Erasing a bit at 300 K (27C or 80F) theoretically costs a minimal energy of 2.87e-21 J. That is, an ideal non-reversive computer at 3 GHz erasing 1 GByte at each cycle would just need about 70 milliwatt. It's obvious that our current computers are very far from that limit.
Also note that current power supplies are all but efficient. That is, a lot of the energy your computer draws from the grid doesn't even reach the CPU.
Since our main losses are obviously not the inevitable cost of non-reversible computing, but other losses dominate, reversible computing will clearly not be the solution to the current computing energy problems.
At another line of thought: Imagine you use your real name, and some time later you happen to become a celebrity. Are you then not allowed to continue using your own name because it's now a celebrity name?
I've been using 'CmdrTaco' online for around a decade now. It predates the existence of this website. It has followed me from game to game, both local, networked, and massive.
Somehow my behaviour is quite the opposite: On Slashdot, I'm "maxwell demon", but that's the only place I use that nickname. Indeed, I usually don't use the same nickname on different places. I'm in another online forum as well, but with another nickname. My Wikipedia nickname is again different, and when I took place in a PBEM game some time ago, I again used a different nickname, and I used yet another nickname in a Web based chat. Should you ever find a "maxwell demon" anywhere else but on Slashdot, most likely it's not me. I also wouldn't care if someone took that name on any other online forum, game or whatever, as long as he didn't pretend he were the same person who uses that name on Slashdot (i.e. me).
However, if I were forced to substantially change my nickname on a certain place after using it for some time, I would probably also be pissed. If there's a validity check on nicknames, then do it at the very beginning. I wouldn't mind if e.g. on a new forum I'd try to register/log in as "Spock", and then got told that Star Trek names are not allowed in that forum (a rule which I'd consider pointless, but otherwise wouldn't care about). However, if after using the name "Spock" for some time, I suddenly got told that it's against the rules, and I should change it, then I'd be pissed unless they gave me a very convincing reason for that.
You can simply measure the direct wave coming from the access point as well. After all, it's not that you get only the reflected wave. As added bonus, any distortion of the signal by going through the wall applies simlarly to both the direct and the reflected wave, therefore allowing you to compensate for that.
You have to use a material which absorbs the microwaves. Water should be a good absorber, therefore prepare to live in a gigantic aquarium... which has the added advantage that it will also protect you from neutron bombs:-)
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
I strongly doubt Einstein ever said that. After all, he was a die-hard realist, which was also the reason why he had big problems with the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Maybe the NSA will just use the waves your WLAN sends out anyway. Which has the advantage (to the NSA) that there's no additional wave source which you might be able to detect.
What about inserting/deleting single frames at well-known (to Disney, of course not to the receiver) positions before/after cuts? There's no way the person copying it could know if the cut should have been one frame earlier or later. Moreover this is likely to be relatively robust to recompression (yes, there may be some dropped frames, but unless it's a very bad quality recording, the probability that more than one or two are exactly at movie cuts should be very low. Now you may claim that it's possible to randomly cut frames at any cut on recompression. But that assumes the one copying it knows or at least suspects that information may be coded in this way (I'm sure Disney will never say in which way they watermark those movies). I'm sure there are other simple ways to robustly hide data in a movie which one finds with very little thinking. If several of them are used, I'm sure almost anyone wanting to remove the watermark will miss at least one of them, unless he is very well informed about the watermarking used. Of course with enough knowledge of the type of watermarking, one can destroy any watermark (simply overwrite it with a different one).
What if you don't have Windows? Are the BIOS producers providing flash programs for Linux, *BSD,...? I doubt so. And I also doubt the BIOS flashing programs will work under Wine.
The Whatever Chocklate Company (in the following named PRODUCER) gives you (in the following named LICENSEE) the non-exclusive license to eat the nougat pralines (in the following named PRODUCT) subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. The PRODUCT is licensed, not sold. Any use of the PRODUCT other than explicitly permitted by this license is prohibited.
2. The PRODUCT is licensed to the LICENSEE personally. Any sublicensing, further selling or other redistribution of the PRODUCT is not allowed.
3. The LICENSEE agrees not to reverse-engineer or modify the PRODUCT in any form, except for the modifications which typically are made by the process of eating the PRODUCT.
4. The license is automatically terminated at the date printed on the side of the box the pralines came in.
5. The LICENSEE agrees not to speak negatively about our product in any public or larger private forum, included, but not limited to internet forums, public and private festivities, TV and print media.
