But does it have ECC RAM? The site says it's soldered onto the board so you can't replace it if it isn't.
A PC that needs to keep running/doesn't reboot, absolutely needs ECC (Error Correcting Code) memory. In PC RAM, bits will flip unintentionally because of cosmic radiation (I'm not kidding) and other reasons. With ECC RAM, your PC will detect those flipped bits and, correct them.
If you don't have ECC memory, those flipped bits will add up after your PC has run a while and if you save any of the info in your RAM, the flipped bits will be stored permanently as corruption of your files. I've read that any ram will quickly flip bits this way. Even while running, bugs might occur. Who knows what will happen with random bit flips, a FreeBSD might spontaneously turn into WindowsXP:)
For this reason, I will not build a server without ECC RAM. Trouble is, it's hard to find motherboards/chipsets that support it. There are 1 or 2 nice Pentium M chipset motherboards that give you BOTH a low power solution and ECC memory but those solutions are expensive.
I'm hoping, that in the future, more manufacturers will create Pentium M motherboards, there's definitely a need for that, especially since Intel is going to switch from Pentium 4 type, to Pentium M type processors for their main consumer range.
The best board I found for a Pentium M server is this a new one: Aopen i855GMEm-LFS It's not out in Europe (nor US I think), but as I said, not cheap. Ultra low voltage Pentium M's can be cooled without a fan using a good heatsink. Maybe the Low voltage Pentium M 1.6 GHz can be as well. You can also underclock them to make certain, they'll still have plenty of computing power.
Computer languages can be made to resemble human language (English) as much as possible. They can be made to reflect the machine as much as possible (assembler) and they can be made to resemble a drunken sailor with Tourette's syndrome (Pearl).
However, I wonder how functional languages will do. They try to approximate math as much as possible. OCaml Won top 3 spots from '98 till '02 in a contest called ICFP. Although OCaml is both functional and has object-oriented features.
Are functional languages the way of the future? Better brush up on my math. Another functional language feature I heard of was that they can be made multi-threaded automatically, with the runtime environment spreading the execution of the program across multiple threads/processors.
Maybe someone should tell Sony about functional languages as a way for game programmers to handle their Cell PS3 processors. They go the - slower individual chips but more of them working at the same time - route.
In the age of the industrial revolution, it was free market all the way. It turned out to be a reall hell for the employees. Near-slavery situations.
In the end, the manufacturers failed as well, because they gave so little money to their employees and other population groups, that no one could affort their products anymore.
People have to abide by rules, and so do companies/corporations. corporations try to be an "individual" anyway, so they should accept the responsibilities that come with it.
Limitations on what powerful entities can do to the rest of the population is good for the population. In the end it's also good for the powerful because rules make sure that no one can leech the population dry with cartels and monopolies and people will be able to afford the products and services.
The DVD+ format is better because it supports absolute accurate positioning of the sector to be written. DVD- isn't accurate to a single sector.
That means a DVD+RW can be written to without gaps, just like you can write to a floppy or HD with accuracy in the written sector/without gaps.
And this in turn means that only DVD+RW supports Mount Rainier (in the future). Mount Rainier is hardware assisted packet writing: - The most important thing is that you can use your DVD+MRW (Mount Rainier Rewritable) as a floppy disk/Hard drive. You drag and drop, delete, write something else etc. Just like a storage device is supposed to be used, none of this "burning" crap. MR has extra fault tolerance too. - Standard OS drivers for all MR drives, they all behave the same. - Formatting in the background by the firmware, the RW can be written to after about 1 minute, you don't have to wait for the whole DVD to finish formatting to start using it.
Only problem is, there are no fully compliant Mount Rainier DVD+MRW drives yet:( The manufacturers are now scampering to get to 16x speed first. After the makers all achieve 16x then we'll get get other differentiating features in the drives, like MR.
The only advantage you get with +RW at the moment is that OTHER packet writing methods (like Nero InCD) also benefit from the exact laser positioning. You don't get Some of the other MRW stuff like background formatting.
I'm waiting with buying a DVD drive until there's an +MRW. You can also recognize compliant drives with the Philips "Easy Write" logo.
P.S. the DVD-R and -RW camp are the ones that do whatever the movie industry wants. The computer manufacturers split from that group because they wanted better features like absolute write-positioning and came up with +RW.
In the Netherlands, Greenpeace was objecting to windmill generators! They were afraid birds would get confused and die by hitting them.
OMG, don't they believe in Darwinism? The birds that learn to fly around the windmills will breed and the others won't, problems solved. Better than all the birds of one species dying of climate change you would think. Maybe they secretly believe in creationism.
Maybe I don't have all my facts straight and I'm overreacting, but I would think GreenPeace to be in favor of dotting the landscape of every windy spot in the world with windmill generators. Every roof of the world cladded with (net energy gain) solar panels.
