By itself this device only gives you liquid CO2 which you then have to deal with. But hook this to an algae photobioreactor tower and you can have a self-contained pod that generates use able diesel fuel with only sunlight and air as inputs.
Pairing them will let you eliminate the "compress to a liquid" step as well, which should further lower the energy requirement for CO2 reclamation.
The reverse can work too. Ages ago I built a bot that would answer chat attempts with randomly selected "fortune" quotes, stripped of their bylines and biased by the presence of nouns that matched those found in the other party's message. I left it running as my "away" message on the mainframe at a large university (where people would chat randomly to you all the time)
I didn't bother saving "my" side of the conversation , so I'm sure I missed some hilarious exchanges, but just reading the other side's messages shows that girls, in particular, would keep chatting with my bot far beyond the point where guys would realize it was a bot and give up.
My favorite was a girl who kept a running dialog going for nearly a day and a half. She would occasionally express surprise at how fast I could type (no delay in bot response) but otherwise seemed convinced that the bot was really human.
That conversation only ended when the bot apparently chose to say something incredibly offensive to her (I wish I knew what it was). She told the bot to "stop talking to me" several times, apparently never picking up on the fact that it auto-responded every time she tried to get the last word in.
Where is the evidence that any additional monitoring does any good?
So, if I understand you, you want to see hard evidence that the device, which hasn't been invented yet, actually works before you'll concede that inventing it might possibly be a good idea?
So I wouldn't rule chickens out completely. Think how quickly you can get around a big space station using a chicken for propulsion! Not to mention the chickens are sure to be happy about their new-found flight capability. And if I know anything about poultry it's that a happy chicken is a tasty chicken.
...the unfortunate consequence is that the move to greater energy efficiency will likely be greatly hampered by the precise trend you've identified.
I disagree.
In the long run old tech will eventually degrade beyond repair and will have to be replaced by whatever is available. Since the old equipment was kept running longer, more advances will have been made by the time the new equipment is purchased. I propose that it is more likely that by leapfrogging from the very old to the very new the energy savings and environmental impact from not manufacturing, transporting, and discarding all the interim equipment will outweigh the inefficiencies of maintaining the old equipment for that duration.
all of the historical advances made by hobbyists were done decades ago, involving simple concepts. all advances today are not simple, but require the support of an advanced facility, simply because all of the fundamental, simple advances in chemistry have already been scoured
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Circletimessquare, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Your defeatist statement reminds me of similar claims made regarding the writing of new music. There are even fewer musical notes available for combining than there are chemical compounds, yet somehow people keep managing to write new music.
"There is nothing new under the sun but there are lots of old things we don't know." -Ambrose Bierce
I know this isn't the meaning of "reproduce" you meant with your joke, but the industry does indeed interfere when cover bands play songs by their artists, or even when Girl Scouts sing around their campfires.
But as with any system of resource sharing (especially bandwidth), some devices/users will simply ignore the rules to improve their own performance: flag every transmission as ultra-high-priority and so forth. You can't expect users, or even manufacturers, to "play fair." And I'm not convinced that regulation can force people to play fair.
This concern can be addressed with well defined standards, as has already been done with 802.11. While not perfect, 802.11 has proved quite good at producing devices that "play nice" with one another. But when those devices encounter non-802.11 devices the non-standard devices do tend to crush them. Fortunately, market forces are convincing people to replace non-802.11 with 802.11 in most of the applications where it works.
However, there is another, technical, concern that presents a major problem for Cognitive Radios: Hidden Node
The Hidden Node problem means that a radio who can't see anyone else using the frequency he wants to transmit on may still be interfering with someone. This is a common problem for everyone trying to do radio comms, but for Cognitive Radio it's a particularly daunting one as it means that you can potentially interfere with someone that you have a legal requirement NOT to.
1. Don't you think your avg. terr'st would have some training, and fein co-operation vs. act like a pissed off asshole?
Maybe.
