This is definitely at least a start, and possibly a good one, but as too many other people have said and the record companies have ignored, mp3s can be beneficial to bands and artists.
Iron Maiden members and their producer all agree that artists need to get paid for their music - but - also agree that mp3's and the net can be a great thing. Bruce Dickinson (lead singer) was recently told by a fan that the fan made a bunch of CDs of one of the tracks of their newest album and gave them away to friends to promote them and what did he think about that - was it a good idea?
The convo:
Bruce, How important do you think word of mouth is today to help out band. With the internet today it seems much easier to communicate with people. I also tried to do my part and print up 500 fliers and copied the song wicker man on 50 cds and handed them out to help out your new record here in tennessee. Do you think if more fans did this sort of thing it would help?
Tj Fowler
Tennessee
Bruce answered: "Good God yes - you deserve a medal."
I know it was what got me to listen to them... (Not TJ, but tapes of their music given to me... "Run to the Hills" made me fall in love with their music - I was in Jamaica at the time... looked everywhere to find it, and eventually found Somewhere in Time (different album) snatched it up and knew I found my newest favorite band of all time... and between their no compromising attitude towards their music and their directness and honesty with their fans, they still are).
An RIAA supported/supporting band woulda had the poor guy in chains. Good thing Maiden fans know what Maiden is all about.
The point of this next section is (my love of Maiden aside) to dipsute any claim the record companies have about how such things affect sales... since Maiden has numbers they could only dream their "Create a Band of the Month" crap had... all without label support. When last have you heard Maiden get air time? Or seen ads for them? Or seen their albums on the New Releases wall? Even with a DVD, 1 new album and 2 new compilations this past two years...
200 gold and platinum records, 14 of 17 albums in the top 10. All in the top 20. Most in the top 5. Sellout tours worldwide - including 250,000 at Rock in Rio III and the entire Year 2000/2001 concert series. Madison Square Garden NY in record time.
Apparently if album sales are so amazing, and they still (23 years after forming) sell out not some or most, but all of their concerts, then maybe the record companies should listen to their approach.
Among things other than their standing on mp3's, CD copies, etc, they also have a big common premise behind their music...
You dont have to like Maiden - even a little - to respect it: Be who they are, "F*K everyone who wants them to be something else". They stay true to who they are - which earns them no support from the record labels who want some nice pliable band to promote (Metallica anyone?) - but then again, which one sells out every concert and still gets top 10 album sales? Oh... wait... not Metallica anymore...
It's time the record companies go many steps... not just the one Bon Jovi and Aerosmith took with this new initiative... but also let artists to THEIR job the way THEY know how. It's the best way to weed out the crap, and have megasellers like Iron Maiden who WITHOUT label support STILL crush the BackDoor Boys and N'Syuck.
(1) Anyone hear of Lexmark ("Still trying to pretend we aren't really part of IBM") International? Let's say the "new" office suite this guy develops somehow "takes off"... and MS decides to drop their office suite except for the big collaborative business aspects (which, compared to Notes, doesnt exist)....
(2) Didnt this guy write Word before he worked for MS anyway? (not really a question... he did, regardless of or as supported by current belief). Perhaps that is why he has retained the rights... a good contract when he was bought out by MS in the beginning (and thus this isnt something as sinister as possibility #1...)
Dunno - it will be interesting to see how things go. But those are the only things I could think of that would explain why he got to leave with all his IP.
No, I just wasnt being PC. Nor will I ever be. Quite frankly, if you know nothing about the workings, sounds or operation of a device, you shouldnt be belittling those who operate it - especially when the event happened 6 years before a failure that would have occurred very shortly afterwards.
In just this topic, someone else pointed out how stupid it was that our politicians, with no knowledge of such things, make and pass laws that govern them without at least talking with sufficient experts in the field. I was hoping my post pointed out the poster I was respnding to, with apparently less knowledge - and an adversion to rollercoasters - was doing the same thing *I* did to him - except I had justification (he was wrong, jumped to a conclusion and then used a 6 year before the event, hazy by his own admission 13 year old kid memory to slam a company about something he had no technical knowledge of then, and seems to have as little of now).
Hopefully that type of behavior will stop since it often hurts many legitimate individuals and companies. If Gillians did something wrong, they should be hammered for it, not for a 13 year old's incorrect, admittedly hazy, recollection of the past.
- Rob
BinFeeds
No - expecting that when a 13 year old complains about something that is normal is retarded though. If you DIDNT hear those noises, that is when to complain - and assuming this is the same rollercoaster, then 6 years later, it stopped making those noises and people died as a result of the mechanical failure that caused the lack of the noises.
I rode the said roller coaster many times, though certainly not recently. The last time I rode it must have been 1993 or so, and that ride remains one of the most horrific and memorable events in my memory.
Maybe you just need to stop whining and not ride rollercoasters... wanna know the reason why? Read my next response.
While going up the incline, I heard several faint but audible metal pinging sounds; these were the sounds of metal ejecting from the machine. Once the roller coaster reached the peak I discovered something awful: the back right corner was not secure! During the whole ride the back bucked and jittered unnaturally, and I honestly thought the thing would come off. Afterward, I told everyone I could about my experience, though no one wants to listen to a hyperactive thirteen year old.
No one wanted to listen to a thirteen year old (in this case) because he was dead wrong. Rollercoasters are designed with an emergency "braking" system on the upwards incline to prevent it from falling back down uncontrollably if the chain breaks.
Wooden roller coasters and even some others are pulled to their highest point by a chain much like a massive bike chain. The roller coaster (by the force of gravity) leaves the station, rolls over the chain, loses speed (comes into the incline), has a big tooth on the bottom that is hooked backwards (so it can go over the chain but hooks into it, when the chain's upward/forward rate is in excess of the coaster's), the coaster then rises to the highest point, breaks the crest and falls due to gravity and the ride begins.
Along many curves and the upward starting track are metal rungs, like a metal rung ladder but not very wide. The coaster has teeth/a tooth much like the one that grabs the chain... big spring loaded device that is continuously being pushed down... if the coaster starts slipping backwards, it grabs...
COASTER
[_____________________] /(tooth) ....
the tooth because of it's angle rides over the springs, and sounds like (to a certain 13 year old) pieces of metal ejecting from the coaster... almost like metal pins/rivets being popped from it. What said 13 year old was really hearing was the spring
pushing the tooth back down once it cleared a safety rung.
On many new coasters this is done using hydraulic brakes. Hydraulics hold the massive (long) brake pads apart, the coaster has fins
on the bottom that slide between them. If there is a system failure or another reason to stop the coaster, the brakes close (with a V wedge opening on both sides that allow the fin to slide between and be "caught" due to friction).
Some coasters employ both. (Almost all employ this method to stop coasters when they enter the station).
People hysterically making retarted claims are what can often cause idiotic laws like this. Proper maintenance avoids most all such problems. The rest are due to "unavoidable" mechanical malfunctions that no amount of legislation can prevent.
You can either get a decent phone or phone system that blocks numbers. At least a few multi-line phones (not phone systems... I am talking about 2-4 line phones you can get from Staples or other better/decent office supply stores) can block incoming numbers. Often (like mine) they have a fax port on the back, so a line can be used for voice and fax, or just fax. Either way, the phone blocks the incoming call by the defined number.
Your post and numerous others on this issue are wrong. He is complaining about the following - which I have seen happen...
You screw with an email's header by doing the following. You set up your own email server and tell it that it is mail.adomainyoutrust.com and you send the mail to the person's mail server. Or you send an email and have your email server change other header lines (not the FROM field) to read from your domain name.
And of course, in the header, the FROM field usually gets changed to match...
The issue is, email servers have settings to determine where mail gets relayed from. If you have a mail server at mail.mywork.com and have a dialin you check your mail from when home (and send from), then you have to enable relaying from myipaddress.athome.com which means anyone who has received an email from you can use that information to send via your server...