I can't see how Greenpeace can be against fusion but, like GreenPeace I'm unsure about nuclear fission, you gain energy by taking a huge deadly risk. That and the possibility of a country, let's say America, shooting the nuclear waste into the desert of countries they invade (hey, 2 problems solved at the same time, what's a few deformed babies for millennia gonna matter?)
Back on topic, Let's hope nuclear fusion works within a reasonable timeframe, it could save the world. I know of 3 approaches, the one in the story, the "traditional" tokamak containment field and the one where they shoot pellets of Deuterium with multiple lasers simultaneously. Which is the most promising?
A pedantic piece of advice to you and the Sunbird developers, "to-do" is spelled like that because the words are seperate but are meant to be together.
If you use to do then the do part can be misread and look like it belongs to another part of your sentence. For example, you can make the mistake of reading "do then" instead of "to-do then" in my sentence above.
I know this because I asked for the right spelling of to-do on Slashdot a while ago, thanks for the answer by the way.
Where your family will get billed for the bullet after you get executed.
On the other hand, who am I to talk, as the Netherlands is the country with the most wiretaps in the world annually, or at least the most open about the amount they wiretap.
At the moment, projectors are lighted by expensive, proprietary light bulbs.
Because of the hot bulbs, the projectors are too noisy to enjoy a nice movie night at home and they burn out after a while.
An array of LEDs would be superiour because they'd be more durable (no need for expensive replacements after X hours) and might be cool enough for fanless beamers.
Unfortunately the manufacturers use the projectors like razorblade holders or like inkjet printers. You can only fit the replacement bulb that the manufacturer made themselves and the replacement bulbs are very expensive because of that monopoly.
However, all it takes is ONE monufacturer to produce a good LED beamer to disrupt the current situation. All the others will have to follow if they want customers after LED lightsources take over, the sooner the better.
I made up my mind to ONLY buy a LED beamer because I know it's possible and I know I'll be screwed over by the current beamers if I don't. The less bulb-beamers we as consumers buy, the faster the changeover will happen.
Either the 2 semi-circle "intacts" type, but they cannot be used @ -4 or lower and another slashdotter said something about halos at night.
or
The complete lens implant which is the ultimate solution. They can go as low or as high as you want. They've been implanting them for cataract patients for years and years and it's reversible.
It's always a good idea to go for a doctor with a good reputation though. Also, the procedure needs to be done with specialized laser pattern equipment to get your eye back into perfect shape after the insertion-cut has been made, check for that.
I've seen it done on several documentaries and it's what I'm going to have done when I get the money.
The old docu showed implanted lenses with semi-circular spokes at the sides of the lens, like the shape of a galaxy where the lens is the center and the spokes hold the lens in position inside the eye behind the colored part/iris part of your eye.
The newer documentary showed the internal lens in front of the iris and attached/clicked tight onto the colored part of your eye. Looked less invasive.
The problem with voting for a 3rd party candidate for president in the US is that it all boils down to 1 person. Most of you people here would like to vote libertarian but if they did that, then the chances of the republican candidate would increase and your libertarian vote would not go to your 2nd choise, the democrat.
The solution to this would be a 2 round voting system so you could redirect your vote to a democrat if your libertarian didn't make it to the 2nd round.
Since there isn't a 2-round voting system in the US (I think). You should vote democrat for the time being.
However, correct me if I'm wrong, in the SENATE, your vote won't boil down to 1 person. There are hundreds of people. If you vote for a libertarian senator, your vote will have a higher chance of voting someone libertarian into government. With the president, it's "All or nothing" With the senate, it's "4 or just 2 senators"
Then the senators can work from within the system to give your country a 3! party government or maybe restrict the power of the president and redirect it to the ministers or parliament.
But the "evil" political geeks in the 2 big parties will probably have thought up a system against that as well.
Companies creating laws that take away rights of citizens? Corporations that make people consume as much as possible using any means necessary?
It looks like the corporations vs the rest of the world. Only the corporations are used to organising themselves and normal people aren't.
How unfortunate that the representatives of the citizen are only representing themselves and corporations. I was about to suggest that the "normal" people form a group to fight evil groups somehow, but that's supposed to be your government's job.
Instead, my advice is to just vote after checking out internet news that is unbiased instead of watching corporate US TV news.
The fastest way to change patent law into something sensible is to trigger patent wars.
Adobe is getting hit with a submarine patent for something in it's PDF reader.
I suggest that people who are against software patents help point submarine patent holders towards a big-business' that can be sued.
