Aereo is an online streaming service - among its offering, it enables people who stay very far away from NYC (for example, Sydney Australia) to watch TV stations from NYC.
The argument from the teevee stations is that by allowing the streaming of their broadcast content, Aereo is violating the "copyright".
I dunno about you, but I find this argument utterly preposterous !
Legally speaking, true, the way the copyright laws has been stipulated by those "legal experts" is that a copy of whatever copyrighted content (be it sound, image, book, or the combination of any form) can only be used one time, in one place.
But c'mon !
People living in Sydney Australia don't get to watch teevee station beaming from NYC anyway - and by allowing them to watch it via online streaming, how the fuck this going to make the NYC teevee station losing money ?
It was, in fact, the IBM, an elite corporation (at that time) which popularize the computer - by deciding to *NOT* stopping others in duplicating the original IBM PC design.
No, also incorrect. The computer was popularized by MultiCalc, the first spreadsheet, BEFORE the IBM PC and there were many brands, most of which used CP/M as its operating system that ran that program. "Microcomputers" as PCs were called at the time cost thousands of dollars. When the IBM PC came out it was about the most expensive, but it sold like hot cakes because "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."
Like you, this geezer too have been through the CP/M era, the Lotus 123 era, the DR-DOS era, and I've burned my fingertips when assemblying my own DIY computers so many times that I have lost count.
No matter how popular was the CP/M, it didn't get the microcomputer to the masses.
It was IBM which did it.
And to answer user Phantomfive's comment (below):
It was, in fact, the IBM, an elite corporation (at that time) which popularize the computer - by deciding to *NOT* stopping others in duplicating the original IBM PC design.
wow, once again IBM definitely *DID* try to stop others from duplicating the original IBM PC design [computerhistory.org]. They couldn't sue Compaq later because Compaq used a clean-room design to avoid copyright violations. (see also the Wikipedia entries for Eagle and Corona computers).
We don't need to look very far back to see how Apple sued Samsung for the "rounded corner" to know that if IBM really wanted to sue, no matter how *clean* Compaq's *clean room* turned out to be, technically they had the right to do so, and they could very well shut the doors of (at that time) still nascent Compaq with their lawsuits.
Moving from the original contractor (Michelle Obama's university buddy - cronyism) to Accenture is like moving the project from a bumbling idiot to the mafia
But that's not the point either.
The point is - WHY IS THERE NOBODY INVESTIGATING MICHELLE OBAMA'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE ?
It was used by the masses (mainly businessmen) to count their money.
Then came the Babbage Machine and Ada Lovelace - the first ever hardware / software combo. It was an important step in the evolutionary path of the computer but its effect was not as widespread as that of the Abacus.
Then came the electrical computer, with diodes. It was mainly used by the elites (military / academic) for war / research purposes.
And this was followed by the mainframe era - where corporations that were rich enough started to infiltrate the "elite circle" and gained the power to let computer automating part of their business activities.
Beginning in the 1970's the computer started to go back to where it came from, the masses. With hobby DIY kits, with many a hacker burning their finger tips to assemble their own computers, people started to realize and to tap on to what the computer can offer them.
It was, in fact, the IBM, an elite corporation (at that time) which popularize the computer - by deciding to *NOT* stopping others in duplicating the original IBM PC design.
This process went on for about 30-odd years and the computer progress from the desktop to the phone, and then, to wearables (wrist watch, head-bands, glasses).
As the masses started to get comfortable with computers, it moves up-stream again, back to the elites.
This "Watson" program represents another chapter of the computer evolution, and this time, it goes back to the elite circle.
So, as we see, the computer, starting as Abacus, was a device for the masses. And then, it became a device for the elites (Babbage machine). Then it became a device for the masses again (cellphone, tablets, wearables). And now, it moves back to the elites.
Maybe those starts just didn't like the neighbourhood they were in and decided to move house
TFA only says that the stars are travelling at a speed high enough that they can escape the pull of the galaxy, but doesn't give any explanation of WHAT is pushing or pulling the stars.
From TFA:
"The generally accepted mechanism for producing hypervelocity stars relies on the extreme gravitational field of the supermassive black hole that resides in the galaxy's core"
If it's the "supermassive black hole in the Galaxy core" that's doing the pulling, the stars should have travelling towards the core.