Change (forge) the Received lines before it gets to the server...
Return-Path: root@theblazinghost.com
Received: from mail.reallyfakedomain.com (64.38.243.210 [64.38.243.210]) by cei.nu
(Hethmon Brothers Smtpd) id
Received: from heater (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mail.reallyfakedomain.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C47821101B
for ; Wed, 11
Sep 2002 01:39:22 -0700 (MST)
Received: Micro$oft Mailer 2.3
And now you better hope your mail server does IP address lookups to make sure they match... problem with that? Simple... if you connect via a dialin, you cannot use IP addresses, you have to use wildcarded IPs or more likely wildcarded domain names... like *.earthlink.net (more precise like *.southern.nj.earthlink.net or similar), but that still leaves gaping holes...
Sorry, you are wrong... he's right... PMMail supported (POP3 Sending) this feature (and still does) for ages.
PMMail 2000 is available for OS/2 and Windows with a possible Linux version at one time (and maybe still) being considered.
I run a mail server that allows send and receieve through POP3 - unfortunately, the security (or insecurity) issue of SMTP doesnt seem to have been dealt with on many other platforms yet.
Does AOL even use their own Netscape product with their web subscriptions, or is that IE deal still in play? How retarded can you be?
It makes perfect sense unfortunately. But you need to know a little more about what really goes on and went on behind the scenes.
When AOL first "integrated" Spry Browser into the AOL service, many many apps were written to build and serve the content they (AOL) use and show - like Rainman for one. If you dont know what it is, get a job for AOL or an AOL partner. What it means is (still) there is a lot of proprietary non-web ready content out there that needs to be changed over - including tons done by content providers who pay for the priviledge of serving their content via AOL - like WebMD used to and many other channels.
AOL cant switch over until that situation is dealt with - which means writing code for Mozilla/Netscape that allows Rainman generated content to be viewed, as well as many other proprietary formats AOL uses.
When MS decided they wanted a browser and failed miserably at the attempt of creating one, they "acquired" Spry and relabelled the browser IE... which is how AOL got stuck with it.
Hence, CompuServe (an AOL company) already has a Netscape version available while the AOL service does not.
-Rob
Re:Interesting twisted misconceptions...
on
The Casimir Effect
·
· Score: 1
I know a vacuum by the true sense of it most likely doesnt exist.
I also know that last year they determined that a photon at rest DOES have mass, finally "proving" correct other theorists who also claimed it was a big flaw in einstein's theories. Heck, it even finally made slashdot a few months ago.
Ooops... if you dont want to do the research, then at least pay better attention to slashdot and you'd know you were wrong. Including numerous non-related articles where photons, that supposedly travel one speed, exhibitted far slower speeds.
Ah well... the truth is it is all probably wrong. We see one thing, and we apply the theory we create for it to everything... which is the reason why a number of theorized quantum particles cant exist either... but alas... I am done with this debate. Universities and researches half the globe around claim photons at rest have mass, there are quantum particles that travel faster than light, blah, blah, blah... while others claim them frauds.
My only reason for believing those who seem to see things as not so simple is the quite simple "rule" that humankind has more often than not (or more accurately "virtually always") learned some "short" time in the future, that (s)he is totally wrong about every theory.
Then again, that's why they are theories.
Anyway, I am really done with this conversation... a simple web search on simply photon and mass will result in a dozen different conflicting theories nowadays, many held by our premeire universities and institutions (such as Brookhaven Labs, where I used to live...) We could argue till the end of time... and the only thing that would happen is the theories we were arguing about would be replaced by others (just like sections of Einsteins are being revised to incorporate other theories to explain away the variances he didnt account for).
Re:Interesting twisted misconceptions...
on
The Casimir Effect
·
· Score: 1
Your opening sentence is incorrect, and that makes hash of the rest of your post. You seem to be discussing classical vacuum, and in fact seem to be stuck on classical physics in general. For instace, a complete absense of everything would not have a temperature of zero, it would have no temperature.
Isnt that the definition of absolute zero? I'd go to google and post a dozen links confirming that, but it would be wasting space. And besides, my point was the article's author was referencing various definitions for a vacuum, in his article making his interpretation of the theory quite... I'm not even sure what to call it... other than probably not a very accurate interpretation of the theory.
I'm not a big physicist myself, but you are criticizing things that you don't even have the faintest conception of. Vacuum fluctations result from virtual particles, which is a concept that some view of is necessary to rationalize certain other quantum effects that occur in particle interaction. You need to learn more.
Oh, I'm sorry... so, you are saying "vacuum fluctuations result from scientists being unable to explain unnaccountable for instances of energy, mass, gravity and/or electromagnetism where they theorized there was supposed to be none - this is possibly due to the fact that these scientists were wrong in their initial theory of what a vacuum was and didnt even bother to account for simple things such as the energy or mass of a photon - that simply because until recently photons were erroneously thought to have no mass, so now instead, we'll create these virtual instances of something probably photon or photon like that explain the errors in our equations due to not understanding enough about the principles of a vacuum under any of our own definitions so that our results are at least a little more accurate until we have to make up some more bullshit so that 3+2=7". Right? Ooops, maybe I do understand the concepts very well. Again, my point was the author of the article used conflicting theories generally held separate in the basis of larger ones as explanations for the theories known as the Casimir Effect. Get it now?
"virtual particles"... How neat! It's based off the same stupid principle that particles even exist, which is also believed to be untrue - it just makes it easier to work with because we can quantify "amounts" of energy easier when measured thus (also because "we" cannot seem to grasp measuring energy as an n-dimensional field as opposed to as a grouping of particles.).
I am far more well versed in the field than you would be had you dedicated your college career to it - my current occupation not withstanding (which was chosen because I thought it time to work for myself in something I found more fun).
You have mistaken the half-digested watered-down absolutes that you got in highschool from a teacher who didn't understand the words being mumbled with The Truth.
Nope - that's where you are wrong. There were no absolutes... that was one of the first things we were taught. My point is, the definition of a vacuum is the existence of nothing in an area - but many scientists (or those this particular writer is writing about) seem to forget the definition when writing. He was basically explaining as if they were different things that "a cup full of water then needs to have Hydrogen and oxygen added to it in the right combination" and then tried to define it as such without the H2O.... you'll misunderstand this one too probably. You create a vacuum and then you take out what? oh wait, there isnt anything, heat, energy or otherwise to take out. And this, by the way isnt some "Gee we dont understand physics" theory. It is the definition of a vacuum. Whether one exists or not is something else entirely, and probably does not, because even the process of creating a "vacuum" creates an almost vacuum - at least by using current technology.
Obviously there are no absolutes. The first thing our teachers taught us was this... we have 5 limited senses, and even with the best machinery we have, they are still limited tremendously - and even above that, everything we build to augment their abilities is BASED OFF OF their abilities... IE: we build tools to allow us to "see" what we already know of in a better way... while we perceive so little because those senses are so limited. And all this based off imagination fueled by those limited senses.
My point was the article is contradictory in its own statements by a vacuum being redefined 3? 4? times, and so on and so on as I was trying to indicate.
All of our knowledge is provisional. And contrary to the fairy-tales that you may have heard, scientists don't have a real picture of how anything actually works. They have detailed guesses. The guesses allow them to predict things. They spend their time testing those predictions because they don't have a clue when they will fall to pieces.
They (and we) know less than nothing. You know that, I know that, and hopefully THEY do. I thought I made that clear too... that their blatant disregard for what they learned because of the "absolutes" they determined was detrimental to our continued "learning" of anything real. I even said as much.
I am beginning to think you just felt like griping instead of really reading and trying to understand what I wrote.
Oh, and the biggest barrier to learning is in putting aside our mistaken preconceptions. You seem to have an unusually strong case of this affliction. Don't let it hobble you too much.
