Could someone tell me why one type of drive wouldn't work with a specific version of Windows? Shouldn't they be able to write drivers for that?
I am guessing that a better description of the problem would be "not optimized for Windows". A hybrid drive is best used when small, in-demand data chunks are put on the flash components and large or infrequently accessed files are left on the platters. Perhaps there is no reasonable method to decide what files should go where?
It would be cool to incorporate this type of controller into a portable device. You could have portable laser-tag like games with real-time mapping
While it would definitely be cool, you can't really use accelerometers as location devices. Accelerometers and, to a lesser degree, odometers both do a pretty terrible job of keeping track of where an object is located. That's why the Wii also includes a sensor bar.
They'll generally give you pretty good readings for a single movement, like 'the object just moved 1 meter forwards', however as soon as you turn or travel a long distance, they suffer from drifting, skidding, and general measurement errors.
A different sort of tech would be needed for mapping. You can do some research into Robotics, such Markov Localization, for some more information. GPS and related techs are better for real time location reporting.
Right, but it heats up for a different reason. Microwave energy directly transfers to heat energy in water. In metals, it generates electric current first which in turn generates heat due to electrical resistance.
That sounds fantastic in an idealistic, theoretical way...but considering the volatility of Wikipedia just on a day-to-day (sometimes hour-to-hour) basis, what makes anyone think the content of Wikipedia in a decade, much less a century, will say anything about what we were like today?
Well no one said it would be easy:)
In all seriousness, I'm sure methods and techniques would exist that take volatility into acccount, looking at trends and changes over the course of months, days, years, or decades. A sort of averaging, if you will. Sure, the researcher would see hourly changes on heated articles, but this in and off itself might be of interest for finding relevant topics. It is might then be up to the researcher to uncover what's changing about the subject and what's not.
Latency shouldn't be an issue since it would be almost entirely one way communication. Electricity through wires moves just as fast as RF through the air (for all intents and purposes.) The monitor also won't have to send ACK signals of any form - the video card would broadcast the signal and the monitor picks it up and decodes it. It's really no different than using the copper wires we have now.
I guess I was hoping someone could also offer some insight into lossless compression techniques and their average compression ratio. As long as one is not doing FMV, you wouldn't, in theory, need to refresh the whole screen. Maybe that's getting too fancy for a simple question though.
Wireless Digital Monitor
on
USB To Go Wireless
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I'm curious - how much bandwidth is required to make a wireless monitor? Let's say its running at 1600x1200 with 24bit color. Anyone have any ideas?
So, once its carrying your cargo along the path and begins to slide down a slope all the tracks will turn in unison to help carry it down the hill to its doom. They won't think anything is wrong because everyone will be pulling in the same direction.
I'm assuming maybe this was more of a humorous comment, but I'll take the bait. It would be trivial (I would think) to add a pitch sensor of some sort, then do a little bit of simply physics/trig to adjust the force calculations.
With USB memory keys now containing more data than a cd or dvd,...
Not more then the upcoming blu-ray and hd-dvd formats (which I assume this would work for as well.) And of course, there's always cost to think about. I think this is as stupid an idea as the next, but let's get our facts straight.
Print it out. Hand it out. You fit way more information on a sheet of paper than in power point (you can print 6 power point slides on an 8.5x11 and still have tons of white space left unused.) Also, it allows your audience to walk away from your presentation with the notes still in hand. Thirdly, it gives them a writing material on which to take notes. Fourth, no one will have trouble reading a sheet of paper right in front of them (unless they need a new glasses, of course.) Fifth, you won't have to flip back and forth through a hundred slide presentation - people are free to review material at their own pace without interrupting the presentation.
... apparently being gay is such a horrible thing to most Slashdotters that accusations of it amount to libel. Sad, really.
I'm not so sure of this. First off, it's really up to the courts to decide. It's entering litigation therefore someone somewhere in the legal system thinks it amounts to libel - not slashdot.