And don't you think DHS knows this and would then disregard the attitude of the person in question?
Are you kidding? There are very few people left in the world, even among TSA employees themselves, who think TSA is there for any reason other than theatrics. They know they're just there for show and they behave just like any other person who spends 8 hours a day doing a completely meaningless job: They're nice to people who are nice to them and they're dicks to people who aren't.
If you want to have an easy time getting through screening just walk up with a smile on your face. Say, "Hello!" and act as though seeing the TSA agent has been the high-point of your day. If you can perfect this technique you'll not only enjoy less hassle at airports, but better service in restaurants, hotels, bars, retail stores, and well, pretty much everywhere you have to deal with other people.
I'm glad you chose to phrase this as a network topology problem because that's the same way my imagined solution is designed. Instead of broadcasting in a star-topology, try multicast streaming with a tree topology:
The highly skilled teacher is the root. The teacher's goal is that everyone learn the subject matter, eventually. But there is no semester division and the course is taught continuously. Students graduate from the course when they reach an acceptable level of subject mastery. The class is composed of all students expected to learn the subject. No segregation by age or "grade" level. As capability deviations emerge and more experienced students progress the more capable students are given the task of instructing the younger and less capable.
By keeping the group composed of students with all skill levels the newest students can be inspired by the advanced students and those students get to apply their knowledge by passing it on the the others, while simultaneously lessening the burden on the teacher.
That's my point though. Such problems increase the difficulty of the situation, and thus effort required to persevere, but effort is all that's really required.
Someone who is truly motivated can take the time to familiarize themselves with the code, perform test builds, review the patches from others, become a member of the core dev team, rally others to do so, or even fork the whole project.
All that's required is the willingness to take on a difficult task.
But since we're getting back to the specifics of X.org as opposed to my general complaint about poor self-esteem, I'd say the biggest impediment to X.org development is that it already works "well enough". People are a heck of a lot more motivated to fix things when they are directly impacted by them.
How many people on here have the capacity to actually make a useful contribution to X.org? How about, "all of them"?
Seriously, anyone who has the inclination to read this article has the capacity to contribute. Maybe you don't know anything about X, or Linux, or programming. But your knowledge isn't your potential. And frankly I'm a bit fed up with people who cop out with, "Oh... but I'm to stupid to contribute anything meaningful to the world."
He's insightful because he's correct. The world has had ages to develop a decent mail client and yet this still has not happened.
Of the many clients I've used, the least terrible (and thus the one I stick with for now) is Claws. It bites.
I'll point out just one major feature seriously lacking from nearly every client (although Gmail comes close on this one): A decent way to organize your old mail.
The sad thing is that it's starting to look like email will die as a medium before anyone gets it right. I predict it will be replaced by a hybrid stored/IM with tighter sender controls that shall be called "Slow Messaging", and that the clients for this will also suck.
When usage starts peaking there is no way to get the sun to send down more energy. Actually, when usage starts peaking it is typically because the sun is sending down more energy (increasing A/C load). So that problem is self solving.
Obviously the best solution is to redesign all clocks so that 6am is always sunrise and 8pm is always sunset. This is easily achieved by merely expanding the length of a second during the day in Summer and contracting it in Winter. Vice versa for nights.
Of course the contraction/expansion factor is a function of both date and latitude, but that's no problem for modern electronic clocks. Everyone knows how easy it is to enter your latitude while calibrating your clock.
This also means that 6am comes later for people in the North than it does for people in the South, and that Southerners will have longer workdays. But that's fine too, since I live in the North.
This is a common misconception. If you were to spend the same amount of time flying as you do driving, the two modes of transportation are equally as likely to result in a fatal accident.
However, you sure cover a lot more distance flying then the same time spent driving. So are you suggesting that cars would be just as safe as passenger jets for the same distance travel led if we all drove 500+ mph?