Or no such affliction whatsoever. My point was the writer had confliciting definitions of the subject matter thus making the article near nonsensicle in a scientific sort of way. To learn more about science, you need to have an open mind and realize that we know so little. To discuss a topic that has been theorized, you need to stick to consistency. The author was writing about the theories of others, using various differing definitions of the same things and trying to link them together in a "well, because the world is flat, you can fall of the edge, but if you go around it you will end up where you started because it is a sphere" which was my biggest complaint. You cant use different conflicting theories - in some cases in the same sentence - to explain others theories that are in all probability based on one of those theories and not the whole slew of them he used. And if the scientists involved actually were using each of those conflicting theories of vacuums, energy, matter, photons, space, et al to come up with their one theory, then how credible does it make their theory?
Next time, dont be so grumpy and read what others write before you fire off an attack... heck, you wont even need to post anonymously when you can then post an intelligent response!
- Rob
Interesting twisted misconceptions...
on
The Casimir Effect
·
· Score: 0
I dunno whether it was because the author of the article doesnt understand physics and such, or was talking for the layperson, but a vacuum has no energy, no matter, no vacuum fluctuations, etc. Anything that does is almost a vacuum but not quite.
These guys seem to keep forgetting that matter is energy. Energy is energy. Energy seems to oddly exhibit much the same behaviors gravametrically and electromagnetically (assuming they arent subsets of each other) as energy in the form of matter. Photons are energy, and just like every other known form of energy "discovered" have mass - even at rest (covered here and a dozen other places over the last few decades, but no one wants to change a billion wrong formulae for the miniscule variances it would create - which in turn limits MANY other more significant "discoveries").
Thus, what all these people forget is, you cannot have a vacuum with any form of electromagnetic radiation in it. Or any form of energy. One seems the component of the other, but nonetheless (or because of that), each thusly exhibit mass, energy and such.
As for the absolute zero crap... you do NOT neeed absolute zero to create a vacuum. You CREATE absolute zero by CREATING a vacuum. Empty it of all energy, there is no heat. Add a photon, it is no longer absolute zero now is it? And nothing you can do can change that short of negating the energy of that photon - which so far we believe would require removing it, since we cannot destroy it (by current belief - right or wrong).
These endless misconceptions seem to permeate these scientific fields truly limiting research.
Worse yet, they are surprised, that energy, due to electromagnetic, gravametric and/or other similar "waves" attract each other in a vacuum - something we have know it does for a long time? Of course objects that would not normally do that elsewhere would do so in a vacuum. Put a cinderblock on a rough piece of wood and push it with 1/2 pound of force. Not gonna move... get rid of friction and try...
Now, in reality, there are a lot more forces involved than in that simple example in non-vacuum conditions... the attractive force needs to be able to overcome not just friction (of moving matter or energy in other forms out of the way), but gravity and other attractive fields that are interfering... too little attractive force to overcome all else that is "holding" or "blocking" the object.
This, and the story are 9th grade physics stuff... and they find it so amazing? We were taught this - properly no less (unlike the article) - back in 1979... in Junior High.
Configured some macros and REXX objects to the Voice interface
Wrote a tiny (under 10K) app to create a touchscreen interface... (this can also be done using HTML, image maps, forms and a web server with a REXX script in the background on the web server) this added touchscreen interface to the whole affair accessible anywhere I chose - or everywhere internet enabled.
Enabled the security sensors to visually activate zones on the monitor showing activity in the building
Used a wireless microphone that was plugged into the PC's microphone port to control anything from anywhere (you need a decent one).
Add(ed) X-10 to IR to X-10 interfaces as wanted, and X-10 to alarm to X-10 interfaces as needed (though there are a ton of X-10 direct sensors which I also use)
Final product is a voice enabled, whole house remote control system that is also touch enabled from one or more computers, or Internet enabled from any IP address in the "allow" list.
I had thought that the districts, sub-divisions and such, as used in addressing agreed as accurate by the USPS was the final say. Wouldnt that make this a moot point? Anything else would make all the governmental census data wrong...
And the data, btw, is to the umpteenth decimal place by longitude and latitude... for instance:
Here's the central longitude and latitude for
Richmond VA +037.531050 -077.474584
The long and lats that define the borders are
as accurate, and they were done in conjunction with surveying which should thus make the postal service databases accurate as well.
Now on the other hand, I've had GPS's accurate to within 3 feet tell me I am a couple miles from a city I am already in, or that I have passed a town by without going through it, while I have just driven down Main Street of whatever town.
Joe Smith's house being innaccurately accounted for on a map is one thing, as inplausible as it would seem... but a whole city, or a decent sized (area wise) town? Unlikely... seems more like the GPS's are wrong.
For school, (at Carnegie Mellon U) a friend did some tests using 14 different satellites to take readings for a(n exactly) known location... you'd be surprised at the varied info. Yes, more than reliable enough to drive by, but not nearly the 3 feet some high end, super GPS devices claim, (and in some cases off by hundreds of feet).
FWIW, I doubt the gov't will even care especially considering the havok one decent sized "correction" would create (assuming this GPS data is correct).
Do you work for Sony? I hate to say it but your post is the biggest piece of bull I have seen - no disrespect intended.
I host dozens of sites, and do you know how the people out there find artists like Greg? Well, if it were for an artist like Greg, you'd search for "jazz" or "sax" or something similar. No Sony involved.
Greg's site wont be indexed in all the search engines for another 2 weeks, yet he's already getting an increase in hits via search engines, and people picking up simple 1/2 cent flyers left out at various venues.
Also, if the record companies take over/push Internet distribution as Sony is trying (already has their own initiative for it online, part of why the Napster suit took a turn for the better last spring), then music would still be all pay for, and the artists (as is still the case with Sony's new initiative) still get nothing or close enough to it that it doesnt matter.
Soon, our company will have music kiosks in numerous local music stores (not big chain stores, but small ones, that seem to do far better in our area), a couple dozen musician sites and an online database of musician resources that will be growing daily once it's online. Betcha Sony wont be happy... I'd also bet you that when our efforts and/or that of others like WebMasterJoe get overly noticed, Sony will find a way to insinuate that what we do is illegal as well or damaging or some other nonsense... much like MS trying to make Open Source Software illegal and pointing out all the "damages" open source causes.
I've done enough e-commerce sites, and it's simply a matter of how the info is collected. If, as seems to be the case, Passport servers are being involved as a passthrough to "identify" you, then all the information is being passed at once to the credit card processing system - remember, there isnt a real way of sending half the information from your computer to the CC system, and half from your computer to passport to thje CC system. The other alternatives are passport sending info to your system (or it being stored there) and your system sending it all to passport and the cc system verifying it with passport - not very secure and useless as then anyone can then just screw with the contents of their hard drive to ensure passport authenticates.
I mean, after all, a slew of breakins already.... it's not a very secure system.
While the RIAA may not be happy with online music, the truth is many artists (due to the idiocy in the record industry) are turning to the 'net to get their albums out.
Here many musicians are doing it and meeting with increasing success without selling their souls. For instance, Greg Thompkins has a great Jazz Quartet that has 5 of their songs online and an album for sale. Their site has just recently went up, and it's already gaining them exposure they hadnt had before.
The record companies will spout off a dozen different reasons why online music should not be, but quite simply, the biggest reason is, as with Greg, Sony and gang don't receive a penny from them. They lose control as well. No profits, no control, no nothing. Thus, they aren't happy, and it's that simple (and something they will keep fighting till someone finally forces them to stop).
Who can force them to stop taking this "witch hunt" to the levels they want? I dont know - but I do hope it is soon - before music on the 'net becomes illegal.
If gravity waves propagate at greater than c, I dont think it means anything - other than what we already know. Einstein's theorys are quite flawed because they only cover certain particles under certain conditions (those being the ones we primarily deal with) - but that's it - and are now the limiting factor in advancing much farther in quantum physics and a number of other scientific "disciplines".