But more importantly, while I could care less, there are plenty of people who would ostracize the teacher for homosexuality. Regardless of my personal beliefs, the fact that a significant number others view it extremely negatively does qualify as libel.
I never said instead nor did I in any way qualify the terms of the liability. I made no statement to suggest that a parents liability should be the same as the childs, just that it should exist. As much as anything, it is a personal opinion I hold.
Thanks for the insults by the way. I do enjoy civil discourse:)
Simply put, you're right, but it's still within the parents' duties to teach extremes of right and wrong (nothing is ever black and white.) Where public defamation lies in that spectrum could also, of course, be debated.
These days the actual influence of a parent is becoming very diluted. Many other agencies want a piece of your kids and they don't care what messages they have to send to get it.
Definately agree and, in many ways, that's always been true. It can be very disheartening.
I'm not really backing up my statement "should thusly be held liable for your childrens' actions". That's a different debate all together from one's parenting skills (its a legal debate.)
As for telling right from wrong, you are correct on this account as well, however it is up to the parents to instill a sense of severity and extremes when it comes to wrong. We all know the world is not black and white. There's a difference between a child commiting a harmless prank and posting publicly, in a derogatory manner, that a person is a homoesexual (disclaimer: I'm certainly no homophobe and would probably give something like this little to no thought. However there are plenty of people in the world who would think less of the teacher.)
But you cannot monitor EVERYTHING your child does.
Whole heartedly agree. I don't think anyone doubts this.
I'm sure these kids are probably over the age of 12, which by then they should probably know right from wrong.
If you're children are 12+, supposedly know right from wrong, but still think posting defamatory material about someone is "right", then you should seriously question your parenting skills and, if you ask me, should thusly be held liable for your childrens' actions.
Until they reach the age of 18, (or whatever age the courts decide is adult,) their actions should be as good as your actions.
One dimensional in a purely mathematical sense, yes. However, to the mind, moving left and moving right are two separate actions. In that sense, you might be able to get away with calling it 2D (not to mention the fact that they also added the ability to fire - a 3rd action.)
For as long as I can remember there have been attempts to fix email so that it won't be subject to spammer stupid-tactics.
That may fix "stupid-tactics" but a lot of phishing is simpler social engineering. There's no concrete way around it really - if the phisher can type the write message up that convinces you to give your information away or click their link, then there's no stopping it.
The only semi-effective method developed so far is to measure each email against no phishing characterstics and websites and slap a warning or outright ban on any email that doesn't pass the test.
What he/she is saying is that 100W at 95% efficiency gives you the CO2 output. (95% efficiency would mean ~105.3 Watts worth of chemical energy is required. 1 watt = 1 joule/second.) Whether or not they actually did the math or know what type of fuel is being used is a different story, but it is, in theory, possible to figure it out.
Is it safe to use engines like this in enclosed spaces? An airplane is a great example, but even my office with sealed window could be a problem. Anyone have more details? Similarly, it says it can run 10 hours, but how much fuel is that? My car engine could run all year if I left it hooked up to a gas pump.
The question is still interesting, though, to those who might promote a [more] free market. If one wants a free market, how does one account for the fact that, between all true and objective data, opinions and personal agenda's still exists? They are detrimental to an effective free market economy.
Slashdot Mirror
Can someone enlighten me?
They'll generally give you pretty good readings for a single movement, like 'the object just moved 1 meter forwards', however as soon as you turn or travel a long distance, they suffer from drifting, skidding, and general measurement errors.
A different sort of tech would be needed for mapping. You can do some research into Robotics, such Markov Localization, for some more information. GPS and related techs are better for real time location reporting.
Right, but it heats up for a different reason. Microwave energy directly transfers to heat energy in water. In metals, it generates electric current first which in turn generates heat due to electrical resistance.
I can't vouch that someone hasn't tampered with it, of course, but that's a whole different story.