But they are travelling instead away from the core !
Instead of a "pull", it is as if there's something that's "PUSHING" them instead, and I do not think it's the supermassive blackhole (whose expertise is on the pulling part).
The easiest way to avoid being vaporized is to wear a shirt that reads "/dev/null".
No intelligent system will send anything your way. You are assuming that the "intelligent system" is programmed using alpha-numeric characters (a-z and 0-9).
What if someone customizes the whole programming environment by only using the Arabic language (which does include the numerical character of 0-9) ?
And another chilling thing about this...
Imagine a robot which is programmed to kill only people with a certain color of skin (black or yellow, or white, or skin) - not unlike what those Muslim terrorists did when they attack that shopping center in Kenya (they only spare Muslims in their rampage) - that robot would be one hell of a "hate machine" !!
Between 1988 and 2003, linear programmng on a standard benchmark improved by a factor of about 40 million. Out of that improvement, about 40,000 was from improvements in software and only about 1000 in hardware improvements (these numbers are partially not well-defined because there's some interaction between how one optimizes software for hardware and the reverse).
I downloaded the report at the link that you have so generously provided -http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-nitrd-report-2010.pdf - but I found the figures somewhat misleading
In the field of numerical algorithms, however, the improvement can be quantified. Here is just one example, provided by Professor Martin GrÃtschel of Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum für Informationstechnik Berlin. GrÃtschel, an expert in optimization, observes that a benchmark production planning model solved using linear programming would have taken 82 years to solve in 1988, using the computers and the linear programming algorithms of the day. Fifteen years later â" in 2003 â" this same model could be solved in roughly 1 minute, an improvement by a factor of roughly 43 million. Of this, a factor of roughly 1,000 was due to increased processor speed, whereas a factor of roughly 43,000 was due to improvements in algo-rithms! GrÃtschel also cites an algorithmic improvement of roughly 30,000 for mixed integer programming between 1991 and 2008
Professor GrÃtschel's sighting was in regard of "numerical algorithm", and no doubt, there have been some great improvements achieved due to new algorithms. But that is just one tiny aspect out of the whole spectrum of the programming scene.
Out of the tiny segment of the numerical crunching, bloatwares have emerged everywhere.
While the hardware speed has accelerated 1,000x (as claimed by the kind professor), the speed of the software in solving the myriad problems hasn't exactly been keeping up.
I have invested more than 30 years of my life in the tech field, and comparing to what we had achieved in software back in the late 1970's, what we have today are astoundingly disappointing.
Back then, RAM was counted in KB, and storage in MB were considered as "HUGE".
We had to squeeze every single ounce of performance out of our programs just to make them run at decent speed.
No matter if it's a game of "pong" or numerical analysis, everything had to be considered and more than often we get down to the machine level (yes, we code one step lower than the assembly language) so to minimize the "waste", counting down to each and every single cycle.
Yes, many of the younger generation will look at us as though we the old farts are crazy, but our quest in fighting against the hardware limitation was, at least to us who went through it all, extremely stimulating.
The really sad thing regarding this "Moore's Law" thing is that, while the hardware had kept on getting faster and even more power efficient, the software that runs on them kept on becoming more and more bloated.
Back in the days of pre-8088 we already had music notation softwares running on Radio Shack TRS-80 model III.
Back then, due to the constraints of the hardware, programmers had to use every trick on the book (and off) to make their programs run.
Nowadays, even the most basic "Hello World" program comes up in megabyte range.
To add on to what user Firethorn has said, try imagine an engine that needs no cooling.
The very reason we need to COOL our engine because the metal that we use in our engine can withstand heat up to a certain limit, and beyond that, the engine starts to melt.
Ceramics don't have that problem. Some ceramic compounds can withstand thousands of degrees of heat (and for that they have been used as shields for the Space Shuttles) and they are excellent insulators !
Serious research has been carried out on ceramic engines since before 1970's, by almost all the developed countries (America, Europe, Japan) and prototype engines had been developed.
The main problem so far is that, unlike metal, ceramics are not as durable against friction. Very fine ceramic dusts will fall out as a result of the friction, and combined with the fuel, it become "sludge"-like, jamming up the chamber.
