Horses!?! And what are these vidio carts you're talking about?! In my my day we had to push a ball of copper up and down a hill all day, using the prince albert in our knobs to generate current, and let me tell you, it was uphill BOTH ways! And you had something that DREW your pictures FOR you?!? We got a rusty nail with which we had to draw the pictures in our retina! The refresh rate was murderous, but we liked it, anyway!
What I wonder is why just not put all the transistors, the chip and the ram...on the other side of the circuitboard! No-one looses a pci slot that way.
Huh? That's how I get my dual monitor setup; geforce in the agp, old pci gfx card in the 1st pci slot (some cards still complain if they're not in the first slot). Losing my first pci slot is NOT worth it, as I need my second monitor for photoshopping and 3dsmax.
That's not data traveling, that's assumptions you are making. And that's not actual data (except in the sense that you can say "based on this, I now make this assumption; the data I have consists of that assumption").
There is a HUGE difference between data and assumptions.
It's like saying royalty travels at an instantanious speed, because as soon as the king is dead, his son is king. No data has traveled, and you also don't know at the time that the king has died that something has happened: you only know that that transfer has taken place when you hear the news...so it's not even like royalty, as royalty travels at the speed of newsbroadcasts:)
Sorry, I mean 'action at a distance', which also has a snazzy buzzword description which I thought was somewhere along those lines...but I can't be bothered to have a look through my books at the moment.
So should we base the definition on the usage of people who have degrees in mechanics and physics, like the people who work for ESA and NASA, who call a UFO an "Unidentified Flying Object" and use that for asteroids, comets and other phenomenon which haven't been classified yet, or do we use the nutcase's definition, meaning flying saucer?
I kind of agree with you...I'm just wondering why they would choose the hydrigon band to broadcast in...that's one assumption of SETI's which I just don't get.
Me, I'd also start looking into the modulations of gamma-ray bursts, too. Or any other phenomenon which could carry information. Just in the off chance....kinda like SETI is doing now.
As I was reading your post, it struck me more and more that what you were saying does not at all add up in comparison to what I've read on the subject in Scientific American and Science. But then came this:
"Additionally, if the two photon are emitted exactly 180 degrees opposite of each other, and both are traveling at velocity c, the transmission of data has a theoretical velocity of twice the speed of light."
This just doesn't fit with current physics. Why? Because those photons travel in a reference frame...it's not called general/special !relativety! for nothing. The photons (and the data) travel at a speed of c...also relative to each other, due to the space-time dilation effect (ie it space-time compresses the faster you travel). Thing is, we don't know why or with what mechanism paired particles retain that odd connection...that's why it's called the 'strange attraction':) We just know that it happens. And it has already been used to transmit data...check out the Scientific American of a couple of months back, which had an article about how this was done for not just a particle or two, but for two whole volumes of gas.
Ok, so you save 10 minutes per ship...still adds up. As for faith in scientific/technological research; yes I do. It's what allows me to type this into a computer in the first place.
Sure, there have been dumb things, but for example nuclear fusion will happen. Basic research must be done. And this isn't just basic research, this is application.
As for that last bit: *thump*. That was the sound of my head hitting my desk. I was talking elctrovalencies...which won't change. Pick up a mechanical engineers handbook, once upon a time, please.
Oh, wow...did you know that cars run on combustible gasoline? Or that powerplants have large electromagnets? Or that everyone has a cellphone which transmits a signal every time you get called? Or that....get the point?
Who cares!? You have terrorists on the brain...at least the Irish and British didn't overreact.
An hour saved on each ship that docks is HUGE!!! savings in a year. Remember, we're talking about one of the (if not/the/) biggest shipping harbour in the world. These aren't pleasure yachts, these are the largest containerships on earth. If you have had any experience with logistics, you'de know that an hour saved on something which happens so may times each day, every day of the year adds up to large increases in throughput, and thus in profit.
As for the 'problems' you forsee...do you REALLY think they haven't been adressed? They'll make sure that the electromagnetic field is shaped, that it's (eventually) going to be cheaper (that's what cost/profitability studies are for) and that it doesn't affect the GPS system. Just as an example: if they hadn't already stated that they'd ensured the cargo wouldn't be affected by their new system, would/you/ have thought of that?