When big business' can't DO big-business you'll see sofware patents removed really quickly because:
1. Big-Business can't do business 2. Big-business -> "influences" government. 3. Government changes law.
The advantage with that is, it costs only the price of a phonecall/E-mail. The problem is that submarine patent holders are in it for the money and can be bought off so Adobe can keep on making patented software.
So, an alternative would be for the EFF or similar organization to get as many trivial but legal-proof software patents of it's own and use those to completely block corporations like Adobe or MS from selling software with OUR "inventions". You'll see legislation change with lightning speed in our favor for a change.
The patent law situation is absurd, and because average people don't have the insight that we have, we have to SHOW people how absurd the situation is.
Sure, things will get ugly for a while but setting things right once and for all is better than hoping for the best. Even corporations can learn if they have to and this way, they have to. Start the war to teach evildoers a ($100.000 a day) lesson.
As the submitter wrote, this guy is one of the examples of why: "There is no question that cruise missile, UAV, bio-warfare, chemical weapons technology, and probably nuclear technologies will all continue to fall in cost significantly for the foreseeable future."
There are model airplanes with gyroscopic autopilots to buy as well.
Anyway, I think it's better to remove the source of the threat by not creating new terrorists instead of trying to herd every possible terrorist or terror facilitator (like the guy in the story).
It's like what the RIAA MPAA is trying to do with downloaders. Much more efficient to stop it at the relatively small and clear source than at the numerous and hidden end-points.
And guess what the W. Bush government and CIA did? four years ago, the whole of the Netherlands were like: "What the fuck? Why did Americans vote for Bush instead of Gore?" I guess we're missing American news media.
Anyway, original point, things are getting more dangerous and it's better to make sure nobody wants to harm you than to push back the danger. We eventually want world peace to happen don't we?
Traditionally, port communications are safeguarded by the application behind the port. This means that if you have 13 network applications, there are 13 possible ways of someone owning your system with a trojan.
On the other hand, portknocking is handled by a single daemon that is simpler than most applications. Portknocking could even be handled by the OS.
This means that instead of having to trust several net-connected programs with your system security, whose primary focus will probably not be safety, you only have to trust 1 program which IS focused on security. Added to that, a portknocking program is easier to make safe because it's simpler than most other programs which have to handle both network defence AND some other task (Instant Messaging).
Computers are supposed to be our slaves. They should serve us in the way we like them to. I would like Linux to have directory names that are clearer and help me figure out/tweak/fix my OS more easily. I should not have to bend my brain just so the computer can have an easier time.
Off the top of my head, computers do two things: - Help us do things that are otherwise impossible. - Help us do those things faster, more efficiently or more easily.
When you can help people use their computers more easily by making the directory names intuitive, you should go for it. It would be great if a person of average intelligence can understand what a certain directory in his OS is used for without having to memorize anything. As you know, human memory is weak and the memory of an arcane directory structure will break if not refreshed often enough. People will like Linux more, explore their system more and will make less mistakes if the directory structure is human readable.
I guess that when you're a kernel hacker, you tend to forget that it's BOTH about the end result (a nice slave) AND the correct/elegant way to achieve that result because you're spending your time mostly on the how, not the ultimate why. I don't know how the traditional directories got their their names and why they were born but was it all thought out logically? Was there a plan and good reason for doing it like this? Well, they did think about the new way of doing it and they have good reasons.
Let me give you another argument. Linux advocates often say that one of the strengths of Open Source is that there is diversity and that the forks and experiments strengthen the software ecosystem. Well, that 'Darwinism' will only work if you select the best 'mutations' and discard the "old organisms" that didn't work. I think that everyone with an open mind would agree that, from the end user's point of view, 'programs' is better than "usr/bin". If you don't select a new way of doing things once in a while, what's the point of experiments and diversity? You might as well keep things just like they were in the beginning forever.
I know switching will be painful because of existing applications but Linux doesn't have 90% market share yet. I know it will but my point is, if the painful switch to a new directory structure is done NOW, it will inconvenience a lot less people than when it would be done when it's the most popular OS on the planet. On top of that, I think it will help Linux achieve that 90% faster.
The computer should be my slave and bend over backwards to please ME. It should use more processor, memory and storage to please ME. I should not have to waste more time, think harder and be aggravated JUST so the PC has an easier time (has to use less storage/memory/cycles).
I will give you one final example of why this way of thinking is good in my opinion. I've been computing in Windows 2000 until now because I've started with Windows, because Counter-Strike and Photoshop are Windows (Mac) only and because I think Linux would cost me more time and aggravation than keeping Windows patched and cleaned. However, I have been keeping an eye on MaxOS X, Linux and other Open Source operating systems like FreeBSD because I know they're better from a system point of view. Also, I know that Microsoft have done evil things and I'm convinced will do evil things in the future.
