Actually, in your example, the site would need 11.111 (recurring)% more energy.;-)
Hmm, let's see. A panel takes 1 unit of energy to make. Let's say it is 90% efficient at getting that energy back. That means that each generation of panel will have a deficit of 0.1 units of energy. So here is the series:
Is this factory using solar power to make their solar panels? If so, would it mean that they've finally got a "green" way of making them?
As long as panels don't make back the energy that it takes to create them they won't be able to do any more than defray their original energy costs. This is true no matter if the plant making the panels uses them itself or not.
Look at it this way, if each panel makes back 90% of the energy it took to make it then the plant will still need to spend the original energy it took to create the panels that power it, plus 10% more. If it makes a panel and then sends it out then that panel can't make energy for the plant and the plant is out of that energy.
The best you could do is to make one panel, keep it and use that energy to make that panel's replacement for when it wears out or breaks. Then you'd only be out 10% of the energy for one panel, multiplied by the number of generations of panels.
In other words, until a panel can produce more energy than it takes to make that panel you can't have a "green" way of making them by using just the power from other panels.
For example, your main menu is totally unusable in Safari 1.2.2 on Mac OS X 10.3.4
That's odd, it works perfectly fine on that exact configuration (Safari 1.2.2 (v125.8) and Firefox) on my 10.3.4 testing machine here, as well as the ones at work.
I'm also seeing some problems with both OmniWeb 4.5 and Safari 1.2.2. Basically most of the links don't come up at all and the text overwrites itself. A re-load of the site got it mostly working under OmniWeb but it didn't do anything under Safari. I'm running Mac OS X 10.3.4 here also.
I'm sending some screenshots your way in order to help you debug the problem. Hope they help.
Tools like Fink help out a lot- I guess I'd compare it to a graphical apt-get for OS X even though I'm sure that isn't entirely accurate.
A few things.
First of all Fink uses apt-get as part of its package management. Fink is basically a Mac OS X-enhanced version of apt-get with some other good features added in.
Secondly, Fink is not graphical at all, it is completely command-line. There is, however, a 3rd-party graphical front end to Fink called FinkCommander.
How about for relatively recent Apple hardware that will run OS X poorly, like my aging 350MHz iMac?
Mac OS X 10.3 runs just fine on the 350 mHz iMac. My parents are running it on one and they have had few, if any, problems. The big thing is to make sure that you have at least 384 MB of RAM in the machine, any less and you will run into swap quickly which slows the machine down considerably.
It won't be a speed demon by any means but you can surf the web, use Microsoft Word and Excel, play some of the less taxing games, etc. It is a great setup for basic computer use. Linux will probably make the machine seem a bit quicker but then again you'll lose the great UI that Mac OS has.
Don't tell anybody, but this must actually break the iTunes DRM good and hard. CrossOverOffice almost certainly uses a standard Linux sound driver to get the sound data to the sound chip. This is bound to mean/dev/dsp, which is "hackable" in the sense that anyone with root access can snarf the digital audio data between when it gets decrypted by iTunes and when it gets sent to the sound chip.
Don't tell anybody, but this happens under Mac OS and Windows also.
Just because you can re-route audio that doesn't mean you are breaking the DRM. Apple knows about all of these methods and has only done a pro forma job at closing them off. Basically, Apple needs to be able to tell the RIAA "We're making sure the music is uncopyable." so that the RIAA will continue to sign distribution contracts with Apple.
Don't make a big deal that you can create DRM-less copies of iTunes Music Store Music and its most likely that Apple won't bother you. Remember that Steve Jobs was the one who said, "Every security scheme that is based on secrets eventually fails."
f you have a 2 hour SDRAM buffer, then on the user pressing the shuffle button the device should go load the buffer with random songs until the memory is full.
Yeah until the user does this:
"Oh I don't like this song" (shuffle) (fill buffer)
"Damn, I don't want to hear this song either" (shuffle) (fill buffer)
Even if the shuffle button just drops the current song, goes to the next one in the buffer, and waits to load a new batch of random songs its still cutting off a lot of the benefits of having a buffer in the first place. Add to that the fact that the user probably has the backlight set to come on when they hit a button and you can see how you would quickly run out of battery charge.