Also, most ship's hulls are already under an electromagnetic influence: to halt corrosion, there's a block of metal called the "selfssacrificing metal" (direct dutch translation). What this does is have a different electrovalence than the hull, to ensure that the metal of that block is corroded instead of the hull. So who cares about "magnetising the hull"...it's already done, and won't affect the navigation in the slightest.
I don't agree...look at most any project, and you'll discover that the mayority of the cost is in personel; people cost a lot of money, above and beyond just the money you pay them (think cafeteria, insurance, etc). Plus I think that you need about 5-10 people to moor a ship (but that I don't know).
That would be a nice ideal (I've thought about it also), if it weren't for the fact that then you'd have to deal with a huge dumb mass of people not doing anything. These are the people who don't know what to do with themselves on a sunday, except drink themselves silly. We need menial labour just to keep people like that occupied...they can't do anything high level (like programm, tech support, designinging new engines or what have you), so it'd low level work or idleness. And idle hands...
My guess is that even if they'd have nothing to do and have their food, housing clothing etc taken care of, they'd still be unhappy. People are just that irrational.
Ok...so how are you going to get thos boxes on store shelves? There's a whole logistical process behind that, as well as a sales pitch/network to figure out. That's a whole lot of time and effort, on top of the schedule you have to keep to just to make the game. It's just not that simple.
It's just that when you're a big company, you can afford to hire all those expensive artists to make the game look good, or hire that extra programmer to fix collision detection or add in some other gameplay feature. Or what about compatibility testing? That takes time and money the smaller players will have difficulty with.
Slashdot Mirror
Shit, let's just hop that it isn't Matrox who takes over from ATI ;)
Man, I hope he does!
Horses!?! And what are these vidio carts you're talking about?! In my my day we had to push a ball of copper up and down a hill all day, using the prince albert in our knobs to generate current, and let me tell you, it was uphill BOTH ways! And you had something that DREW your pictures FOR you?!? We got a rusty nail with which we had to draw the pictures in our retina! The refresh rate was murderous, but we liked it, anyway!
What I wonder is why just not put all the transistors, the chip and the ram...on the other side of the circuitboard! No-one looses a pci slot that way.
Huh? That's how I get my dual monitor setup; geforce in the agp, old pci gfx card in the 1st pci slot (some cards still complain if they're not in the first slot). Losing my first pci slot is NOT worth it, as I need my second monitor for photoshopping and 3dsmax.
That's not data traveling, that's assumptions you are making. And that's not actual data (except in the sense that you can say "based on this, I now make this assumption; the data I have consists of that assumption").
:)
There is a HUGE difference between data and assumptions.
It's like saying royalty travels at an instantanious speed, because as soon as the king is dead, his son is king. No data has traveled, and you also don't know at the time that the king has died that something has happened: you only know that that transfer has taken place when you hear the news...so it's not even like royalty, as royalty travels at the speed of newsbroadcasts
Sorry, I mean 'action at a distance', which also has a snazzy buzzword description which I thought was somewhere along those lines...but I can't be bothered to have a look through my books at the moment.
Heh...I just re-read my phrasing...that was what I meant to intimate :)
So should we base the definition on the usage of people who have degrees in mechanics and physics, like the people who work for ESA and NASA, who call a UFO an "Unidentified Flying Object" and use that for asteroids, comets and other phenomenon which haven't been classified yet, or do we use the nutcase's definition, meaning flying saucer?
Use defines language, indeed.
I kind of agree with you...I'm just wondering why they would choose the hydrigon band to broadcast in...that's one assumption of SETI's which I just don't get.
Me, I'd also start looking into the modulations of gamma-ray bursts, too. Or any other phenomenon which could carry information. Just in the off chance....kinda like SETI is doing now.
As I was reading your post, it struck me more and more that what you were saying does not at all add up in comparison to what I've read on the subject in Scientific American and Science. But then came this:
:) We just know that it happens. And it has already been used to transmit data...check out the Scientific American of a couple of months back, which had an article about how this was done for not just a particle or two, but for two whole volumes of gas.