Oddly, the theory that an electron (or other "s-a-p") is a sub-atomic particle seems to still be held prevalent even though the thought to be more accurate theory is that an electron is actually an energy value measurable in what we define as negative, that in reality exhibits itself as a field and not a particle. The process of attempting to detect it makes a manifestation that appears to be a particle - somewhat like (scientifically a shitty anaology) how a stron enough magnet in front of a monitor will attract the electron stream to it instead of it being the electron "field" the gun is actually projecting.
Point being, the speed of light is just that. The mass of an object has nothing to do with its mass at it is approaching (or exceeding) the speed of light. The list of "particles" we are aware of that exceed the speed of light is growing. If scientists take what they already know (that "particles" are actually - or at least more likely - energy wave fields and not particles at all) the scientific community will progress a lot farther, a lot faster. Much more difficult to calculate wave field interaction especially with frequency variances attributable to different energy wave phenomena (a simple for instance... "photons" manifest and/or travel on various wavelengths, generating different field effects - and that's just "photons").
One day we may get it right... until then, everything is just guesswork and finding equations that seem to work within the limited circumstances we apply them to.
First, Intel literally SCREWS users over. AMD hasnt went that far. Making what they or Intel can off a product is one thing. Changing the PII to Slot I because it is sooo superior to Socket 7 and similar socketed designs (all while hiding the standard type chip in a neat case) and *advertising this* to help cripple AMD's slow creep into your market was absurd. It hurt the market, and it was a lie - as we all (who werent the techie type and already knew) shown when Intel changed back to the socket design.
Intel released buggy CPU after CPU just to make deadlines and be able to yell "me first!" even when the defects were known (online articles, lawsuits and statements concur).
As mentioned, "flavor of the month" seems to also be Intel's biggest favorite thing to do to make some extra money off everyone involved... new chipsets all the time, new socket/slot/socket/slot designs (often for the same damn chips). Exhorbitant pricing (while you are claiming AMD would/will do the same but is consistently cheaper on an equal performance level).
Then there's Eternium... do I even need to go any farther with that buggy, half decade delayed piece of still in the works crap?
So, nothing personal, but why do you bother? You apparently dont know much about the company you work for. I've worked for some big IBM VARs and seen too much of what Intel really does that I am not permitted to mention here.
More info and summary of some good points made...
on
Do-it-yourself UPS
·
· Score: 1
First, to summarize some points made:
Creating a circuit to monitor one is easy.
Creating a circuit and software to allow it to "interact" with a computer is easy.
The design, contrary to a previous post can and will provide VERY stable power - far better than most "household" UPS's sold - because you are always running off the inverter - if you buy good quality true sine-wave inverters. StatPower is a good source of them and you can buy them cheaply from JC Whitney - AND - JCW offers a 60 day unconditional money back guarantee on everything they sell - you wont find better customer service. Each and every order shipped by them comes with prepaid return labels pre-authorized for merchandise returns. No annoying calls for an RMA number and such. Simply drop the item back in the box, slap the supplied label on it and call UPS for a pickup. (in 15 years, I havent returned more than 2 things... YMMV... instant credits on them).
Adding a fan(s) and enclosure for cooling and "safety" (not dropping something across the battery leads) is easy. Using a thermistor to regulate when the fan comes on is child's play.
Wire sizes as already noted are extremely important. Whenever working with DC, keep in mind the wires need to be large (ie: low gauge). Generally, in case of overcurrent situations, I use 2-4 gauge less than "required"). You cannot use AC current wiring specs to determine wire gauge on DC wiring - unless you want a puddle of copper and insulation and possibly a neat little fire. Because AC does just what the name implies - alternate - heat buildup for the same amount of current is a lot less. Also keep in mind, for longer DC runs, you need lower gauges than for shorter ones of the same load. (there are a dozen sites on line that will help with this info - look up DC house wiring to find some).
Installing a breaker type automotive fuse block of the appropriate size will facilitate avoiding a number of problems. Again, make sure breaker(s) and wires are properly rated for the load you wish to pull.
Buying an inverter that only generates the load being drawn will help increase efficiency. There are some that use only milliamps in "idle" mode (no load, but online).
Exide is the place for batteries... besides the fact that they make more brands of batteries than most of you could imagine (as a comparison, 40 "brands" of soap on the shelf at the supermarket, 5 major soap companies...), they also specialize in industrial deep cycle batteries and seem to have the size factor at a very acceptable level for the current they store and "create". For instance, the one we have been looking at for a similar (house level) application is an Exide 840ah 24v 6 hour rated battery... (you do the math... it'd power your computer for a very very long time...) they are designed for the in-building forklifts you can find at various Home-Depot's and such. Thus, charge, full/near-full discharge during heavy use, and repeat daily abuse and they handle them well. Exide makes smaller versions as well. All the way down to the RayOVac (and bigger brand name) batteries. Keep in mind many such battery solutions will require a 24V charger and 24V inverter - or 2 inverters in series. They are ideal for big UPS' that use 4 12V batteries.
If you are serious about this, battery quality does count big time. The correct lead acid battery type will last YEARS of continuous charge, discharge cycles. We used a bunch Panasonic made for an entertainment venue a number of years back and got 8 (on the first to die) to 12 years out of them doing 2 charge/discharge cycles a day every day. I wouldnt recommend them any more (Panasonic) as they far exceeded the rated life and charging cycle - which Panasonic rectified when they revamped the battery series. 2 years on the same model number battery of the new design.
These same plans can also be used with solar, wind and water power generation systems to charge, maintain or top off batteries with a little planning - as well as with backup generators. Thus, you can use a cheap backup generator in your house or business to create the DC charging current to then provide beautifully stable AC current via the battery(ies) and inverter(s).
For larger applications (VERY large), consider one of the "household" inverters... they are chainable to create 240V (which is really 2 120V lines in cyclic opposition), and usually contain charging units in them that you can provide power to via your incoming utility line, generator, solar, wind, etc. For 4400 Watts expect to pay about $2500 for the inverter, but expect the power to exceed the quality of your utility company 130% of the time and keep your batteries "professionally" charged. I am talking about this as a solution because it is ideal for companies with big server rooms wanting to use a similar method as described on the web page but for higher loads to maintain a lot of servers. It would be very simple to use an Exide 840ah and a Trace inverter (the makers of many other brands of inverters too like StatPower and PortaPower) to power a server room for hours or days.
ASE Americas makes 315Watt and down solar panels in roof mount sizes with high efficiency ratings and certification for many areas and setups. They come in a wide range of voltages per wattage output (meaning you can mix and match inverter/battery/solar cell options to create an ideal system). Solar would be more likely for people out in nowhere areas who needed long backup times or wanted to operate entirely off-grid.
Price shop like crazy for your inverter, batteries and more... I've seen the 4000W Trace inverters as high as $5800 and as low as $2490. Same model, different places. Same probably applies to the lower watt models like the StatPower (which have models to 3000W). Both StatPower and Trace home inverters feature very high surge ratings and stable "true-sine" power output on their higher end models. For StatPower, JCWhitney usually cannot be beat on price [except on auctions (eBay maybe?) and closeouts] and cannot be beat on customer satisfaction.
From what I understand, MS was promoting that NTFS was designed to have the capability of using disks that large. Not that it was WRITTEN to do so. Much like how the NT/XP line was designed to take advantage of 64 CPU per node systems - but only actually supports 8 (thanks to IBM's help they finally exceeded 4) and up to 32 CPU's in a 4 node system.
NTFS file system limits are a lot more real world and not equivalent to JFS's.
JFS was designed to handle up to 2 Petabytes but is limited to where it currently is (on Linux and OS/2 Warp).
Don't confuse MS design limits with MS real world released version actual limits.
These are even more commonly called hydroplanes. You take a plane and create a method in which it can coast over or land on water. This has been done already using a variety of methods.