The Planet CCRMA distro (actually it's a pile of RPMS, that turns Fedora Core into, effectively, a whole new distro) combines all the greatest Linux audio tools with a low-latency kernel and fully configured JACK and ALSA setups.
Setting up all the tools on a general purpose machine can be very tedious, so I dedicated a machine to music with this.
I slapped a couple M-Audio Delta 1010s in there and now I have a 16-Track recording studio on the cheap. It's great!
It is. Because it acts as a seed for vapor condensation and liquid water is really a good reflector.
That said, I think that those who believe that Global Dimming is countering Global Warming have it all wrong.
Reflection works in all directions. Those reflective atmospheric particles don't just reflect energy away from the planet. They also reflect it back to the planet. And there is no reason to believe there is any sort of balance there. The heat reflected back is in a different spectrum than the light reflected away and this likely results in a different percentage of total energy getting reflected.
And there is also the fact that condensation is a function of temperature. There will certainly be more condensation at night than during the day. This means a "Thicker Blanket" at night. Keeping more heat in during the cooling hours.
So it could very well be that Global Dimming is a contributor to Global Warming, not a mitigator.
The only way to make sure your network is 100% secure is to pull all the patch cables
I wouldn't say 100% for even that solution. Do the computers have Wifi? IR ports? Wireless mice or keyboard? Even if they have none of those there are still CDs, Floppies, and USB keys with rootkits. Even if you prohibit removable media of any kind there are still social attacks and plain old user error. Better not let any humans near the computers. No computer, network, or system of any kind can ever be 100% secure. That's just life.
I guess maybe you can throw all the computers into a volcano just before it erupts and stand a reasonably good chance of them being secure against any future attacks (but not compromises that occurred prior to and during the vulcanization procedure).
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, but the the real question is how long has it been killing people, and why doesn't it eat their feet?
By itself this device only gives you liquid CO2 which you then have to deal with. But hook this to an algae photobioreactor tower and you can have a self-contained pod that generates use able diesel fuel with only sunlight and air as inputs.
Pairing them will let you eliminate the "compress to a liquid" step as well, which should further lower the energy requirement for CO2 reclamation.
Right.
Just like not watching TV commercials.
Going to the bathroom is stealing.
Actually, it's quite a ways in the past. It was called VRML and the world wasn't ready for it... then.
The reverse can work too. Ages ago I built a bot that would answer chat attempts with randomly selected "fortune" quotes, stripped of their bylines and biased by the presence of nouns that matched those found in the other party's message. I left it running as my "away" message on the mainframe at a large university (where people would chat randomly to you all the time)
I didn't bother saving "my" side of the conversation , so I'm sure I missed some hilarious exchanges, but just reading the other side's messages shows that girls, in particular, would keep chatting with my bot far beyond the point where guys would realize it was a bot and give up.
My favorite was a girl who kept a running dialog going for nearly a day and a half. She would occasionally express surprise at how fast I could type (no delay in bot response) but otherwise seemed convinced that the bot was really human.
That conversation only ended when the bot apparently chose to say something incredibly offensive to her (I wish I knew what it was). She told the bot to "stop talking to me" several times, apparently never picking up on the fact that it auto-responded every time she tried to get the last word in.
Where is the evidence that any additional monitoring does any good?
So, if I understand you, you want to see hard evidence that the device, which hasn't been invented yet, actually works before you'll concede that inventing it might possibly be a good idea?
If you write software, you should have the freedom to release it under whatever goddamn terms you want.
You do have that freedom. And the users have to freedom to reject your software in favor of something else.
If you want to use my service and my resources, then you don't get to dictate your terms to me.
Sure. But if you want me to use your service and resources, then I do.
...there aren't many truly international SIP providers...
Really? Even compared to the number of Skype there is?
So I wouldn't rule chickens out completely. Think how quickly you can get around a big space station using a chicken for propulsion! Not to mention the chickens are sure to be happy about their new-found flight capability. And if I know anything about poultry it's that a happy chicken is a tasty chicken.