"Additionally, if the two photon are emitted exactly 180 degrees opposite of each other, and both are traveling at velocity c, the transmission of data has a theoretical velocity of twice the speed of light."
This just doesn't fit with current physics. Why? Because those photons travel in a reference frame...it's not called general/special !relativety! for nothing. The photons (and the data) travel at a speed of c...also relative to each other, due to the space-time dilation effect (ie it space-time compresses the faster you travel). Thing is, we don't know why or with what mechanism paired particles retain that odd connection...that's why it's called the 'strange attraction'
Ok, so you save 10 minutes per ship...still adds up. As for faith in scientific/technological research; yes I do. It's what allows me to type this into a computer in the first place.
Sure, there have been dumb things, but for example nuclear fusion will happen. Basic research must be done. And this isn't just basic research, this is application.
As for that last bit: *thump*. That was the sound of my head hitting my desk. I was talking elctrovalencies...which won't change. Pick up a mechanical engineers handbook, once upon a time, please.
Hurrah!
You know, those abbaci worked real well for centuries, too...why oh why did we ever think about replacing them?
But container ships wouldn't give much of a rats behind...
Oh, wow...did you know that cars run on combustible gasoline? Or that powerplants have large electromagnets? Or that everyone has a cellphone which transmits a signal every time you get called? Or that....get the point?
Who cares!? You have terrorists on the brain...at least the Irish and British didn't overreact.
An hour saved on each ship that docks is HUGE!!! savings in a year. Remember, we're talking about one of the (if not /the/) biggest shipping harbour in the world. These aren't pleasure yachts, these are the largest containerships on earth. If you have had any experience with logistics, you'de know that an hour saved on something which happens so may times each day, every day of the year adds up to large increases in throughput, and thus in profit.
/you/ have thought of that?
As for the 'problems' you forsee...do you REALLY think they haven't been adressed? They'll make sure that the electromagnetic field is shaped, that it's (eventually) going to be cheaper (that's what cost/profitability studies are for) and that it doesn't affect the GPS system. Just as an example: if they hadn't already stated that they'd ensured the cargo wouldn't be affected by their new system, would
Also, most ship's hulls are already under an electromagnetic influence: to halt corrosion, there's a block of metal called the "selfssacrificing metal" (direct dutch translation). What this does is have a different electrovalence than the hull, to ensure that the metal of that block is corroded instead of the hull. So who cares about "magnetising the hull"...it's already done, and won't affect the navigation in the slightest.
I don't agree...look at most any project, and you'll discover that the mayority of the cost is in personel; people cost a lot of money, above and beyond just the money you pay them (think cafeteria, insurance, etc). Plus I think that you need about 5-10 people to moor a ship (but that I don't know).
Also, how do you put a cost on human life?
That would be a nice ideal (I've thought about it also), if it weren't for the fact that then you'd have to deal with a huge dumb mass of people not doing anything. These are the people who don't know what to do with themselves on a sunday, except drink themselves silly. We need menial labour just to keep people like that occupied...they can't do anything high level (like programm, tech support, designinging new engines or what have you), so it'd low level work or idleness. And idle hands...
My guess is that even if they'd have nothing to do and have their food, housing clothing etc taken care of, they'd still be unhappy. People are just that irrational.
Oh, you mean like Quake 3 did?
Hmmmm...about 1 meter by 20 centimeters should do it :)
Yup...and it's all being field tested in the great firewalls of China and the middle east.
Ok...so how are you going to get thos boxes on store shelves? There's a whole logistical process behind that, as well as a sales pitch/network to figure out. That's a whole lot of time and effort, on top of the schedule you have to keep to just to make the game. It's just not that simple.
So what about the gaming websites like bluesnews, ign, gamespot/spy? Or does the term "payola" extend from the music industry to the gaming industry?
It's just that when you're a big company, you can afford to hire all those expensive artists to make the game look good, or hire that extra programmer to fix collision detection or add in some other gameplay feature. Or what about compatibility testing? That takes time and money the smaller players will have difficulty with.