreads outside of it's initial range. This may be due to infection vectors or other things, but they never seem to really take over in general (thankfully).
I'm also not too worried about West Nile, and others like it. Let's be realistic - if you're not very old, very young, or immune-compromised, your odds of catching it and dying (or even knowing) are lower than being struck by lightning.
Superbugs and the new diseases that we have no immunity are a lot more worrisome. These are having the greatest impact worldwide, and have no simple cures. I'm aware that developing nations suffer a lot more deaths than either of these causes from very well-known diseases, but they are easily preventable through proper hygiene and such - that's why they disappeared in most industrialized countries.
So, flus and such don't even get on my list. As long as we keep getting our regular exposures to the worldwide variants (and exporting ours