There are a lot of places inside an engine where there are frictions, but the MAIN place which friction takes place is in between the piston ring and the bore wall.
If what the TFA says is true - that they can manipulate the air to become a "force" and takes the place of the piston ring, which means, the friction in between the piston ring and the wall of the bore is gone, then, the number one problem facing the ceramic engine is solved !
As for the "Laws of War", no matter if it came from Machiavelli or from Sun Zi, psy ops are as important as ever.
No matter if it's MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) or killer drones, no matter if it's a symmetrical warfare or if it's asymmetrical (such as terrorism), human beings are _still_ human beings.
For example: NSA is fighting a war against the citizens of the United States of America, and NSA has applied plenty of lessons it learned from both Machiavelli and Sun Zi.
Being investing in many start-ups for 2 decades or so, and been couple of times played that wide-eye start-up entrepreneur role, I really pity the current crop of entrepreneurs.
There have been too many con-artists in the investment scene.
Yes, many of us are there to invest our real money for those with solid ideas - but there are those who went in, pretending to be interested in investing, but some how, for whatever reason they pulled out at the last moment, carry with them great ideas that they often transformed into a sell-out end product.
I know few of them, and I also met with some of their victims.
I count myself very lucky that when I *was* starting up there wasn't so many con-artists rubbing shoulders with us who were looking for funding.
What took you so long? We've known it's a police state for over a decade already. What is wrong with you?
USA is a police state, but USA is *NOT* the only police state.
Many of the so-called "Western Democracies" have turned into police states.
Take United Kingdom, for example.
What has GCHQ been doing for the past few decades ?
And when "The Guardian" newspaper printed the revelation from Edward Snowden files, what did the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom do ?
He threaten the paper with censure.
Let's not forget the contribution of "Great Firewall of UK", aka the "David Cameron Porn Filter" which filtered out many non-porn site, including Slashdot.org
It's also England which has blocked out the Pirate Bay.
"... that an absolute seal isnâ(TM)t that important, and eliminating the friction generated by the rings on the cylinder wall can have far-reaching effects on engine design on the whole "
"... that the whole thing is blowing a bunch of hot air?"
If they _CAN_ use that bunch of hot air to form a seal, and achieve a drastic reduce of friction in between the piston ring and the bore itself, I feel that it's time for the return of the ceramic engine.
The chief reason why ceramic engine doesn't make it into the mainstream despite having had under research since the 1970's is that the friction in between the piston ring and the wall of the bore itself result in the wearoff of the ceramic material in the form of a pile up of fine ceramic dust inside the chamber.
If what the vendor said is proven to be true, then we should bring the ceramic engine back to the fore-front.
... cancer will remain much more resistant because it is not so much a disease as a phenomenon
From NIH
Cancer is a term used for diseases in which abnormal cells divide without control and are able to invade other tissues
... or in other words, cancer is cell mutations that went out of control.
Normal cells do have an expiry date. It's known as Apoptosis.
The one stark difference of a cancerous cell is that it forgets to die, and it keeps on multiplying like mad.
There are many causes of cancer, some of which can be traced back to genetic. Other cancers, on the other hand, could be triggered by bacteria/virus. And then, there are cancers that are caused by external factors, such as chemicals that came into our body, via food, or smoke, or pollution.
Have you, America as a nation, let your hunger for war and hegemony override your once great ideals for the betterment of mankind?
Just where did you go wrong?
American Idol, NFL, NBA, etc.. When we decided it was more fun to watch others than to do it ourselves. Lazy fuckers.
Actually it's more like Halliburton, Chase Manhattan, Mosanto, Walmart, Eli Lily, Microsoft, and the rest of the commercial giants that have dug American in.
Instead of bravely go to where no one has gone before, the Americans have been slaving for whoever sign their paychecks for the past 40 odd years without any clue what their country is heading.
It's the American greediness that has killed the American spirit.
While your post has nothing to do with time travelers whatsoever, it's still interesting.
I posted what I posted in this "time traveling" story because I suspect (I do not have any proof, only suspicions) that something did travel back in time (about 7 minutes) and I just so happened to "encounter" one of the "side effects" of that "travel".