12 songs? like an... album? what do they got in their, a hamster? it can't possibly be that hard to find somewhere to stuff a couple more MP3s in a cell phone. why so stingy?
The poster of the story got it a bit wrong. It's not a dozen songs, it is dozenS of songs. So think more like a couple of albums worth, not one album worth of songs.
Remember that most songs will probably be full 128 kbit iTunes Music Store AAC files. Judging from the songs I've bought from the iTMS each song will take up around 3.5 MB so a dozen will take 42 MB. That adds up pretty quick. You could fit about 36 songs onto a 128 MB flash card, which sounds reasonable for a flash-based cell phone/MP3 player.
Try opening up Terminal and running the following command:
# sudo sh
It's not that hard to gain root in Mac OS X, even with superuser disabled in NetInfo.
Right but even then you are asked for a password before you can open up a root shell. The point is that the password is yet another roadblock to a virus gaining root on your system. Of course there is no 100% sure way to stop all attempts at infiltrating a system but every roadblock helps!
For those that are truly paranoid I'd recommend running your main account with no sudo privileges at all. Basically create two accounts, an administrator account with the ability to sudo and do all the other stuff that an admin needs to do and a regular joe account with no special privileges at all.
Use the admin account for installing, updating, and fixing stuff and use the average joe account for your normal day-to-day e-mail, web, spreadsheets, etc. That way even if a virus did infect your machine it would most likely be in the average joe account you use all the time and where the virus can't do squat since that user can't do anything to the system.
With Mac OS X's Fast User Switching it is pretty easy to swap between these accounts at will and still maintain privilege separation.
The virus is already on the inside with "root". It would be trivial for the virus to simply disable the firewall before spewing.
Not if the system is set up properly. For example, under Mac OS X the user does not have root privileges by default. Instead the user needs to authenticate himself every time he performs any changes to the root system or anything else outside of his own user account for that matter. This makes it very difficult and much less likely that a virus could get root privileges.
So, sure the virus could infect your own personal account but since the firewall runs under root the virus can't disable it. Yes, you still won't stop the idiots who blindly authenticate anything that pops up but at least this is another barrier to stop the spread of a virus.
I tried it and it did copy everything to the folder as you described. However, it did not import nearly the entire folder. It wound up importing about 1/10 the total # of songs.
Did all of the songs copy? How did you do the importing to iTunes - through the iTunes menu item File->Import... or by drag-and-drop? Did you get any messages as to why some of the songs didn't import?
The last time I tried this it worked just fine. Took a bit of time to copy 9 GB of songs but other than that...:-)
Put Linux on the iMac, start an X Windows server, and get a 386 for a terminal
No need for Linux to do that, you can already run an X-Windows server under Mac OS X and do the same deal as you would with Linux. I've done remote connections using just this setup and it works perfectly.
a gallon of diesel fuel has about twice the energy as a gallon of gasoline. (Of course I'm not counting the energy used in refining, gasoline needs a lot of energy to create)
This is simply not true. There is a bit of variation between the different types and grades of diesel and gasoline but it pretty much comes down to they are fairly equal in the amount of energy that each fuel contains. If you look at this web site you will see the following numbers:
gasoline - 35 MJ/liter diesel - 36.4 MJ/liter
Diesel has a bit more energy than gasoline but by no means does it have twice the energy!
I was too busy focusing on the numbers coming out of the logs to have my shopping cart completely up to date. When the numbers told me to buy - I clicked "shopping cart" and waited six minutes for it to load. I watched the 100 million mark roll by before my shopping cart loaded and I could click buy.
Heh, yep same here. I started trying to load by shopping cart at around the 99,990,000 mark. The damn thing would not load and sure enough the next number that came up on the counter was something like 100,014,000. Man was I cursing up a storm!