70mm is truly breathtaking. The problem is many of the new movie houses wont/dont go that route. One reason (if you've ever seen a 70mm reel set) is they are massive and tough to deal with. Back when there were lots of independent movie houses and people who knew what they were doing, that was one thing... but now when high school and college kids (nothing against them - but they arent experienced film projectionists) run most of these projectors, you really want to entrust 6-7 massive 70mm reels to them and expect it on the screen properly?
Sorry... 80% of the box IS standard. And no movie house owner I've talked to agrees on the cut of concessions - unless it is for Star Wars merchandised material. In which case, once again, standard practice.
This, btw, is the reason movie houses charge so much for concession food - because all first run movies are in the 80% range. Plus rental costs. The box office percentage drops after ___ # of weeks (varies depending on the movie and the contract, etc, etc, etc...). Usually 2 - 4 weeks. Movie houses also pay a penalty to stop showing a movie before a certain date (for instance if it's a flop and they want to get something else in).
Not saying GL isnt greedy - nor saying he is. Just saying these are indeed standard rates in the movie industry. As for the DL projectors, most (all?) movie houses were getting them for nothing but installation. A few hundred installs were scaled down to the few everyone has been talking about.
Slashdot Mirror
Iron Maiden members and their producer all agree that artists need to get paid for their music - but - also agree that mp3's and the net can be a great thing. Bruce Dickinson (lead singer) was recently told by a fan that the fan made a bunch of CDs of one of the tracks of their newest album and gave them away to friends to promote them and what did he think about that - was it a good idea?
The convo:
Bruce, How important do you think word of mouth is today to help out band. With the internet today it seems much easier to communicate with people. I also tried to do my part and print up 500 fliers and copied the song wicker man on 50 cds and handed them out to help out your new record here in tennessee. Do you think if more fans did this sort of thing it would help?
Tj Fowler
Tennessee
Bruce answered: "Good God yes - you deserve a medal."
I know it was what got me to listen to them... (Not TJ, but tapes of their music given to me... "Run to the Hills" made me fall in love with their music - I was in Jamaica at the time... looked everywhere to find it, and eventually found Somewhere in Time (different album) snatched it up and knew I found my newest favorite band of all time... and between their no compromising attitude towards their music and their directness and honesty with their fans, they still are).
An RIAA supported/supporting band woulda had the poor guy in chains. Good thing Maiden fans know what Maiden is all about.
The point of this next section is (my love of Maiden aside) to dipsute any claim the record companies have about how such things affect sales... since Maiden has numbers they could only dream their "Create a Band of the Month" crap had... all without label support. When last have you heard Maiden get air time? Or seen ads for them? Or seen their albums on the New Releases wall? Even with a DVD, 1 new album and 2 new compilations this past two years...
200 gold and platinum records, 14 of 17 albums in the top 10. All in the top 20. Most in the top 5. Sellout tours worldwide - including 250,000 at Rock in Rio III and the entire Year 2000/2001 concert series. Madison Square Garden NY in record time.
Apparently if album sales are so amazing, and they still (23 years after forming) sell out not some or most, but all of their concerts, then maybe the record companies should listen to their approach.
Among things other than their standing on mp3's, CD copies, etc, they also have a big common premise behind their music...
You dont have to like Maiden - even a little - to respect it: Be who they are, "F*K everyone who wants them to be something else". They stay true to who they are - which earns them no support from the record labels who want some nice pliable band to promote (Metallica anyone?) - but then again, which one sells out every concert and still gets top 10 album sales? Oh... wait... not Metallica anymore...
It's time the record companies go many steps... not just the one Bon Jovi and Aerosmith took with this new initiative... but also let artists to THEIR job the way THEY know how. It's the best way to weed out the crap, and have megasellers like Iron Maiden who WITHOUT label support STILL crush the BackDoor Boys and N'Syuck.
(1) Anyone hear of Lexmark ("Still trying to pretend we aren't really part of IBM") International? Let's say the "new" office suite this guy develops somehow "takes off"... and MS decides to drop their office suite except for the big collaborative business aspects (which, compared to Notes, doesnt exist)....
(2) Didnt this guy write Word before he worked for MS anyway? (not really a question... he did, regardless of or as supported by current belief). Perhaps that is why he has retained the rights... a good contract when he was bought out by MS in the beginning (and thus this isnt something as sinister as possibility #1...)
Dunno - it will be interesting to see how things go. But those are the only things I could think of that would explain why he got to leave with all his IP.
-Rob
BinFeeds
In just this topic, someone else pointed out how stupid it was that our politicians, with no knowledge of such things, make and pass laws that govern them without at least talking with sufficient experts in the field. I was hoping my post pointed out the poster I was respnding to, with apparently less knowledge - and an adversion to rollercoasters - was doing the same thing *I* did to him - except I had justification (he was wrong, jumped to a conclusion and then used a 6 year before the event, hazy by his own admission 13 year old kid memory to slam a company about something he had no technical knowledge of then, and seems to have as little of now).
Hopefully that type of behavior will stop since it often hurts many legitimate individuals and companies. If Gillians did something wrong, they should be hammered for it, not for a 13 year old's incorrect, admittedly hazy, recollection of the past. - Rob BinFeeds
No - expecting that when a 13 year old complains about something that is normal is retarded though. If you DIDNT hear those noises, that is when to complain - and assuming this is the same rollercoaster, then 6 years later, it stopped making those noises and people died as a result of the mechanical failure that caused the lack of the noises.
- I rode the said roller coaster many times, though certainly not recently. The last time I rode it must have been 1993 or so, and that ride remains one of the most horrific and memorable events in my memory.
Maybe you just need to stop whining and not ride rollercoasters... wanna know the reason why? Read my next response.- While going up the incline, I heard several faint but audible metal pinging sounds; these were the sounds of metal ejecting from the machine. Once the roller coaster reached the peak I discovered something awful: the back right corner was not secure! During the whole ride the back bucked and jittered unnaturally, and I honestly thought the thing would come off. Afterward, I told everyone I could about my experience, though no one wants to listen to a hyperactive thirteen year old.
No one wanted to listen to a thirteen year old (in this case) because he was dead wrong. Rollercoasters are designed with an emergency "braking" system on the upwards incline to prevent it from falling back down uncontrollably if the chain breaks.Wooden roller coasters and even some others are pulled to their highest point by a chain much like a massive bike chain. The roller coaster (by the force of gravity) leaves the station, rolls over the chain, loses speed (comes into the incline), has a big tooth on the bottom that is hooked backwards (so it can go over the chain but hooks into it, when the chain's upward/forward rate is in excess of the coaster's), the coaster then rises to the highest point, breaks the crest and falls due to gravity and the ride begins.
Along many curves and the upward starting track are metal rungs, like a metal rung ladder but not very wide. The coaster has teeth/a tooth much like the one that grabs the chain... big spring loaded device that is continuously being pushed down... if the coaster starts slipping backwards, it grabs...
COASTER
/(tooth)
....
[_____________________]
the tooth because of it's angle rides over the springs, and sounds like (to a certain 13 year old) pieces of metal ejecting from the coaster... almost like metal pins/rivets being popped from it. What said 13 year old was really hearing was the spring pushing the tooth back down once it cleared a safety rung.
On many new coasters this is done using hydraulic brakes. Hydraulics hold the massive (long) brake pads apart, the coaster has fins on the bottom that slide between them. If there is a system failure or another reason to stop the coaster, the brakes close (with a V wedge opening on both sides that allow the fin to slide between and be "caught" due to friction).
Some coasters employ both. (Almost all employ this method to stop coasters when they enter the station).
People hysterically making retarted claims are what can often cause idiotic laws like this. Proper maintenance avoids most all such problems. The rest are due to "unavoidable" mechanical malfunctions that no amount of legislation can prevent.
-Rob
www.BinFeeds.com
- Rob
Your post and numerous others on this issue are wrong. He is complaining about the following - which I have seen happen...