There was nothing shaking, absolutely nothing to trigger my "earth is shaking" premonition but still, that very first thought that came across my mind after I witnessed that "bend reality" phenomanon was "earthquake".
That thought came so naturally that even now, as I type, I still have no explanation of why I thought what I thought at that juncture.
My suspicion is that an earthquake had happened, and something in or near the locality somehow transmitted a "force"/ an "energy field", or whatever that I can't explain, outwards to warn its own kinds (maybe scattered around this planet, or beyond) of the danger.
And to make that warning effective, the warning itself must reach its target (or targets) before the event (in my example, the big earthquake near Japan) happened.
Or, in other words, the message must travel backward in time in order to be effective.
... I did experience some kind of "reality bending", about 9 minutes prior to the earthquake that triggered the tsunami in Japan.
The date was April 11, 2011.
It was 16.07 local (Singapore) time, as I was in Singapore for a business meeting.
I was sitting in front of a computer display typing away, inside a hotel room. The desktop computer was provided by the host, and it was plugged into the net. The computer clock had just been synced with some online atomic time at noon time (some 4 hours ago).
For some reason I felt something weird, nothing moving, but I felt that something is not right. I look out of the windows (it was a high-rise hotel, and my room was in the 23 or 24th floor) and I witnessed "reality bending".
I can't really describe it, but what I saw was the window frame and the concrete pole "bend", not unlike what the "bending images" of some old vhs tapes where part of the scenes got scattered to one side.
That weird sensation only lasted a few seconds and the first thought that came across my mind was that there was an earthquake.
Since Singapore is located very near to earthquake zone, I expected that something gonna shake and was waiting to see if the shaking gonna be big and if that I have to evacuate from the hotel room.
But nothing shook.
So instinctively I look at the computer clock. It showed 16:07.
I sat there for a minute or two, waiting for some "signs" of shaking or whatever. Nothing.
Satisfied that nothing gonna happened I continued what I was doing.
A few minutes afterward, news started to trickle in over the net - a big quake in Japan, and later, a devastating tsunami.
Till now I still can't explain what exactly happened, and why my first thought after I experienced that "bend reality" was a "earthquake".
Fractional reserve banking was invented by goldsmiths. People would deposit their gold with smiths, who would issue script as receipts. Soon the script would circulate as being much more convenient than gold. The smiths realized that they could make loans against the gold they held. Ta-da more script in circulation than the gold holding.
So how is this solved for BTC? I'm not sure.
What is there to stop the Bitcoin exchange to start functioning like the goldsmiths you mentioned above?
What if they start issuing "scripts" to facilitate trading, finance, debt ?
Why is there such concern of whether the robot is "closed" or "open" ?
Both the "closed" version of the robotic and the "open" version have their own ecological spheres - just like the one in the software field.
We have closed and proprietary software and we have open sourced software, and we have some that overlap both camps.
Each side has its own (sort of) evolutionary scheme, and each side has its own strength and weaknesses.
Why can't the robotic be the same ?
If someone decide to turn their robots into something like the dishwasher machine, hey, that's their choice, let them.
After all, this is a free world.
But if someone decide that they want their robots to gain more inputs / feedback / tune / addition from the userland, then they make their robots the "open" kind, so that their robots can "grow", "mutate", "evolve" into new fields that the original inventor couldn't even begin to fathom.
Slashdot Mirror
Aereo is an online streaming service - among its offering, it enables people who stay very far away from NYC (for example, Sydney Australia) to watch TV stations from NYC.
The argument from the teevee stations is that by allowing the streaming of their broadcast content, Aereo is violating the "copyright".
I dunno about you, but I find this argument utterly preposterous !
Legally speaking, true, the way the copyright laws has been stipulated by those "legal experts" is that a copy of whatever copyrighted content (be it sound, image, book, or the combination of any form) can only be used one time, in one place.
But c'mon !
People living in Sydney Australia don't get to watch teevee station beaming from NYC anyway - and by allowing them to watch it via online streaming, how the fuck this going to make the NYC teevee station losing money ?
It was, in fact, the IBM, an elite corporation (at that time) which popularize the computer - by deciding to *NOT* stopping others in duplicating the original IBM PC design.