Latency shouldn't be an issue since it would be almost entirely one way communication. Electricity through wires moves just as fast as RF through the air (for all intents and purposes.) The monitor also won't have to send ACK signals of any form - the video card would broadcast the signal and the monitor picks it up and decodes it. It's really no different than using the copper wires we have now.
I guess I was hoping someone could also offer some insight into lossless compression techniques and their average compression ratio. As long as one is not doing FMV, you wouldn't, in theory, need to refresh the whole screen. Maybe that's getting too fancy for a simple question though.
I'm curious - how much bandwidth is required to make a wireless monitor? Let's say its running at 1600x1200 with 24bit color. Anyone have any ideas?
With USB memory keys now containing more data than a cd or dvd, ...
Not more then the upcoming blu-ray and hd-dvd formats (which I assume this would work for as well.) And of course, there's always cost to think about. I think this is as stupid an idea as the next, but let's get our facts straight.
Paper.
Print it out. Hand it out. You fit way more information on a sheet of paper than in power point (you can print 6 power point slides on an 8.5x11 and still have tons of white space left unused.) Also, it allows your audience to walk away from your presentation with the notes still in hand. Thirdly, it gives them a writing material on which to take notes. Fourth, no one will have trouble reading a sheet of paper right in front of them (unless they need a new glasses, of course.) Fifth, you won't have to flip back and forth through a hundred slide presentation - people are free to review material at their own pace without interrupting the presentation.
But more importantly, while I could care less, there are plenty of people who would ostracize the teacher for homosexuality. Regardless of my personal beliefs, the fact that a significant number others view it extremely negatively does qualify as libel.
I never said instead nor did I in any way qualify the terms of the liability. I made no statement to suggest that a parents liability should be the same as the childs, just that it should exist. As much as anything, it is a personal opinion I hold.
:)
Thanks for the insults by the way. I do enjoy civil discourse
I agree and I'll refer you to another similar response I made: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=200459&cid=164 13689
Simply put, you're right, but it's still within the parents' duties to teach extremes of right and wrong (nothing is ever black and white.) Where public defamation lies in that spectrum could also, of course, be debated.
I'm not really backing up my statement "should thusly be held liable for your childrens' actions". That's a different debate all together from one's parenting skills (its a legal debate.)
As for telling right from wrong, you are correct on this account as well, however it is up to the parents to instill a sense of severity and extremes when it comes to wrong. We all know the world is not black and white. There's a difference between a child commiting a harmless prank and posting publicly, in a derogatory manner, that a person is a homoesexual (disclaimer: I'm certainly no homophobe and would probably give something like this little to no thought. However there are plenty of people in the world who would think less of the teacher.)
If you're children are 12+, supposedly know right from wrong, but still think posting defamatory material about someone is "right", then you should seriously question your parenting skills and, if you ask me, should thusly be held liable for your childrens' actions.
Until they reach the age of 18, (or whatever age the courts decide is adult,) their actions should be as good as your actions.
One dimensional in a purely mathematical sense, yes. However, to the mind, moving left and moving right are two separate actions. In that sense, you might be able to get away with calling it 2D (not to mention the fact that they also added the ability to fire - a 3rd action.)
The only semi-effective method developed so far is to measure each email against no phishing characterstics and websites and slap a warning or outright ban on any email that doesn't pass the test.
What he/she is saying is that 100W at 95% efficiency gives you the CO2 output. (95% efficiency would mean ~105.3 Watts worth of chemical energy is required. 1 watt = 1 joule/second.) Whether or not they actually did the math or know what type of fuel is being used is a different story, but it is, in theory, possible to figure it out.
Is it safe to use engines like this in enclosed spaces? An airplane is a great example, but even my office with sealed window could be a problem. Anyone have more details? Similarly, it says it can run 10 hours, but how much fuel is that? My car engine could run all year if I left it hooked up to a gas pump.