...the unfortunate consequence is that the move to greater energy efficiency will likely be greatly hampered by the precise trend you've identified.
I disagree.
In the long run old tech will eventually degrade beyond repair and will have to be replaced by whatever is available. Since the old equipment was kept running longer, more advances will have been made by the time the new equipment is purchased. I propose that it is more likely that by leapfrogging from the very old to the very new the energy savings and environmental impact from not manufacturing, transporting, and discarding all the interim equipment will outweigh the inefficiencies of maintaining the old equipment for that duration.
all of the historical advances made by hobbyists were done decades ago, involving simple concepts. all advances today are not simple, but require the support of an advanced facility, simply because all of the fundamental, simple advances in chemistry have already been scoured
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Circletimessquare, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Your defeatist statement reminds me of similar claims made regarding the writing of new music. There are even fewer musical notes available for combining than there are chemical compounds, yet somehow people keep managing to write new music.
"There is nothing new under the sun but there are lots of old things we don't know." -Ambrose Bierce
I know this isn't the meaning of "reproduce" you meant with your joke, but the industry does indeed interfere when cover bands play songs by their artists, or even when Girl Scouts sing around their campfires.
But as with any system of resource sharing (especially bandwidth), some devices/users will simply ignore the rules to improve their own performance: flag every transmission as ultra-high-priority and so forth. You can't expect users, or even manufacturers, to "play fair." And I'm not convinced that regulation can force people to play fair.
This concern can be addressed with well defined standards, as has already been done with 802.11. While not perfect, 802.11 has proved quite good at producing devices that "play nice" with one another. But when those devices encounter non-802.11 devices the non-standard devices do tend to crush them. Fortunately, market forces are convincing people to replace non-802.11 with 802.11 in most of the applications where it works.
However, there is another, technical, concern that presents a major problem for Cognitive Radios: Hidden Node
The Hidden Node problem means that a radio who can't see anyone else using the frequency he wants to transmit on may still be interfering with someone. This is a common problem for everyone trying to do radio comms, but for Cognitive Radio it's a particularly daunting one as it means that you can potentially interfere with someone that you have a legal requirement NOT to.
1. Don't you think your avg. terr'st would have some training, and fein co-operation vs. act like a pissed off asshole?
Maybe.
And don't you think DHS knows this and would then disregard the attitude of the person in question?
Are you kidding? There are very few people left in the world, even among TSA employees themselves, who think TSA is there for any reason other than theatrics. They know they're just there for show and they behave just like any other person who spends 8 hours a day doing a completely meaningless job: They're nice to people who are nice to them and they're dicks to people who aren't.
If you want to have an easy time getting through screening just walk up with a smile on your face. Say, "Hello!" and act as though seeing the TSA agent has been the high-point of your day. If you can perfect this technique you'll not only enjoy less hassle at airports, but better service in restaurants, hotels, bars, retail stores, and well, pretty much everywhere you have to deal with other people.
I'm glad you chose to phrase this as a network topology problem because that's the same way my imagined solution is designed.
Instead of broadcasting in a star-topology, try multicast streaming with a tree topology:
The highly skilled teacher is the root.
The teacher's goal is that everyone learn the subject matter, eventually. But there is no semester division and the course is taught continuously. Students graduate from the course when they reach an acceptable level of subject mastery.
The class is composed of all students expected to learn the subject. No segregation by age or "grade" level. As capability deviations emerge and more experienced students progress the more capable students are given the task of instructing the younger and less capable.
By keeping the group composed of students with all skill levels the newest students can be inspired by the advanced students and those students get to apply their knowledge by passing it on the the others, while simultaneously lessening the burden on the teacher.
That's my point though. Such problems increase the difficulty of the situation, and thus effort required to persevere, but effort is all that's really required.