You screw with an email's header by doing the following. You set up your own email server and tell it that it is mail.adomainyoutrust.com and you send the mail to the person's mail server. Or you send an email and have your email server change other header lines (not the FROM field) to read from your domain name.
And of course, in the header, the FROM field usually gets changed to match...
The issue is, email servers have settings to determine where mail gets relayed from. If you have a mail server at mail.mywork.com and have a dialin you check your mail from when home (and send from), then you have to enable relaying from myipaddress.athome.com which means anyone who has received an email from you can use that information to send via your server...
Change (forge) the Received lines before it gets to the server...
Return-Path: root@theblazinghost.com
Received: from mail.reallyfakedomain.com (64.38.243.210 [64.38.243.210]) by cei.nu (Hethmon Brothers Smtpd) id
20020911071410-24648-7 ; Wed, 11 Sep 2002 07:14:10 -0500
Received: from heater (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.reallyfakedomain.com (Postfix) with SMTP id C47821101B for ; Wed, 11
Sep 2002 01:39:22 -0700 (MST)
Received: Micro$oft Mailer 2.3
And now you better hope your mail server does IP address lookups to make sure they match... problem with that? Simple... if you connect via a dialin, you cannot use IP addresses, you have to use wildcarded IPs or more likely wildcarded domain names... like *.earthlink.net (more precise like *.southern.nj.earthlink.net or similar), but that still leaves gaping holes...
- Robert
Sorry, you are wrong... he's right... PMMail supported (POP3 Sending) this feature (and still does) for ages.
PMMail 2000 is available for OS/2 and Windows with a possible Linux version at one time (and maybe still) being considered.
I run a mail server that allows send and receieve through POP3 - unfortunately, the security (or insecurity) issue of SMTP doesnt seem to have been dealt with on many other platforms yet.
- Rob
- Does AOL even use their own Netscape product with their web subscriptions, or is that IE deal still in play? How retarded can you be?
It makes perfect sense unfortunately. But you need to know a little more about what really goes on and went on behind the scenes.When AOL first "integrated" Spry Browser into the AOL service, many many apps were written to build and serve the content they (AOL) use and show - like Rainman for one. If you dont know what it is, get a job for AOL or an AOL partner. What it means is (still) there is a lot of proprietary non-web ready content out there that needs to be changed over - including tons done by content providers who pay for the priviledge of serving their content via AOL - like WebMD used to and many other channels.
AOL cant switch over until that situation is dealt with - which means writing code for Mozilla/Netscape that allows Rainman generated content to be viewed, as well as many other proprietary formats AOL uses.
When MS decided they wanted a browser and failed miserably at the attempt of creating one, they "acquired" Spry and relabelled the browser IE... which is how AOL got stuck with it.
Hence, CompuServe (an AOL company) already has a Netscape version available while the AOL service does not.
-Rob
I also know that last year they determined that a photon at rest DOES have mass, finally "proving" correct other theorists who also claimed it was a big flaw in einstein's theories. Heck, it even finally made slashdot a few months ago.
Ooops... if you dont want to do the research, then at least pay better attention to slashdot and you'd know you were wrong. Including numerous non-related articles where photons, that supposedly travel one speed, exhibitted far slower speeds.
Ah well... the truth is it is all probably wrong. We see one thing, and we apply the theory we create for it to everything... which is the reason why a number of theorized quantum particles cant exist either... but alas... I am done with this debate. Universities and researches half the globe around claim photons at rest have mass, there are quantum particles that travel faster than light, blah, blah, blah... while others claim them frauds.
My only reason for believing those who seem to see things as not so simple is the quite simple "rule" that humankind has more often than not (or more accurately "virtually always") learned some "short" time in the future, that (s)he is totally wrong about every theory.
Then again, that's why they are theories.
Anyway, I am really done with this conversation... a simple web search on simply photon and mass will result in a dozen different conflicting theories nowadays, many held by our premeire universities and institutions (such as Brookhaven Labs, where I used to live...) We could argue till the end of time... and the only thing that would happen is the theories we were arguing about would be replaced by others (just like sections of Einsteins are being revised to incorporate other theories to explain away the variances he didnt account for).
- Your opening sentence is incorrect, and that makes hash of the rest of your post. You seem to be discussing classical vacuum, and in fact seem to be stuck on classical physics in general. For instace, a complete absense of everything would not have a temperature of zero, it would have no temperature.
Isnt that the definition of absolute zero? I'd go to google and post a dozen links confirming that, but it would be wasting space. And besides, my point was the article's author was referencing various definitions for a vacuum, in his article making his interpretation of the theory quite... I'm not even sure what to call it... other than probably not a very accurate interpretation of the theory.- I'm not a big physicist myself, but you are criticizing things that you don't even have the faintest conception of. Vacuum fluctations result from virtual particles, which is a concept that some view of is necessary to rationalize certain other quantum effects that occur in particle interaction. You need to learn more.
Oh, I'm sorry... so, you are saying "vacuum fluctuations result from scientists being unable to explain unnaccountable for instances of energy, mass, gravity and/or electromagnetism where they theorized there was supposed to be none - this is possibly due to the fact that these scientists were wrong in their initial theory of what a vacuum was and didnt even bother to account for simple things such as the energy or mass of a photon - that simply because until recently photons were erroneously thought to have no mass, so now instead, we'll create these virtual instances of something probably photon or photon like that explain the errors in our equations due to not understanding enough about the principles of a vacuum under any of our own definitions so that our results are at least a little more accurate until we have to make up some more bullshit so that 3+2=7". Right? Ooops, maybe I do understand the concepts very well. Again, my point was the author of the article used conflicting theories generally held separate in the basis of larger ones as explanations for the theories known as the Casimir Effect. Get it now?"virtual particles"... How neat! It's based off the same stupid principle that particles even exist, which is also believed to be untrue - it just makes it easier to work with because we can quantify "amounts" of energy easier when measured thus (also because "we" cannot seem to grasp measuring energy as an n-dimensional field as opposed to as a grouping of particles.).
I am far more well versed in the field than you would be had you dedicated your college career to it - my current occupation not withstanding (which was chosen because I thought it time to work for myself in something I found more fun).
- You have mistaken the half-digested watered-down absolutes that you got in highschool from a teacher who didn't understand the words being mumbled with The Truth.
Nope - that's where you are wrong. There were no absolutes... that was one of the first things we were taught. My point is, the definition of a vacuum is the existence of nothing in an area - but many scientists (or those this particular writer is writing about) seem to forget the definition when writing. He was basically explaining as if they were different things that "a cup full of water then needs to have Hydrogen and oxygen added to it in the right combination" and then tried to define it as such without the H2O.... you'll misunderstand this one too probably. You create a vacuum and then you take out what? oh wait, there isnt anything, heat, energy or otherwise to take out. And this, by the way isnt some "Gee we dont understand physics" theory. It is the definition of a vacuum. Whether one exists or not is something else entirely, and probably does not, because even the process of creating a "vacuum" creates an almost vacuum - at least by using current technology.Obviously there are no absolutes. The first thing our teachers taught us was this... we have 5 limited senses, and even with the best machinery we have, they are still limited tremendously - and even above that, everything we build to augment their abilities is BASED OFF OF their abilities... IE: we build tools to allow us to "see" what we already know of in a better way... while we perceive so little because those senses are so limited. And all this based off imagination fueled by those limited senses.
My point was the article is contradictory in its own statements by a vacuum being redefined 3? 4? times, and so on and so on as I was trying to indicate.
- All of our knowledge is provisional. And contrary to the fairy-tales that you may have heard, scientists don't have a real picture of how anything actually works. They have detailed guesses. The guesses allow them to predict things. They spend their time testing those predictions because they don't have a clue when they will fall to pieces.