Ahh well, I probably had no chance and I already have a PowerMac G5 and a 20 GB iPod but it still would have been nice to win all that swag. I hope that it went to someone who was limping along with an older system and a older 5 GB iPod or something
This contest was really a great idea on Apple's part. I'm sure they sold millions more songs than they would have normally in the same time period.
I'm using the ditto command (a standard shell tool that comes with Mac OS X) because it properly preserves data forks and file metadata. You can use any copying tool you want, but some may not get all of the filesystem metadata. The files will still play fine but they might lose custom icons and stuff like that. No big deal either way.
You can copy the files directly through the Finder but that's a little tougher since the Music directory is an invisible folder. There are ways of making it visible but its just easier to use the Terminal.
By the way, it's more fun to use this command because then you can see each file listed as it is copied:
When the copy operation is finished you'll have a folder named Music on your Desktop (assuming Mac OS X here). Just import the whole folder into iTunes - much easier because the files are sorted in a way that doesn't make much sense at a first glance (the folders are a type of hash that makes it easy for the iPod to find a song quickly against an internal table).
Re:This isn't about making cool browsers...
on
Browser Wars 2004
·
· Score: 1
It's much easier to write UI code in HTML with some JavaScript that it is to write the same UI code with C++ or any other language for that matter.
While this is true in some instances I can think of one very relevant instance where it is not true. This is the case of UI code on Mac OS X. Under Mac OS X you have a tool named Interface Builder which allows you to build the UI graphically through a tool palette. Through Interface Builder building a UI is as easy as dragging in a few elements, hooking up a few connections, and applying it to your code. It will even stub out the interfaces for you in code so all you need to do is to define the interactions you need.
One of the main advantages of Interface Builder (aside from the ease of creating a GUI) is that it helps you to layout your interface for maximum interoperability with the rest of the operating system. There are guides that pop up to show you proper spacing between elements and which help you keep all text on one line. This is a good thing because if every application has a similar layout then it becomes easy for the user to sit down and learn your application, based on his prior experience with other applications.
Honestly I was astonished that Apple had chosen to go the HTML/CSS/JS route toward making the Dashboard widgets or whatever they are called. It seems like this is the more difficult route when all they needed to do was create an API that could be accessed by whatever language you prefer and have the GUI be made up in Interface Builder or some similar tool. I guess they could create a new program to do the UI layout in HTML/CSS/JS but that really seems like reinventing the wheel.
Screw the X-prize, I want to see which corporation is first to get a billboard on the moon, and after that, which corporation is first to get to mars. That'll be some fun times, right there.
Are you suggesting that a planet the size of earth will evaporate, becoming smaller? So first, it gathers all this material, then for some unknown reason starts losing it? What is the mechanism for the reversal?
This kind of thinking shakes my faith in scientists.
Don't blame the scientists for the difficulty that you are having with these concepts. Instead read more of their papers and source material and perhaps you will see what they are talking about.
The universe is not a place with evenly distributed material and perfectly omnidirectional forces. There are flaws in any gas cloud and this leads to eddies and whorls. Some of these are larger than others and thus trap more material. The larger ones coalesce into larger astronomical objects and the smaller ones tend to form smaller objects.
This form of aggregation occurs on all scales. Microscopic particles of dust can accrete into large clumps, large bodies can become larger or smaller depending on their environment. You can see this accretion in the rings of Saturn where it is likely that the bands are forming from interactions between the material that the rings is composed of. There is also good evidence that it is occuring in nebula
When the loose material is blown away from an astronomical object the amount left behind will depend on a lot of factors such as the amount and type of atoms that were in the gas cloud, the size of the gas cloud, the motion of the gas cloud, the size of the newly formed sun, etc.
All planets substantially smaller than Earth are "Evaporating" into space. It is quite impossible for a planet the mass of the earth to have developed from a smaller planet like mars. The process doesn't work! In order to form an "Earth" you essentially must start with an object about the current mass. This leaves us with a cosmological question as to how such a body would be formed in the first place. The small to large process just does not happen well.