No, also incorrect. The computer was popularized by MultiCalc, the first spreadsheet, BEFORE the IBM PC and there were many brands, most of which used CP/M as its operating system that ran that program. "Microcomputers" as PCs were called at the time cost thousands of dollars. When the IBM PC came out it was about the most expensive, but it sold like hot cakes because "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."
Like you, this geezer too have been through the CP/M era, the Lotus 123 era, the DR-DOS era, and I've burned my fingertips when assemblying my own DIY computers so many times that I have lost count.
No matter how popular was the CP/M, it didn't get the microcomputer to the masses.
It was IBM which did it.
And to answer user Phantomfive's comment (below):
It was, in fact, the IBM, an elite corporation (at that time) which popularize the computer - by deciding to *NOT* stopping others in duplicating the original IBM PC design.
wow, once again IBM definitely *DID* try to stop others from duplicating the original IBM PC design [computerhistory.org]. They couldn't sue Compaq later because Compaq used a clean-room design to avoid copyright violations. (see also the Wikipedia entries for Eagle and Corona computers).
We don't need to look very far back to see how Apple sued Samsung for the "rounded corner" to know that if IBM really wanted to sue, no matter how *clean* Compaq's *clean room* turned out to be, technically they had the right to do so, and they could very well shut the doors of (at that time) still nascent Compaq with their lawsuits.
Holy fucking shit we're fucked
Moving from the original contractor (Michelle Obama's university buddy - cronyism) to Accenture is like moving the project from a bumbling idiot to the mafia
But that's not the point either.
The point is - WHY IS THERE NOBODY INVESTIGATING MICHELLE OBAMA'S INVOLVEMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE ?
The first human made computer was the Abacus.
It was used by the masses (mainly businessmen) to count their money.
Then came the Babbage Machine and Ada Lovelace - the first ever hardware / software combo. It was an important step in the evolutionary path of the computer but its effect was not as widespread as that of the Abacus.
Then came the electrical computer, with diodes. It was mainly used by the elites (military / academic) for war / research purposes.
And this was followed by the mainframe era - where corporations that were rich enough started to infiltrate the "elite circle" and gained the power to let computer automating part of their business activities.
Beginning in the 1970's the computer started to go back to where it came from, the masses. With hobby DIY kits, with many a hacker burning their finger tips to assemble their own computers, people started to realize and to tap on to what the computer can offer them.
It was, in fact, the IBM, an elite corporation (at that time) which popularize the computer - by deciding to *NOT* stopping others in duplicating the original IBM PC design.
This process went on for about 30-odd years and the computer progress from the desktop to the phone, and then, to wearables (wrist watch, head-bands, glasses).
As the masses started to get comfortable with computers, it moves up-stream again, back to the elites.
This "Watson" program represents another chapter of the computer evolution, and this time, it goes back to the elite circle.
So, as we see, the computer, starting as Abacus, was a device for the masses. And then, it became a device for the elites (Babbage machine). Then it became a device for the masses again (cellphone, tablets, wearables). And now, it moves back to the elites.
Tick - - - tock - - - tick - - - and now... tock
Maybe those starts just didn't like the neighbourhood they were in and decided to move house
TFA only says that the stars are travelling at a speed high enough that they can escape the pull of the galaxy, but doesn't give any explanation of WHAT is pushing or pulling the stars.
From TFA:
"The generally accepted mechanism for producing hypervelocity stars relies on the extreme gravitational field of the supermassive black hole that resides in the galaxy's core"
If it's the "supermassive black hole in the Galaxy core" that's doing the pulling, the stars should have travelling towards the core.
But they are travelling instead away from the core !
Instead of a "pull", it is as if there's something that's "PUSHING" them instead, and I do not think it's the supermassive blackhole (whose expertise is on the pulling part).
And how many charge/discharge cycle that "rhubarb battery" can handle ?
What are the benefits this "rhubarb battery" has over the ultra-capacitors which can handle huge number of rapid charge/discharge cycles ?
See the comment I posted back in 2012 regarding ultra-capacitors @ http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3143769&cid=41458249
The easiest way to avoid being vaporized is to wear a shirt that reads "/dev/null".
No intelligent system will send anything your way. You are assuming that the "intelligent system" is programmed using alpha-numeric characters (a-z and 0-9).
What if someone customizes the whole programming environment by only using the Arabic language (which does include the numerical character of 0-9) ?