I have decided to switch to another OS because of ROX and GoboLinux. I'll try different combinations of GoboLinux, Rox, FreeBSD and installed Knoppix and decide afterwards. (any suggestions for a beginner?) If that doesn't work out for me I'll have to save for an iBook.
I'm not too proud to beg so please help make the the world a friendlier and less MS place and open yourself to that "discard the old and embrace the better" mentality that you demand of Windows users. Support and advocate the ROX and GoboLinux way.
Slightly offtopic: Some people argue against the "every file of a program contai
The perfect display technology is coming from Philips R&D.
It's based on electrowetting. Basically, one of the three colours of an RGB pixel is made up of a film of oil. The oil normally spreads/clings all over the tiny surface to form a solid color. The surface under the oil is made of a special material that attracts water ONLY if it's under electrical current.
Now, if you want to remove the oil to reveal the color of the surface under it, you electrify the surface below the oil, the water above the oil will worm it's way towards the surface because it's attracted and it will push away the oil to the side very quickly. Voila, you just changed the color of the (sub)pixel.
It gets better. The display tech isn't based on RGB like I wrote above, that was just an easy way to explain it. It's based on the CMYK color model just like printed paper/magazines are.
RGB is additive, it adds colour from the display from 3 different subpixels to give the appearance of white light when they are on full blast.
CMYK is subtractive, it subtracts colours from white light and that's how this display tech works. You bathe the display in white light and the oil of the subpixels either cover the whole surface of the pixel and subtract all light to show a black pixel, or they "get out of the way" and show the white surface under the oil to show a white pixel.
Click the first link ("A reflective display based on electrowetting")on the page I linked above. Look under the text: "Main display properties" where it shows a closeup of 2 pixels. Stand far away from your monitor and squint your eyes. The top pixel will appear black and the bottom pixel will appear white. Just like printed paper (use a magnifying glass on a magazine).
Why is this better than RGB? well, it means that the display will behave like a magazine, the more sunlight, the better (as with a magazine). If you want to view the display in the dark, you just bounce an internal white-light source from the top of the display using a "front scattering film" that is stuck on top of the screen and acts like a million little mirrors, bouncing the white light directly onto the pixels and back into your eye. The GameBoy Advance SP has a scattering film like that. Either use the film or just shine a light onto it (the bulb in your room).
What it all boils down to is this: - The display is faster than TFT/LCD. You'll be able to watch video and play fast moving games without the blurring of LCD. - The display is durable. OLED and Plasma will be junk in just a short time. Especially the blue OLED subpixels. - It uses very little power. It's much less than CRT and will probably beat LCD as well. - You can use it outside, the more light, the better. It will enable a display that is: "at least two times brighter than what is possible with any other technology". - It's flat screen tech. It'll be about the same thickness as LCD and it'll be easier to make into a big screen as LCD. Plasma screens are super heavy and need their own cooling fan.
It'll be the perfect display, buy CRT for colour correctness and FPS games, buy LCD for laptops or if you don't do prepress/fast games. SKIP OLED! and wait for Electrowetting displays which will combine all the good stuff from the other techs and have none of the disadvantages. It's basically "done" as far as I can see, it'll just need tweaking, unlike OLED which needs some kind of breakthrough to achieve durability. The only thing I'm not sure of is the number of different colors it can display inbetween black and white, will it be 24 bits or less?
The problem with robots which are evolved to handle a task, is that you have no idea of what the programming is like in their heads. You have a working robot, but you don't know how to program one yourself. All you can do is train it and analyze the "brain patterns" afterwards. These things are hard to decipher.
The robots-as-dogs method will probably win because it gets results quicker than the programmed-thought-by-human method. Could be dangerous though, because you don't know what makes it tick.
Asimov's three laws of robotics seem appropriate in this case.
I'm 99.999999999999 % sure that god doesn't exist. I'm also 99.999999999999 sure that Earth's gravity will not suddenly reverse itself and shoot everything into space.
I agree that the bible has laid down some useful rules to follow, have 1 days rest a week, don't kill etc. but the world has changed since it was written. You don't have abstain from sex to prevent overpopulation anymore, just use a condom or the pill.
Religion is just a story (99.999 etc.). Feels good to be part of that epic story and "belong" to a group but I suggest to all believers to stop believing in this disneyworld and face the harsh and wonderful reality.
Slashdot Mirror
And maybe I just shot my mouth off :O
But does it have ECC RAM?
:)
The site says it's soldered onto the board so you can't replace it if it isn't.
A PC that needs to keep running/doesn't reboot, absolutely needs ECC (Error Correcting Code) memory.
In PC RAM, bits will flip unintentionally because of cosmic radiation (I'm not kidding) and other reasons. With ECC RAM, your PC will detect those flipped bits and, correct them.