Different environment, different effects.
Remember that it took some time for the center of our solar system to gather enough material into a dense enough package for the solar furnace of our Sun to ignite. Until then there were a lot of clumps of material building up and gathering into what would eventually become the planets. Once the Sun ignited the solar wind blew away most of the lighter elements but many of those clumps were dense enough and had high enough local gravity to retain a significant fraction of the material around them.
This sort of process is still occurring in places where solar winds are too weak to blast apart an object which is being built up.
Also, it's not likely that the "loose" material was swept out of the solar system all at once. It probably took billions of years for this to happen and it is still continuing to this day. It's quite possible for a planet like Earth to have aggregated from smaller bits of material and then slowly lose them over the course of billions of years to eventually become like Mars is now.
Remember the Green / Blue Mars novels by Kim Stanley Robinson where they create an atmosphere on Mars? Well it looks like it wouldn't be viable without also finding a way to generate an Earth-like magnetic field.
Not necessarily true. Yes, eventually Mars will lose most of its terraformed atmosphere and it will return to the state that it is currently in but that could take millions of years. We can certainly generate a ton more atmosphere than Mars loses and we can do so for a good, long time.
Not only that but if we were really innovative we would redirect a few comets or similar objects into a close orbit around Mars, releasing them onto the planet in a planned manner and further bulking up the atmosphere. This may be a bit beyond our current technology but we should be able to do it fairly soon.
By the time we are ready to terraform Mars we will almost definitely be able to do so.
I suspect that Mars *did* once have a magnetic field. My guess is that some really *big* impact caused sufficient vulcanism to blow enough magma out to sap the energy from the core and stop the magneto.
One of the theories is that since Mars is smaller than Earth it may have cooled off faster. Since the magnetic field of a planet is generated by the spinning of the core if a planet were to cool sufficiently the core would slow down (the speeds of the core and the crust would begin to match) and thus the magnetic field would weaken.
This theory is supported by the fact that there is little or no tectonic activity currently occurring on Mars, although there certainly has been tectonic activity in the past.
Starbucks, with their deployment of wireless APs in their stores, and now with the music concept, is really working hard to keep customers sitting down longer in their stores, consuming their products.
Hmm, at Starbuck's rates I'm surprised that anyone is using their wireless service at all. The rates are one of the following plans:
$6 / hour ($0.10 per minute additional after first hour, minimum 1 hour)
$10 / day (continuous 24 hours) $40 / month (continuous) $360 / year (continuous)
Even the bulk rate of $360 per year is pretty damn close to what I pay for my cable modem service at home! The only thing is that I LIVE at home and I only VISIT a Starbucks so I'm likely to get better use out of my home cable modem than a yearly Starbucks/T-Moble account. Not to mention that I also get a bunch of pop/imap e-mail addresses, web space, and a some other perks with my cable modem service.
It would be much smarter for Starbucks to simply provide a limited-time access code with every product purchase. Say, a free 1/2 hour of wireless access for every $3 spent on coffee or other products. Set up a simple system that prints a time-limited code on every receipt. The code is good for so long after the receipt is printed and then it is retired. This would encourage people to buy products and would discourage dumpster-divers from finding activation codes in litter and leeching off the network.
What degree of vulnerability does each security update affect (serious, critical, not that big a deal)? What's the attack vector? What are the workarounds? How do these changes affect other apps that may rely on them?
If you look up the CVE name for the vulnerability at the CVE website you can find links to all this and more. Here's an example: CAN-2003-0020 is one of the Apache vulnerabilities that were fixed in Apple's Security Update 2004-05-03.
Name CAN-2003-0020 (under review)
Description Apache does not filter terminal escape sequences from its error logs, which could make it easier for attackers to insert those sequences into terminal emulators containing vulnerabilities related to escape sequences.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm, let's see. A panel takes 1 unit of energy to make. Let's say it is 90% efficient at getting that energy back. That means that each generation of panel will have a deficit of 0.1 units of energy. So here is the series:Therefore the total energy needed would be n x 0.1 energy unit or n x 10% of one energy unit, where n is the number of panels made.