They (and we) know less than nothing. You know that, I know that, and hopefully THEY do. I thought I made that clear too... that their blatant disregard for what they learned because of the "absolutes" they determined was detrimental to our continued "learning" of anything real. I even said as much.I am beginning to think you just felt like griping instead of really reading and trying to understand what I wrote.
- Oh, and the biggest barrier to learning is in putting aside our mistaken preconceptions. You seem to have an unusually strong case of this affliction. Don't let it hobble you too much.
Or no such affliction whatsoever. My point was the writer had confliciting definitions of the subject matter thus making the article near nonsensicle in a scientific sort of way. To learn more about science, you need to have an open mind and realize that we know so little. To discuss a topic that has been theorized, you need to stick to consistency. The author was writing about the theories of others, using various differing definitions of the same things and trying to link them together in a "well, because the world is flat, you can fall of the edge, but if you go around it you will end up where you started because it is a sphere" which was my biggest complaint. You cant use different conflicting theories - in some cases in the same sentence - to explain others theories that are in all probability based on one of those theories and not the whole slew of them he used. And if the scientists involved actually were using each of those conflicting theories of vacuums, energy, matter, photons, space, et al to come up with their one theory, then how credible does it make their theory?Next time, dont be so grumpy and read what others write before you fire off an attack... heck, you wont even need to post anonymously when you can then post an intelligent response!
- Rob
These guys seem to keep forgetting that matter is energy. Energy is energy. Energy seems to oddly exhibit much the same behaviors gravametrically and electromagnetically (assuming they arent subsets of each other) as energy in the form of matter. Photons are energy, and just like every other known form of energy "discovered" have mass - even at rest (covered here and a dozen other places over the last few decades, but no one wants to change a billion wrong formulae for the miniscule variances it would create - which in turn limits MANY other more significant "discoveries").
Thus, what all these people forget is, you cannot have a vacuum with any form of electromagnetic radiation in it. Or any form of energy. One seems the component of the other, but nonetheless (or because of that), each thusly exhibit mass, energy and such.
As for the absolute zero crap... you do NOT neeed absolute zero to create a vacuum. You CREATE absolute zero by CREATING a vacuum. Empty it of all energy, there is no heat. Add a photon, it is no longer absolute zero now is it? And nothing you can do can change that short of negating the energy of that photon - which so far we believe would require removing it, since we cannot destroy it (by current belief - right or wrong).
These endless misconceptions seem to permeate these scientific fields truly limiting research.
Worse yet, they are surprised, that energy, due to electromagnetic, gravametric and/or other similar "waves" attract each other in a vacuum - something we have know it does for a long time? Of course objects that would not normally do that elsewhere would do so in a vacuum. Put a cinderblock on a rough piece of wood and push it with 1/2 pound of force. Not gonna move... get rid of friction and try...
Now, in reality, there are a lot more forces involved than in that simple example in non-vacuum conditions... the attractive force needs to be able to overcome not just friction (of moving matter or energy in other forms out of the way), but gravity and other attractive fields that are interfering... too little attractive force to overcome all else that is "holding" or "blocking" the object.
This, and the story are 9th grade physics stuff... and they find it so amazing? We were taught this - properly no less (unlike the article) - back in 1979... in Junior High.
- Rob
I simply did the following...
- Set up one OS/2 Warp 4 system with touchscreen and Warp's built in Voice Navigation and Dictation
- Installed House/2 (OS/2 only)
- Configured some macros and REXX objects to the Voice interface
- Wrote a tiny (under 10K) app to create a touchscreen interface... (this can also be done using HTML, image maps, forms and a web server with a REXX script in the background on the web server) this added touchscreen interface to the whole affair accessible anywhere I chose - or everywhere internet enabled.
- Enabled the security sensors to visually activate zones on the monitor showing activity in the building
- Used a wireless microphone that was plugged into the PC's microphone port to control anything from anywhere (you need a decent one).
- Add(ed) X-10 to IR to X-10 interfaces as wanted, and X-10 to alarm to X-10 interfaces as needed (though there are a ton of X-10 direct sensors which I also use)
Final product is a voice enabled, whole house remote control system that is also touch enabled from one or more computers, or Internet enabled from any IP address in the "allow" list.This was 5 years ago when House/2 first came out.
- Rob
And the data, btw, is to the umpteenth decimal place by longitude and latitude... for instance:
Here's the central longitude and latitude for Richmond VA
+037.531050
-077.474584
The long and lats that define the borders are as accurate, and they were done in conjunction with surveying which should thus make the postal service databases accurate as well.
Now on the other hand, I've had GPS's accurate to within 3 feet tell me I am a couple miles from a city I am already in, or that I have passed a town by without going through it, while I have just driven down Main Street of whatever town.
Joe Smith's house being innaccurately accounted for on a map is one thing, as inplausible as it would seem... but a whole city, or a decent sized (area wise) town? Unlikely... seems more like the GPS's are wrong.
For school, (at Carnegie Mellon U) a friend did some tests using 14 different satellites to take readings for a(n exactly) known location... you'd be surprised at the varied info. Yes, more than reliable enough to drive by, but not nearly the 3 feet some high end, super GPS devices claim, (and in some cases off by hundreds of feet).
FWIW, I doubt the gov't will even care especially considering the havok one decent sized "correction" would create (assuming this GPS data is correct).
- Robert
www.Hyperforce.com
Do you work for Sony? I hate to say it but your post is the biggest piece of bull I have seen - no disrespect intended.
I host dozens of sites, and do you know how the people out there find artists like Greg? Well, if it were for an artist like Greg, you'd search for "jazz" or "sax" or something similar. No Sony involved.
Greg's site wont be indexed in all the search engines for another 2 weeks, yet he's already getting an increase in hits via search engines, and people picking up simple 1/2 cent flyers left out at various venues.
Also, if the record companies take over/push Internet distribution as Sony is trying (already has their own initiative for it online, part of why the Napster suit took a turn for the better last spring), then music would still be all pay for, and the artists (as is still the case with Sony's new initiative) still get nothing or close enough to it that it doesnt matter.
Soon, our company will have music kiosks in numerous local music stores (not big chain stores, but small ones, that seem to do far better in our area), a couple dozen musician sites and an online database of musician resources that will be growing daily once it's online. Betcha Sony wont be happy... I'd also bet you that when our efforts and/or that of others like WebMasterJoe get overly noticed, Sony will find a way to insinuate that what we do is illegal as well or damaging or some other nonsense... much like MS trying to make Open Source Software illegal and pointing out all the "damages" open source causes.
I mean, after all, a slew of breakins already.... it's not a very secure system.
Here many musicians are doing it and meeting with increasing success without selling their souls. For instance, Greg Thompkins has a great Jazz Quartet that has 5 of their songs online and an album for sale. Their site has just recently went up, and it's already gaining them exposure they hadnt had before.
The record companies will spout off a dozen different reasons why online music should not be, but quite simply, the biggest reason is, as with Greg, Sony and gang don't receive a penny from them. They lose control as well. No profits, no control, no nothing. Thus, they aren't happy, and it's that simple (and something they will keep fighting till someone finally forces them to stop).
Who can force them to stop taking this "witch hunt" to the levels they want? I dont know - but I do hope it is soon - before music on the 'net becomes illegal.
- Rob
Oddly, the theory that an electron (or other "s-a-p") is a sub-atomic particle seems to still be held prevalent even though the thought to be more accurate theory is that an electron is actually an energy value measurable in what we define as negative, that in reality exhibits itself as a field and not a particle. The process of attempting to detect it makes a manifestation that appears to be a particle - somewhat like (scientifically a shitty anaology) how a stron enough magnet in front of a monitor will attract the electron stream to it instead of it being the electron "field" the gun is actually projecting.