If you don't have ECC memory, those flipped bits will add up after your PC has run a while and if you save any of the info in your RAM, the flipped bits will be stored permanently as corruption of your files. I've read that any ram will quickly flip bits this way. Even while running, bugs might occur. Who knows what will happen with random bit flips, a FreeBSD might spontaneously turn into WindowsXP
For this reason, I will not build a server without ECC RAM. Trouble is, it's hard to find motherboards/chipsets that support it. There are 1 or 2 nice Pentium M chipset motherboards that give you BOTH a low power solution and ECC memory but those solutions are expensive.
I'm hoping, that in the future, more manufacturers will create Pentium M motherboards, there's definitely a need for that, especially since Intel is going to switch from Pentium 4 type, to Pentium M type processors for their main consumer range.
The best board I found for a Pentium M server is this a new one: Aopen i855GMEm-LFS
It's not out in Europe (nor US I think), but as I said, not cheap. Ultra low voltage Pentium M's can be cooled without a fan using a good heatsink. Maybe the Low voltage Pentium M 1.6 GHz can be as well. You can also underclock them to make certain, they'll still have plenty of computing power.
Computer languages can be made to resemble human language (English) as much as possible. They can be made to reflect the machine as much as possible (assembler) and they can be made to resemble a drunken sailor with Tourette's syndrome (Pearl).
However, I wonder how functional languages will do. They try to approximate math as much as possible. OCaml Won top 3 spots from '98 till '02 in a contest called ICFP. Although OCaml is both functional and has object-oriented features.
Are functional languages the way of the future? Better brush up on my math. Another functional language feature I heard of was that they can be made multi-threaded automatically, with the runtime environment spreading the execution of the program across multiple threads/processors.
Maybe someone should tell Sony about functional languages as a way for game programmers to handle their Cell PS3 processors. They go the - slower individual chips but more of them working at the same time - route.
In the age of the industrial revolution, it was free market all the way. It turned out to be a reall hell for the employees. Near-slavery situations.
In the end, the manufacturers failed as well, because they gave so little money to their employees and other population groups, that no one could affort their products anymore.
People have to abide by rules, and so do companies/corporations. corporations try to be an "individual" anyway, so they should accept the responsibilities that come with it.
Limitations on what powerful entities can do to the rest of the population is good for the population. In the end it's also good for the powerful because rules make sure that no one can leech the population dry with cartels and monopolies and people will be able to afford the products and services.
after you disconnect the power cord for a while.
The DVD+ format is better because it supports absolute accurate positioning of the sector to be written. DVD- isn't accurate to a single sector.
:(
That means a DVD+RW can be written to without gaps, just like you can write to a floppy or HD with accuracy in the written sector/without gaps.
And this in turn means that only DVD+RW supports Mount Rainier (in the future). Mount Rainier is hardware assisted packet writing:
- The most important thing is that you can use your DVD+MRW (Mount Rainier Rewritable) as a floppy disk/Hard drive. You drag and drop, delete, write something else etc. Just like a storage device is supposed to be used, none of this "burning" crap. MR has extra fault tolerance too.
- Standard OS drivers for all MR drives, they all behave the same.
- Formatting in the background by the firmware, the RW can be written to after about 1 minute, you don't have to wait for the whole DVD to finish formatting to start using it.
Only problem is, there are no fully compliant Mount Rainier DVD+MRW drives yet
The manufacturers are now scampering to get to 16x speed first. After the makers all achieve 16x then we'll get get other differentiating features in the drives, like MR.
The only advantage you get with +RW at the moment is that OTHER packet writing methods (like Nero InCD) also benefit from the exact laser positioning. You don't get Some of the other MRW stuff like background formatting.
I'm waiting with buying a DVD drive until there's an +MRW. You can also recognize compliant drives with the Philips "Easy Write" logo.
P.S. the DVD-R and -RW camp are the ones that do whatever the movie industry wants. The computer manufacturers split from that group because they wanted better features like absolute write-positioning and came up with +RW.
Spoiler alert!
The last paragraph of the article gives the main surprise away of one of the best science-fiction books on Earth: "Ender's Game"
I recommend Ender's Game, easy to read and great, and recommend against reading the last paragraph of the article if you haven't already.
In the Netherlands, Greenpeace was objecting to windmill generators! They were afraid birds would get confused and die by hitting them.
OMG, don't they believe in Darwinism? The birds that learn to fly around the windmills will breed and the others won't, problems solved. Better than all the birds of one species dying of climate change you would think. Maybe they secretly believe in creationism.
Maybe I don't have all my facts straight and I'm overreacting, but I would think GreenPeace to be in favor of dotting the landscape of every windy spot in the world with windmill generators. Every roof of the world cladded with (net energy gain) solar panels.