As long as panels don't make back the energy that it takes to create them they won't be able to do any more than defray their original energy costs. This is true no matter if the plant making the panels uses them itself or not.
Look at it this way, if each panel makes back 90% of the energy it took to make it then the plant will still need to spend the original energy it took to create the panels that power it, plus 10% more. If it makes a panel and then sends it out then that panel can't make energy for the plant and the plant is out of that energy.
The best you could do is to make one panel, keep it and use that energy to make that panel's replacement for when it wears out or breaks. Then you'd only be out 10% of the energy for one panel, multiplied by the number of generations of panels.
In other words, until a panel can produce more energy than it takes to make that panel you can't have a "green" way of making them by using just the power from other panels.
I'm also seeing some problems with both OmniWeb 4.5 and Safari 1.2.2. Basically most of the links don't come up at all and the text overwrites itself. A re-load of the site got it mostly working under OmniWeb but it didn't do anything under Safari. I'm running Mac OS X 10.3.4 here also.
I'm sending some screenshots your way in order to help you debug the problem. Hope they help.
A few things.
First of all Fink uses apt-get as part of its package management. Fink is basically a Mac OS X-enhanced version of apt-get with some other good features added in.
Secondly, Fink is not graphical at all, it is completely command-line. There is, however, a 3rd-party graphical front end to Fink called FinkCommander.
Mac OS X 10.3 runs just fine on the 350 mHz iMac. My parents are running it on one and they have had few, if any, problems. The big thing is to make sure that you have at least 384 MB of RAM in the machine, any less and you will run into swap quickly which slows the machine down considerably.
It won't be a speed demon by any means but you can surf the web, use Microsoft Word and Excel, play some of the less taxing games, etc. It is a great setup for basic computer use. Linux will probably make the machine seem a bit quicker but then again you'll lose the great UI that Mac OS has.
Don't tell anybody, but this happens under Mac OS and Windows also.
Just because you can re-route audio that doesn't mean you are breaking the DRM. Apple knows about all of these methods and has only done a pro forma job at closing them off. Basically, Apple needs to be able to tell the RIAA "We're making sure the music is uncopyable." so that the RIAA will continue to sign distribution contracts with Apple.
Don't make a big deal that you can create DRM-less copies of iTunes Music Store Music and its most likely that Apple won't bother you. Remember that Steve Jobs was the one who said, "Every security scheme that is based on secrets eventually fails."
Yeah until the user does this:
"Oh I don't like this song" (shuffle) (fill buffer)
"Damn, I don't want to hear this song either" (shuffle) (fill buffer)
Even if the shuffle button just drops the current song, goes to the next one in the buffer, and waits to load a new batch of random songs its still cutting off a lot of the benefits of having a buffer in the first place. Add to that the fact that the user probably has the backlight set to come on when they hit a button and you can see how you would quickly run out of battery charge.
The poster of the story got it a bit wrong. It's not a dozen songs, it is dozenS of songs. So think more like a couple of albums worth, not one album worth of songs.
Remember that most songs will probably be full 128 kbit iTunes Music Store AAC files. Judging from the songs I've bought from the iTMS each song will take up around 3.5 MB so a dozen will take 42 MB. That adds up pretty quick. You could fit about 36 songs onto a 128 MB flash card, which sounds reasonable for a flash-based cell phone/MP3 player.
Right but even then you are asked for a password before you can open up a root shell. The point is that the password is yet another roadblock to a virus gaining root on your system. Of course there is no 100% sure way to stop all attempts at infiltrating a system but every roadblock helps!
For those that are truly paranoid I'd recommend running your main account with no sudo privileges at all. Basically create two accounts, an administrator account with the ability to sudo and do all the other stuff that an admin needs to do and a regular joe account with no special privileges at all.
Use the admin account for installing, updating, and fixing stuff and use the average joe account for your normal day-to-day e-mail, web, spreadsheets, etc. That way even if a virus did infect your machine it would most likely be in the average joe account you use all the time and where the virus can't do squat since that user can't do anything to the system.