And another chilling thing about this ...
Imagine a robot which is programmed to kill only people with a certain color of skin (black or yellow, or white, or skin) - not unlike what those Muslim terrorists did when they attack that shopping center in Kenya (they only spare Muslims in their rampage) - that robot would be one hell of a "hate machine" !!
Between 1988 and 2003, linear programmng on a standard benchmark improved by a factor of about 40 million. Out of that improvement, about 40,000 was from improvements in software and only about 1000 in hardware improvements (these numbers are partially not well-defined because there's some interaction between how one optimizes software for hardware and the reverse).
I downloaded the report at the link that you have so generously provided -http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcast-nitrd-report-2010.pdf - but I found the figures somewhat misleading
In the field of numerical algorithms, however, the improvement can be quantified. Here is just one example, provided by Professor Martin GrÃtschel of Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum für Informationstechnik Berlin. GrÃtschel, an expert in optimization, observes that a benchmark production planning model solved using linear programming would have taken 82 years to solve in 1988, using the computers and the linear programming algorithms of the day. Fifteen years later â" in 2003 â" this same model could be solved in roughly 1 minute, an improvement by a factor of roughly 43 million. Of this, a factor of roughly 1,000 was due to increased processor speed, whereas a factor of roughly 43,000 was due to improvements in algo-rithms! GrÃtschel also cites an algorithmic improvement of roughly 30,000 for mixed integer programming between 1991 and 2008
Professor GrÃtschel's sighting was in regard of "numerical algorithm", and no doubt, there have been some great improvements achieved due to new algorithms. But that is just one tiny aspect out of the whole spectrum of the programming scene.
Out of the tiny segment of the numerical crunching, bloatwares have emerged everywhere.
While the hardware speed has accelerated 1,000x (as claimed by the kind professor), the speed of the software in solving the myriad problems hasn't exactly been keeping up.
I have invested more than 30 years of my life in the tech field, and comparing to what we had achieved in software back in the late 1970's, what we have today are astoundingly disappointing.
Back then, RAM was counted in KB, and storage in MB were considered as "HUGE".
We had to squeeze every single ounce of performance out of our programs just to make them run at decent speed.
No matter if it's a game of "pong" or numerical analysis, everything had to be considered and more than often we get down to the machine level (yes, we code one step lower than the assembly language) so to minimize the "waste", counting down to each and every single cycle.
Yes, many of the younger generation will look at us as though we the old farts are crazy, but our quest in fighting against the hardware limitation was, at least to us who went through it all, extremely stimulating.
The really sad thing regarding this "Moore's Law" thing is that, while the hardware had kept on getting faster and even more power efficient, the software that runs on them kept on becoming more and more bloated.
Back in the days of pre-8088 we already had music notation softwares running on Radio Shack TRS-80 model III.
Back then, due to the constraints of the hardware, programmers had to use every trick on the book (and off) to make their programs run.
Nowadays, even the most basic "Hello World" program comes up in megabyte range.
Sigh !
Chinese don't like war too much. They are not a warring tribe.
However, they love money.
Ask any Chinese, and I mean, any Chinese and you will find each and every single one of them love money.
How I know ? I am a Chinese.
The multiplication table wasn't the only Chinese invention. The ancient Chinese also invented the Abacus ( http://eileen-lian.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/abacus-1-AJHD.jpg ) because they needed something to count their money.
To add on to what user Firethorn has said, try imagine an engine that needs no cooling.
The very reason we need to COOL our engine because the metal that we use in our engine can withstand heat up to a certain limit, and beyond that, the engine starts to melt.
Ceramics don't have that problem. Some ceramic compounds can withstand thousands of degrees of heat (and for that they have been used as shields for the Space Shuttles) and they are excellent insulators !
Serious research has been carried out on ceramic engines since before 1970's, by almost all the developed countries (America, Europe, Japan) and prototype engines had been developed.
The main problem so far is that, unlike metal, ceramics are not as durable against friction. Very fine ceramic dusts will fall out as a result of the friction, and combined with the fuel, it become "sludge"-like, jamming up the chamber.
There are a lot of places inside an engine where there are frictions, but the MAIN place which friction takes place is in between the piston ring and the bore wall.