Someone who is truly motivated can take the time to familiarize themselves with the code, perform test builds, review the patches from others, become a member of the core dev team, rally others to do so, or even fork the whole project.
All that's required is the willingness to take on a difficult task.
But since we're getting back to the specifics of X.org as opposed to my general complaint about poor self-esteem, I'd say the biggest impediment to X.org development is that it already works "well enough". People are a heck of a lot more motivated to fix things when they are directly impacted by them.
Seriously, anyone who has the inclination to read this article has the capacity to contribute. Maybe you don't know anything about X, or Linux, or programming. But your knowledge isn't your potential. And frankly I'm a bit fed up with people who cop out with, "Oh... but I'm to stupid to contribute anything meaningful to the world."
No you're not. You're just too lazy.
He's insightful because he's correct. The world has had ages to develop a decent mail client and yet this still has not happened. Of the many clients I've used, the least terrible (and thus the one I stick with for now) is Claws. It bites.
I'll point out just one major feature seriously lacking from nearly every client (although Gmail comes close on this one): A decent way to organize your old mail.
The sad thing is that it's starting to look like email will die as a medium before anyone gets it right. I predict it will be replaced by a hybrid stored/IM with tighter sender controls that shall be called "Slow Messaging", and that the clients for this will also suck.
Obviously the best solution is to redesign all clocks so that 6am is always sunrise and 8pm is always sunset. This is easily achieved by merely expanding the length of a second during the day in Summer and contracting it in Winter. Vice versa for nights.
Of course the contraction/expansion factor is a function of both date and latitude, but that's no problem for modern electronic clocks. Everyone knows how easy it is to enter your latitude while calibrating your clock.
This also means that 6am comes later for people in the North than it does for people in the South, and that Southerners will have longer workdays. But that's fine too, since I live in the North.
This is a common misconception. If you were to spend the same amount of time flying as you do driving, the two modes of transportation are equally as likely to result in a fatal accident.
However, you sure cover a lot more distance flying then the same time spent driving. So are you suggesting that cars would be just as safe as passenger jets for the same distance travel led if we all drove 500+ mph?
The Planet CCRMA distro (actually it's a pile of RPMS, that turns Fedora Core into, effectively, a whole new distro) combines all the greatest Linux audio tools with a low-latency kernel and fully configured JACK and ALSA setups.
Setting up all the tools on a general purpose machine can be very tedious, so I dedicated a machine to music with this.
I slapped a couple M-Audio Delta 1010s in there and now I have a 16-Track recording studio on the cheap. It's great!
Because soot is such a good reflector
It is. Because it acts as a seed for vapor condensation and liquid water is really a good reflector.
That said, I think that those who believe that Global Dimming is countering Global Warming have it all wrong.
Reflection works in all directions. Those reflective atmospheric particles don't just reflect energy away from the planet. They also reflect it back to the planet. And there is no reason to believe there is any sort of balance there. The heat reflected back is in a different spectrum than the light reflected away and this likely results in a different percentage of total energy getting reflected.
And there is also the fact that condensation is a function of temperature. There will certainly be more condensation at night than during the day. This means a "Thicker Blanket" at night. Keeping more heat in during the cooling hours.
So it could very well be that Global Dimming is a contributor to Global Warming, not a mitigator.
The only way to make sure your network is 100% secure is to pull all the patch cables
I wouldn't say 100% for even that solution. Do the computers have Wifi? IR ports? Wireless mice or keyboard?
Even if they have none of those there are still CDs, Floppies, and USB keys with rootkits.
Even if you prohibit removable media of any kind there are still social attacks and plain old user error.
Better not let any humans near the computers.
No computer, network, or system of any kind can ever be 100% secure. That's just life.
I guess maybe you can throw all the computers into a volcano just before it erupts and stand a reasonably good chance of them being secure against any future attacks (but not compromises that occurred prior to and during the vulcanization procedure).