With Mac OS X's Fast User Switching it is pretty easy to swap between these accounts at will and still maintain privilege separation.
If by pro you mean PROstitute then, yes, Rob Enderle is a true pro in the computer industry. Just ask his pimp-daddy Bill Gates.
Not if the system is set up properly. For example, under Mac OS X the user does not have root privileges by default. Instead the user needs to authenticate himself every time he performs any changes to the root system or anything else outside of his own user account for that matter. This makes it very difficult and much less likely that a virus could get root privileges.
So, sure the virus could infect your own personal account but since the firewall runs under root the virus can't disable it. Yes, you still won't stop the idiots who blindly authenticate anything that pops up but at least this is another barrier to stop the spread of a virus.
Did all of the songs copy? How did you do the importing to iTunes - through the iTunes menu item File->Import... or by drag-and-drop? Did you get any messages as to why some of the songs didn't import?
The last time I tried this it worked just fine. Took a bit of time to copy 9 GB of songs but other than that...
No need for Linux to do that, you can already run an X-Windows server under Mac OS X and do the same deal as you would with Linux. I've done remote connections using just this setup and it works perfectly.
This is simply not true. There is a bit of variation between the different types and grades of diesel and gasoline but it pretty much comes down to they are fairly equal in the amount of energy that each fuel contains. If you look at this web site you will see the following numbers:Diesel has a bit more energy than gasoline but by no means does it have twice the energy!
Heh, yep same here. I started trying to load by shopping cart at around the 99,990,000 mark. The damn thing would not load and sure enough the next number that came up on the counter was something like 100,014,000. Man was I cursing up a storm!
Ahh well, I probably had no chance and I already have a PowerMac G5 and a 20 GB iPod but it still would have been nice to win all that swag. I hope that it went to someone who was limping along with an older system and a older 5 GB iPod or something
This contest was really a great idea on Apple's part. I'm sure they sold millions more songs than they would have normally in the same time period.
Sure you can. Plug the iPod in. Open up a terminal window. Type in (replacing iPodName with the actual name of the iPod):I'm using the ditto command (a standard shell tool that comes with Mac OS X) because it properly preserves data forks and file metadata. You can use any copying tool you want, but some may not get all of the filesystem metadata. The files will still play fine but they might lose custom icons and stuff like that. No big deal either way.
You can copy the files directly through the Finder but that's a little tougher since the Music directory is an invisible folder. There are ways of making it visible but its just easier to use the Terminal.
By the way, it's more fun to use this command because then you can see each file listed as it is copied:When the copy operation is finished you'll have a folder named Music on your Desktop (assuming Mac OS X here). Just import the whole folder into iTunes - much easier because the files are sorted in a way that doesn't make much sense at a first glance (the folders are a type of hash that makes it easy for the iPod to find a song quickly against an internal table).
While this is true in some instances I can think of one very relevant instance where it is not true. This is the case of UI code on Mac OS X. Under Mac OS X you have a tool named Interface Builder which allows you to build the UI graphically through a tool palette. Through Interface Builder building a UI is as easy as dragging in a few elements, hooking up a few connections, and applying it to your code. It will even stub out the interfaces for you in code so all you need to do is to define the interactions you need.
One of the main advantages of Interface Builder (aside from the ease of creating a GUI) is that it helps you to layout your interface for maximum interoperability with the rest of the operating system. There are guides that pop up to show you proper spacing between elements and which help you keep all text on one line. This is a good thing because if every application has a similar layout then it becomes easy for the user to sit down and learn your application, based on his prior experience with other applications.
Honestly I was astonished that Apple had chosen to go the HTML/CSS/JS route toward making the Dashboard widgets or whatever they are called. It seems like this is the more difficult route when all they needed to do was create an API that could be accessed by whatever language you prefer and have the GUI be made up in Interface Builder or some similar tool. I guess they could create a new program to do the UI layout in HTML/CSS/JS but that really seems like reinventing the wheel.