If what the TFA says is true - that they can manipulate the air to become a "force" and takes the place of the piston ring, which means, the friction in between the piston ring and the wall of the bore is gone, then, the number one problem facing the ceramic engine is solved !
The TFA asks:
Are New Technologies Undermining the Laws of War?
You sez:
"All is fair in love and war"
Well, let's see
Another adage puts it this way ...
" To the victor goes the spoils "
There is absolutely *NO* fairness in WAR.
As for the "Laws of War", no matter if it came from Machiavelli or from Sun Zi, psy ops are as important as ever.
No matter if it's MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) or killer drones, no matter if it's a symmetrical warfare or if it's asymmetrical (such as terrorism), human beings are _still_ human beings.
For example: NSA is fighting a war against the citizens of the United States of America, and NSA has applied plenty of lessons it learned from both Machiavelli and Sun Zi.
Even now I have really no idea what role DHS is playing.
NSA deals with high math stuffs
FBI deals with people
DEA deals with drugs
ATF deals with weapons
But what DHS deals with ? Terrorists ?
I think I'm about to puke !
Being investing in many start-ups for 2 decades or so, and been couple of times played that wide-eye start-up entrepreneur role, I really pity the current crop of entrepreneurs.
There have been too many con-artists in the investment scene.
Yes, many of us are there to invest our real money for those with solid ideas - but there are those who went in, pretending to be interested in investing, but some how, for whatever reason they pulled out at the last moment, carry with them great ideas that they often transformed into a sell-out end product.
I know few of them, and I also met with some of their victims.
I count myself very lucky that when I *was* starting up there wasn't so many con-artists rubbing shoulders with us who were looking for funding.
What took you so long? We've known it's a police state for over a decade already. What is wrong with you?
USA is a police state, but USA is *NOT* the only police state.
Many of the so-called "Western Democracies" have turned into police states.
Take United Kingdom, for example.
What has GCHQ been doing for the past few decades ?
And when "The Guardian" newspaper printed the revelation from Edward Snowden files, what did the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom do ?
He threaten the paper with censure.
Let's not forget the contribution of "Great Firewall of UK", aka the "David Cameron Porn Filter" which filtered out many non-porn site, including Slashdot.org
It's also England which has blocked out the Pirate Bay.
From the TFA:
"... that an absolute seal isnâ(TM)t that important, and eliminating the friction generated by the rings on the cylinder wall can have far-reaching effects on engine design on the whole "
" ... that the whole thing is blowing a bunch of hot air?"
If they _ CAN _ use that bunch of hot air to form a seal, and achieve a drastic reduce of friction in between the piston ring and the bore itself, I feel that it's time for the return of the ceramic engine.
The chief reason why ceramic engine doesn't make it into the mainstream despite having had under research since the 1970's is that the friction in between the piston ring and the wall of the bore itself result in the wearoff of the ceramic material in the form of a pile up of fine ceramic dust inside the chamber.
If what the vendor said is proven to be true, then we should bring the ceramic engine back to the fore-front.
The two-party gag is merely a ruse
How many governmental agencies are in charge of "National Security" ?
Navy ...
Army
Air Force
Marine
Coast Guard
NSA
CIA
FBI
TBA
How many governmental agencies are in charge of "Law Enforcement" ?
SEC (for financial/security)
DEA (for drugs)
ATF (for guns)
Marshall (for witness protection)
With FBI withdrawing from "Law Enforcement", who is in charge of interstate criminal activities, racketeering, and so on ??
From TFA
From NIH
Cancer is a term used for diseases in which abnormal cells divide without control and are able to invade other tissues
... or in other words, cancer is cell mutations that went out of control.
Normal cells do have an expiry date. It's known as Apoptosis.
The one stark difference of a cancerous cell is that it forgets to die, and it keeps on multiplying like mad.
There are many causes of cancer, some of which can be traced back to genetic. Other cancers, on the other hand, could be triggered by bacteria/virus. And then, there are cancers that are caused by external factors, such as chemicals that came into our body, via food, or smoke, or pollution.
Have you, America as a nation, let your hunger for war and hegemony override your once great ideals for the betterment of mankind?
Just where did you go wrong?