Point being, the speed of light is just that. The mass of an object has nothing to do with its mass at it is approaching (or exceeding) the speed of light. The list of "particles" we are aware of that exceed the speed of light is growing. If scientists take what they already know (that "particles" are actually - or at least more likely - energy wave fields and not particles at all) the scientific community will progress a lot farther, a lot faster. Much more difficult to calculate wave field interaction especially with frequency variances attributable to different energy wave phenomena (a simple for instance... "photons" manifest and/or travel on various wavelengths, generating different field effects - and that's just "photons").
One day we may get it right... until then, everything is just guesswork and finding equations that seem to work within the limited circumstances we apply them to.
-Robert
First, Intel literally SCREWS users over. AMD hasnt went that far. Making what they or Intel can off a product is one thing. Changing the PII to Slot I because it is sooo superior to Socket 7 and similar socketed designs (all while hiding the standard type chip in a neat case) and *advertising this* to help cripple AMD's slow creep into your market was absurd. It hurt the market, and it was a lie - as we all (who werent the techie type and already knew) shown when Intel changed back to the socket design.
Intel released buggy CPU after CPU just to make deadlines and be able to yell "me first!" even when the defects were known (online articles, lawsuits and statements concur).
As mentioned, "flavor of the month" seems to also be Intel's biggest favorite thing to do to make some extra money off everyone involved... new chipsets all the time, new socket/slot/socket/slot designs (often for the same damn chips). Exhorbitant pricing (while you are claiming AMD would/will do the same but is consistently cheaper on an equal performance level).
Then there's Eternium... do I even need to go any farther with that buggy, half decade delayed piece of still in the works crap?
So, nothing personal, but why do you bother? You apparently dont know much about the company you work for. I've worked for some big IBM VARs and seen too much of what Intel really does that I am not permitted to mention here.
Creating a circuit to monitor one is easy.
Creating a circuit and software to allow it to "interact" with a computer is easy.
The design, contrary to a previous post can and will provide VERY stable power - far better than most "household" UPS's sold - because you are always running off the inverter - if you buy good quality true sine-wave inverters. StatPower is a good source of them and you can buy them cheaply from JC Whitney - AND - JCW offers a 60 day unconditional money back guarantee on everything they sell - you wont find better customer service. Each and every order shipped by them comes with prepaid return labels pre-authorized for merchandise returns. No annoying calls for an RMA number and such. Simply drop the item back in the box, slap the supplied label on it and call UPS for a pickup. (in 15 years, I havent returned more than 2 things... YMMV... instant credits on them).
Adding a fan(s) and enclosure for cooling and "safety" (not dropping something across the battery leads) is easy. Using a thermistor to regulate when the fan comes on is child's play.
Wire sizes as already noted are extremely important. Whenever working with DC, keep in mind the wires need to be large (ie: low gauge). Generally, in case of overcurrent situations, I use 2-4 gauge less than "required"). You cannot use AC current wiring specs to determine wire gauge on DC wiring - unless you want a puddle of copper and insulation and possibly a neat little fire. Because AC does just what the name implies - alternate - heat buildup for the same amount of current is a lot less. Also keep in mind, for longer DC runs, you need lower gauges than for shorter ones of the same load. (there are a dozen sites on line that will help with this info - look up DC house wiring to find some).
Installing a breaker type automotive fuse block of the appropriate size will facilitate avoiding a number of problems. Again, make sure breaker(s) and wires are properly rated for the load you wish to pull.
Buying an inverter that only generates the load being drawn will help increase efficiency. There are some that use only milliamps in "idle" mode (no load, but online).
Exide is the place for batteries... besides the fact that they make more brands of batteries than most of you could imagine (as a comparison, 40 "brands" of soap on the shelf at the supermarket, 5 major soap companies...), they also specialize in industrial deep cycle batteries and seem to have the size factor at a very acceptable level for the current they store and "create". For instance, the one we have been looking at for a similar (house level) application is an Exide 840ah 24v 6 hour rated battery... (you do the math... it'd power your computer for a very very long time...) they are designed for the in-building forklifts you can find at various Home-Depot's and such. Thus, charge, full/near-full discharge during heavy use, and repeat daily abuse and they handle them well. Exide makes smaller versions as well. All the way down to the RayOVac (and bigger brand name) batteries. Keep in mind many such battery solutions will require a 24V charger and 24V inverter - or 2 inverters in series. They are ideal for big UPS' that use 4 12V batteries.
If you are serious about this, battery quality does count big time. The correct lead acid battery type will last YEARS of continuous charge, discharge cycles. We used a bunch Panasonic made for an entertainment venue a number of years back and got 8 (on the first to die) to 12 years out of them doing 2 charge/discharge cycles a day every day. I wouldnt recommend them any more (Panasonic) as they far exceeded the rated life and charging cycle - which Panasonic rectified when they revamped the battery series. 2 years on the same model number battery of the new design.
These same plans can also be used with solar, wind and water power generation systems to charge, maintain or top off batteries with a little planning - as well as with backup generators. Thus, you can use a cheap backup generator in your house or business to create the DC charging current to then provide beautifully stable AC current via the battery(ies) and inverter(s).
For larger applications (VERY large), consider one of the "household" inverters... they are chainable to create 240V (which is really 2 120V lines in cyclic opposition), and usually contain charging units in them that you can provide power to via your incoming utility line, generator, solar, wind, etc. For 4400 Watts expect to pay about $2500 for the inverter, but expect the power to exceed the quality of your utility company 130% of the time and keep your batteries "professionally" charged. I am talking about this as a solution because it is ideal for companies with big server rooms wanting to use a similar method as described on the web page but for higher loads to maintain a lot of servers. It would be very simple to use an Exide 840ah and a Trace inverter (the makers of many other brands of inverters too like StatPower and PortaPower) to power a server room for hours or days.
ASE Americas makes 315Watt and down solar panels in roof mount sizes with high efficiency ratings and certification for many areas and setups. They come in a wide range of voltages per wattage output (meaning you can mix and match inverter/battery/solar cell options to create an ideal system). Solar would be more likely for people out in nowhere areas who needed long backup times or wanted to operate entirely off-grid.
Price shop like crazy for your inverter, batteries and more... I've seen the 4000W Trace inverters as high as $5800 and as low as $2490. Same model, different places. Same probably applies to the lower watt models like the StatPower (which have models to 3000W). Both StatPower and Trace home inverters feature very high surge ratings and stable "true-sine" power output on their higher end models. For StatPower, JCWhitney usually cannot be beat on price [except on auctions (eBay maybe?) and closeouts] and cannot be beat on customer satisfaction.
Some links for reference:
- Inverter
- 12V House
- Exide
- ASE Americas - Rob www.Hyperforce.com
NTFS file system limits are a lot more real world and not equivalent to JFS's.
JFS was designed to handle up to 2 Petabytes but is limited to where it currently is (on Linux and OS/2 Warp).
Don't confuse MS design limits with MS real world released version actual limits.
These are even more commonly called hydroplanes. You take a plane and create a method in which it can coast over or land on water. This has been done already using a variety of methods.
70mm is truly breathtaking. The problem is many of the new movie houses wont/dont go that route. One reason (if you've ever seen a 70mm reel set) is they are massive and tough to deal with. Back when there were lots of independent movie houses and people who knew what they were doing, that was one thing... but now when high school and college kids (nothing against them - but they arent experienced film projectionists) run most of these projectors, you really want to entrust 6-7 massive 70mm reels to them and expect it on the screen properly?
This, btw, is the reason movie houses charge so much for concession food - because all first run movies are in the 80% range. Plus rental costs. The box office percentage drops after ___ # of weeks (varies depending on the movie and the contract, etc, etc, etc...). Usually 2 - 4 weeks. Movie houses also pay a penalty to stop showing a movie before a certain date (for instance if it's a flop and they want to get something else in).
Not saying GL isnt greedy - nor saying he is. Just saying these are indeed standard rates in the movie industry. As for the DL projectors, most (all?) movie houses were getting them for nothing but installation. A few hundred installs were scaled down to the few everyone has been talking about.
Robert