The first one will probably be some evil madman who wants to write his name on the Moon so it can be seen from Earth. He'll probably get stopped but henchmen will still manage to write "CHA" in large letters across the near side of the Moon.
Don't blame the scientists for the difficulty that you are having with these concepts. Instead read more of their papers and source material and perhaps you will see what they are talking about.
The universe is not a place with evenly distributed material and perfectly omnidirectional forces. There are flaws in any gas cloud and this leads to eddies and whorls. Some of these are larger than others and thus trap more material. The larger ones coalesce into larger astronomical objects and the smaller ones tend to form smaller objects.
This form of aggregation occurs on all scales. Microscopic particles of dust can accrete into large clumps, large bodies can become larger or smaller depending on their environment. You can see this accretion in the rings of Saturn where it is likely that the bands are forming from interactions between the material that the rings is composed of. There is also good evidence that it is occuring in nebula
When the loose material is blown away from an astronomical object the amount left behind will depend on a lot of factors such as the amount and type of atoms that were in the gas cloud, the size of the gas cloud, the motion of the gas cloud, the size of the newly formed sun, etc.
Different environment, different effects.
Remember that it took some time for the center of our solar system to gather enough material into a dense enough package for the solar furnace of our Sun to ignite. Until then there were a lot of clumps of material building up and gathering into what would eventually become the planets. Once the Sun ignited the solar wind blew away most of the lighter elements but many of those clumps were dense enough and had high enough local gravity to retain a significant fraction of the material around them.
This sort of process is still occurring in places where solar winds are too weak to blast apart an object which is being built up.
Also, it's not likely that the "loose" material was swept out of the solar system all at once. It probably took billions of years for this to happen and it is still continuing to this day. It's quite possible for a planet like Earth to have aggregated from smaller bits of material and then slowly lose them over the course of billions of years to eventually become like Mars is now.
Not necessarily true. Yes, eventually Mars will lose most of its terraformed atmosphere and it will return to the state that it is currently in but that could take millions of years. We can certainly generate a ton more atmosphere than Mars loses and we can do so for a good, long time.
Not only that but if we were really innovative we would redirect a few comets or similar objects into a close orbit around Mars, releasing them onto the planet in a planned manner and further bulking up the atmosphere. This may be a bit beyond our current technology but we should be able to do it fairly soon.
By the time we are ready to terraform Mars we will almost definitely be able to do so.
One of the theories is that since Mars is smaller than Earth it may have cooled off faster. Since the magnetic field of a planet is generated by the spinning of the core if a planet were to cool sufficiently the core would slow down (the speeds of the core and the crust would begin to match) and thus the magnetic field would weaken.
This theory is supported by the fact that there is little or no tectonic activity currently occurring on Mars, although there certainly has been tectonic activity in the past.
Hmm, at Starbuck's rates I'm surprised that anyone is using their wireless service at all. The rates are one of the following plans:
Even the bulk rate of $360 per year is pretty damn close to what I pay for my cable modem service at home! The only thing is that I LIVE at home and I only VISIT a Starbucks so I'm likely to get better use out of my home cable modem than a yearly Starbucks/T-Moble account. Not to mention that I also get a bunch of pop/imap e-mail addresses, web space, and a some other perks with my cable modem service.
It would be much smarter for Starbucks to simply provide a limited-time access code with every product purchase. Say, a free 1/2 hour of wireless access for every $3 spent on coffee or other products. Set up a simple system that prints a time-limited code on every receipt. The code is good for so long after the receipt is printed and then it is retired. This would encourage people to buy products and would discourage dumpster-divers from finding activation codes in litter and leeching off the network.
If you look up the CVE name for the vulnerability at the CVE website you can find links to all this and more. Here's an example: CAN-2003-0020 is one of the Apache vulnerabilities that were fixed in Apple's Security Update 2004-05-03.Yeah you might have to dig for some of the information but overall they direct you pretty much what you need to know.
Sure you can, just look right here for the perfect solution!