I can't see how Greenpeace can be against fusion but, like GreenPeace I'm unsure about nuclear fission, you gain energy by taking a huge deadly risk. That and the possibility of a country, let's say America, shooting the nuclear waste into the desert of countries they invade (hey, 2 problems solved at the same time, what's a few deformed babies for millennia gonna matter?)
Back on topic, Let's hope nuclear fusion works within a reasonable timeframe, it could save the world. I know of 3 approaches, the one in the story, the "traditional" tokamak containment field and the one where they shoot pellets of Deuterium with multiple lasers simultaneously. Which is the most promising?
A pedantic piece of advice to you and the Sunbird developers, "to-do" is spelled like that because the words are seperate but are meant to be together.
If you use to do then the do part can be misread and look like it belongs to another part of your sentence. For example, you can make the mistake of reading "do then" instead of "to-do then" in my sentence above.
I know this because I asked for the right spelling of to-do on Slashdot a while ago, thanks for the answer by the way.
Where your family will get billed for the bullet after you get executed.
On the other hand, who am I to talk, as the Netherlands is the country with the most wiretaps in the world annually, or at least the most open about the amount they wiretap.
At the moment, projectors are lighted by expensive, proprietary light bulbs.
Because of the hot bulbs, the projectors are too noisy to enjoy a nice movie night at home and they burn out after a while.
An array of LEDs would be superiour because they'd be more durable (no need for expensive replacements after X hours) and might be cool enough for fanless beamers.
Unfortunately the manufacturers use the projectors like razorblade holders or like inkjet printers. You can only fit the replacement bulb that the manufacturer made themselves and the replacement bulbs are very expensive because of that monopoly.
However, all it takes is ONE monufacturer to produce a good LED beamer to disrupt the current situation. All the others will have to follow if they want customers after LED lightsources take over, the sooner the better.
I made up my mind to ONLY buy a LED beamer because I know it's possible and I know I'll be screwed over by the current beamers if I don't. The less bulb-beamers we as consumers buy, the faster the changeover will happen.
Is eye-implants.
Either the 2 semi-circle "intacts" type, but they cannot be used @ -4 or lower and another slashdotter said something about halos at night.
or
The complete lens implant which is the ultimate solution. They can go as low or as high as you want. They've been implanting them for cataract patients for years and years and it's reversible.
It's always a good idea to go for a doctor with a good reputation though. Also, the procedure needs to be done with specialized laser pattern equipment to get your eye back into perfect shape after the insertion-cut has been made, check for that.
I've seen it done on several documentaries and it's what I'm going to have done when I get the money.
The old docu showed implanted lenses with semi-circular spokes at the sides of the lens, like the shape of a galaxy where the lens is the center and the spokes hold the lens in position inside the eye behind the colored part/iris part of your eye.
The newer documentary showed the internal lens in front of the iris and attached/clicked tight onto the colored part of your eye. Looked less invasive.
The problem with voting for a 3rd party candidate for president in the US is that it all boils down to 1 person. Most of you people here would like to vote libertarian but if they did that, then the chances of the republican candidate would increase and your libertarian vote would not go to your 2nd choise, the democrat.
The solution to this would be a 2 round voting system so you could redirect your vote to a democrat if your libertarian didn't make it to the 2nd round.
Since there isn't a 2-round voting system in the US (I think). You should vote democrat for the time being.
However, correct me if I'm wrong, in the SENATE, your vote won't boil down to 1 person. There are hundreds of people. If you vote for a libertarian senator, your vote will have a higher chance of voting someone libertarian into government.
With the president, it's "All or nothing"
With the senate, it's "4 or just 2 senators"
Then the senators can work from within the system to give your country a 3! party government or maybe restrict the power of the president and redirect it to the ministers or parliament.
But the "evil" political geeks in the 2 big parties will probably have thought up a system against that as well.
Is this what the future holds for the US?
Companies creating laws that take away rights of citizens? Corporations that make people consume as much as possible using any means necessary?
It looks like the corporations vs the rest of the world. Only the corporations are used to organising themselves and normal people aren't.
How unfortunate that the representatives of the citizen are only representing themselves and corporations. I was about to suggest that the "normal" people form a group to fight evil groups somehow, but that's supposed to be your government's job.
Instead, my advice is to just vote after checking out internet news that is unbiased instead of watching corporate US TV news.
The fastest way to change patent law into something sensible is to trigger patent wars.
Adobe is getting hit with a submarine patent for something in it's PDF reader.
I suggest that people who are against software patents help point submarine patent holders towards a big-business' that can be sued.
When big business' can't DO big-business you'll see sofware patents removed really quickly because:
1. Big-Business can't do business
2. Big-business -> "influences" government.
3. Government changes law.
The advantage with that is, it costs only the price of a phonecall/E-mail. The problem is that submarine patent holders are in it for the money and can be bought off so Adobe can keep on making patented software.