American Idol, NFL, NBA, etc.. When we decided it was more fun to watch others than to do it ourselves. Lazy fuckers.
Actually it's more like Halliburton, Chase Manhattan, Mosanto, Walmart, Eli Lily, Microsoft, and the rest of the commercial giants that have dug American in.
Instead of bravely go to where no one has gone before, the Americans have been slaving for whoever sign their paychecks for the past 40 odd years without any clue what their country is heading.
It's the American greediness that has killed the American spirit.
While your post has nothing to do with time travelers whatsoever, it's still interesting.
I posted what I posted in this "time traveling" story because I suspect (I do not have any proof, only suspicions) that something did travel back in time (about 7 minutes) and I just so happened to "encounter" one of the "side effects" of that "travel".
There was nothing shaking, absolutely nothing to trigger my "earth is shaking" premonition but still, that very first thought that came across my mind after I witnessed that "bend reality" phenomanon was "earthquake".
That thought came so naturally that even now, as I type, I still have no explanation of why I thought what I thought at that juncture.
My suspicion is that an earthquake had happened, and something in or near the locality somehow transmitted a "force"/ an "energy field", or whatever that I can't explain, outwards to warn its own kinds (maybe scattered around this planet, or beyond) of the danger.
And to make that warning effective, the warning itself must reach its target (or targets) before the event (in my example, the big earthquake near Japan) happened.
Or, in other words, the message must travel backward in time in order to be effective.
... I did experience some kind of "reality bending", about 9 minutes prior to the earthquake that triggered the tsunami in Japan.
The date was April 11, 2011.
It was 16.07 local (Singapore) time, as I was in Singapore for a business meeting.
I was sitting in front of a computer display typing away, inside a hotel room. The desktop computer was provided by the host, and it was plugged into the net. The computer clock had just been synced with some online atomic time at noon time (some 4 hours ago).
For some reason I felt something weird, nothing moving, but I felt that something is not right. I look out of the windows (it was a high-rise hotel, and my room was in the 23 or 24th floor) and I witnessed "reality bending".
I can't really describe it, but what I saw was the window frame and the concrete pole "bend", not unlike what the "bending images" of some old vhs tapes where part of the scenes got scattered to one side.
That weird sensation only lasted a few seconds and the first thought that came across my mind was that there was an earthquake.
Since Singapore is located very near to earthquake zone, I expected that something gonna shake and was waiting to see if the shaking gonna be big and if that I have to evacuate from the hotel room.
But nothing shook.
So instinctively I look at the computer clock. It showed 16:07.
I sat there for a minute or two, waiting for some "signs" of shaking or whatever. Nothing.
Satisfied that nothing gonna happened I continued what I was doing.
A few minutes afterward, news started to trickle in over the net - a big quake in Japan, and later, a devastating tsunami.
Till now I still can't explain what exactly happened, and why my first thought after I experienced that "bend reality" was a "earthquake".
And not all of us do time travels all the time. :)
Fractional reserve banking was invented by goldsmiths. People would deposit their gold with smiths, who would issue script as receipts. Soon the script would circulate as being much more convenient than gold. The smiths realized that they could make loans against the gold they held. Ta-da more script in circulation than the gold holding.
So how is this solved for BTC? I'm not sure.
What is there to stop the Bitcoin exchange to start functioning like the goldsmiths you mentioned above?
What if they start issuing "scripts" to facilitate trading, finance, debt ?
Which part of "Made in the USA" did you not understand?
Please correct me if I am wrong, isn't Sercomm ( http://www.sercomm.com/ ) a Chinese company ?
Why is there such concern of whether the robot is "closed" or "open" ?
Both the "closed" version of the robotic and the "open" version have their own ecological spheres - just like the one in the software field.
We have closed and proprietary software and we have open sourced software, and we have some that overlap both camps.
Each side has its own (sort of) evolutionary scheme, and each side has its own strength and weaknesses.
Why can't the robotic be the same ?
If someone decide to turn their robots into something like the dishwasher machine, hey, that's their choice, let them.
After all, this is a free world.
But if someone decide that they want their robots to gain more inputs / feedback / tune / addition from the userland, then they make their robots the "open" kind, so that their robots can "grow", "mutate", "evolve" into new fields that the original inventor couldn't even begin to fathom.