So, an alternative would be for the EFF or similar organization to get as many trivial but legal-proof software patents of it's own and use those to completely block corporations like Adobe or MS from selling software with OUR "inventions". You'll see legislation change with lightning speed in our favor for a change.
The patent law situation is absurd, and because average people don't have the insight that we have, we have to SHOW people how absurd the situation is.
Sure, things will get ugly for a while but setting things right once and for all is better than hoping for the best. Even corporations can learn if they have to and this way, they have to. Start the war to teach evildoers a ($100.000 a day) lesson.
Anybody see holes in this plan?
As the submitter wrote, this guy is one of the examples of why: "There is no question that cruise missile, UAV, bio-warfare, chemical weapons technology, and probably nuclear technologies will all continue to fall in cost significantly for the foreseeable future."
There are model airplanes with gyroscopic autopilots to buy as well.
Anyway, I think it's better to remove the source of the threat by not creating new terrorists instead of trying to herd every possible terrorist or terror facilitator (like the guy in the story).
It's like what the RIAA MPAA is trying to do with downloaders. Much more efficient to stop it at the relatively small and clear source than at the numerous and hidden end-points.
And guess what the W. Bush government and CIA did? four years ago, the whole of the Netherlands were like: "What the fuck? Why did Americans vote for Bush instead of Gore?" I guess we're missing American news media.
Anyway, original point, things are getting more dangerous and it's better to make sure nobody wants to harm you than to push back the danger. We eventually want world peace to happen don't we?
* EDGE (UK):
The best games magazine there is, also offers insights into the development side of the industry
* C'T (Germany): One of the best computing magazines, Germans are very thorough.
* WIRED (US): They seem to be on top of all the new cool science and tech.
* Other science news magazines for average smart ppl:
They didn't design it like you suggested because you have more clue than Nokia
Traditionally, port communications are safeguarded by the application behind the port. This means that if you have 13 network applications, there are 13 possible ways of someone owning your system with a trojan.
On the other hand, portknocking is handled by a single daemon that is simpler than most applications. Portknocking could even be handled by the OS.
This means that instead of having to trust several net-connected programs with your system security, whose primary focus will probably not be safety, you only have to trust 1 program which IS focused on security. Added to that, a portknocking program is easier to make safe because it's simpler than most other programs which have to handle both network defence AND some other task (Instant Messaging).
This is a bit offtopic but what is the correct way to spell the "to-do" from to-do list?
:O
dictionary.com didn't help
Is it "to do" or "to-do"?
Not knowing this is driving me slowly insane
I agree with you.
Computers are supposed to be our slaves. They should serve us in the way we like them to. I would like Linux to have directory names that are clearer and help me figure out/tweak/fix my OS more easily. I should not have to bend my brain just so the computer can have an easier time.
Off the top of my head, computers do two things:
- Help us do things that are otherwise impossible.
- Help us do those things faster, more efficiently or more easily.
When you can help people use their computers more easily by making the directory names intuitive, you should go for it. It would be great if a person of average intelligence can understand what a certain directory in his OS is used for without having to memorize anything. As you know, human memory is weak and the memory of an arcane directory structure will break if not refreshed often enough. People will like Linux more, explore their system more and will make less mistakes if the directory structure is human readable.
I guess that when you're a kernel hacker, you tend to forget that it's BOTH about the end result (a nice slave) AND the correct/elegant way to achieve that result because you're spending your time mostly on the how, not the ultimate why. I don't know how the traditional directories got their their names and why they were born but was it all thought out logically? Was there a plan and good reason for doing it like this? Well, they did think about the new way of doing it and they have good reasons.
Let me give you another argument. Linux advocates often say that one of the strengths of Open Source is that there is diversity and that the forks and experiments strengthen the software ecosystem. Well, that 'Darwinism' will only work if you select the best 'mutations' and discard the "old organisms" that didn't work. I think that everyone with an open mind would agree that, from the end user's point of view, 'programs' is better than "usr/bin". If you don't select a new way of doing things once in a while, what's the point of experiments and diversity? You might as well keep things just like they were in the beginning forever.
I know switching will be painful because of existing applications but Linux doesn't have 90% market share yet. I know it will but my point is, if the painful switch to a new directory structure is done NOW, it will inconvenience a lot less people than when it would be done when it's the most popular OS on the planet. On top of that, I think it will help Linux achieve that 90% faster.
The computer should be my slave and bend over backwards to please ME. It should use more processor, memory and storage to please ME. I should not have to waste more time, think harder and be aggravated JUST so the PC has an easier time (has to use less storage/memory/cycles).
I will give you one final example of why this way of thinking is good in my opinion. I've been computing in Windows 2000 until now because I've started with Windows, because Counter-Strike and Photoshop are Windows (Mac) only and because I think Linux would cost me more time and aggravation than keeping Windows patched and cleaned. However, I have been keeping an eye on MaxOS X, Linux and other Open Source operating systems like FreeBSD because I know they're better from a system point of view. Also, I know that Microsoft have done evil things and I'm convinced will do evil things in the future.
I have decided to switch to another OS because of ROX and GoboLinux. I'll try different combinations of GoboLinux, Rox, FreeBSD and installed Knoppix and decide afterwards. (any suggestions for a beginner?) If that doesn't work out for me I'll have to save for an iBook.
I'm not too proud to beg so please help make the the world a friendlier and less MS place and open yourself to that "discard the old and embrace the better" mentality that you demand of Windows users. Support and advocate the ROX and GoboLinux way.
Slightly offtopic: Some people argue against the "every file of a program contai
The perfect display technology is coming from Philips R&D.
It's based on electrowetting. Basically, one of the three colours of an RGB pixel is made up of a film of oil. The oil normally spreads/clings all over the tiny surface to form a solid color. The surface under the oil is made of a special material that attracts water ONLY if it's under electrical current.
Now, if you want to remove the oil to reveal the color of the surface under it, you electrify the surface below the oil, the water above the oil will worm it's way towards the surface because it's attracted and it will push away the oil to the side very quickly. Voila, you just changed the color of the (sub)pixel.
It gets better. The display tech isn't based on RGB like I wrote above, that was just an easy way to explain it. It's based on the CMYK color model just like printed paper/magazines are.
RGB is additive, it adds colour from the display from 3 different subpixels to give the appearance of white light when they are on full blast.
CMYK is subtractive, it subtracts colours from white light and that's how this display tech works. You bathe the display in white light and the oil of the subpixels either cover the whole surface of the pixel and subtract all light to show a black pixel, or they "get out of the way" and show the white surface under the oil to show a white pixel.
Click the first link ("A reflective display based on electrowetting")on the page I linked above. Look under the text: "Main display properties" where it shows a closeup of 2 pixels. Stand far away from your monitor and squint your eyes. The top pixel will appear black and the bottom pixel will appear white. Just like printed paper (use a magnifying glass on a magazine).
Why is this better than RGB? well, it means that the display will behave like a magazine, the more sunlight, the better (as with a magazine). If you want to view the display in the dark, you just bounce an internal white-light source from the top of the display using a "front scattering film" that is stuck on top of the screen and acts like a million little mirrors, bouncing the white light directly onto the pixels and back into your eye. The GameBoy Advance SP has a scattering film like that. Either use the film or just shine a light onto it (the bulb in your room).
What it all boils down to is this:
- The display is faster than TFT/LCD. You'll be able to watch video and play fast moving games without the blurring of LCD.
- The display is durable. OLED and Plasma will be junk in just a short time. Especially the blue OLED subpixels.
- It uses very little power. It's much less than CRT and will probably beat LCD as well.
- You can use it outside, the more light, the better. It will enable a display that is: "at least two times brighter than what is possible with any other technology".
- It's flat screen tech. It'll be about the same thickness as LCD and it'll be easier to make into a big screen as LCD. Plasma screens are super heavy and need their own cooling fan.
It'll be the perfect display, buy CRT for colour correctness and FPS games, buy LCD for laptops or if you don't do prepress/fast games. SKIP OLED! and wait for Electrowetting displays which will combine all the good stuff from the other techs and have none of the disadvantages. It's basically "done" as far as I can see, it'll just need tweaking, unlike OLED which needs some kind of breakthrough to achieve durability. The only thing I'm not sure of is the number of different colors it can display inbetween black and white, will it be 24 bits or less?
The problem with robots which are evolved to handle a task, is that you have no idea of what the programming is like in their heads. You have a working robot, but you don't know how to program one yourself. All you can do is train it and analyze the "brain patterns" afterwards. These things are hard to decipher.
The robots-as-dogs method will probably win because it gets results quicker than the programmed-thought-by-human method. Could be dangerous though, because you don't know what makes it tick.
Asimov's three laws of robotics seem appropriate in this case.
How about eggplants?
I'm 99.999999999999 % sure that god doesn't exist.
I'm also 99.999999999999 sure that Earth's gravity will not suddenly reverse itself and shoot everything into space.
I agree that the bible has laid down some useful rules to follow, have 1 days rest a week, don't kill etc. but the world has changed since it was written. You don't have abstain from sex to prevent overpopulation anymore, just use a condom or the pill.
Religion is just a story (99.999 etc.). Feels good to be part of that epic story and "belong" to a group but I suggest to all believers to stop believing in this disneyworld and face the harsh and wonderful reality.