6. The LICENSEE agrees not to eat this product together with competing products.
7. Disclaimer of Waranty: THIS PRODUCT IS PROVIDED AS-IS, WITHOUT ANY EXPLICIT OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTY OF EATABILITY OR TASTINESS, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. THE LICENSEE AGREES TO INDEMNIFY THE PRODUCER FROM ANY LEGAL ACTIONS WHICH MIGHT ARISE FROM THE USE OF THIS PRODUCT.
I hope I got the legalese right:-)
Re:Breach Of Contract Is Not A Crime
on
End User License Gems
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
when't the last time you tried to return the pre-installed software on a new machine for a refund? Oh, you can't.
Try to give back the whole product you got (that is, including the computer it was pre-installed on). I guess if you buy a box of pralines and try to give back only the nougat pralines, you'll have problems as well.
Of course, there may be no observer to whom the use of both is simultaneous. Which is completely compatible with the Theory of Relativity, since the non-simultaneousness of events which are inside the lightcones of each other (which especially is true for the events along the world line of a single observer) is invariant under Lorentz transforms.
In related news, Bush is working heavily with Monsanto to ensure that the DMCA is found to be applicable to current life forms. Scientists caught attempting to reverse engineer life should expect to be raided by the FBI by the end of year.
In addition, soon any unauthorized reproduction of genetical material will be forbidden. If you want children, you first have to buy a patent license. It has not yet been determined if reproduction of genetic material during normal life cycle will also need a license. The president pointed out the huge advantage this would have in the war on terror: Then the terrorists could be caught when they tried to renew their patent licenses.
Maybe a more informative number would be lawyers per tech employee. After all, it makes a big difference if a company with 10000 employees has 9 lawyers, or if a company with 10 employees has 9 lawyers.
I'd like to know that relation specifically for SCO:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed it would be a big surprise if MS didn't include support for Word documents even if OOo wouldn't
Erasing a bit at 300 K (27C or 80F) theoretically costs a minimal energy of 2.87e-21 J. That is, an ideal non-reversive computer at 3 GHz erasing 1 GByte at each cycle would just need about 70 milliwatt. It's obvious that our current computers are very far from that limit.
Also note that current power supplies are all but efficient. That is, a lot of the energy your computer draws from the grid doesn't even reach the CPU.
Since our main losses are obviously not the inevitable cost of non-reversible computing, but other losses dominate, reversible computing will clearly not be the solution to the current computing energy problems.
Then will we soon have a Greenpeace campain to use only assembler, because of the impact on the environment?
Well, you know, tubes are usually made of glass, which basically is oxidized silicon. Therefore tube-based computers are silicon-based as well. :-)
Here's the translation. All irrelevant stuff has been removed.
--- begin of translation ---
--- end of translation ---
Hope this helps.
SUE Linux? Is that a distribution specifically tailored for lawyers?
I don't think he'd get promoted: Failure is not an option!
I for one welcome our new Violated overlord.
At another line of thought: Imagine you use your real name, and some time later you happen to become a celebrity. Are you then not allowed to continue using your own name because it's now a celebrity name?
You know, Slashdot doesn't evolve, it's all Intelligent Design.
Somehow my behaviour is quite the opposite: On Slashdot, I'm "maxwell demon", but that's the only place I use that nickname. Indeed, I usually don't use the same nickname on different places. I'm in another online forum as well, but with another nickname. My Wikipedia nickname is again different, and when I took place in a PBEM game some time ago, I again used a different nickname, and I used yet another nickname in a Web based chat. Should you ever find a "maxwell demon" anywhere else but on Slashdot, most likely it's not me. I also wouldn't care if someone took that name on any other online forum, game or whatever, as long as he didn't pretend he were the same person who uses that name on Slashdot (i.e. me).
However, if I were forced to substantially change my nickname on a certain place after using it for some time, I would probably also be pissed. If there's a validity check on nicknames, then do it at the very beginning. I wouldn't mind if e.g. on a new forum I'd try to register/log in as "Spock", and then got told that Star Trek names are not allowed in that forum (a rule which I'd consider pointless, but otherwise wouldn't care about). However, if after using the name "Spock" for some time, I suddenly got told that it's against the rules, and I should change it, then I'd be pissed unless they gave me a very convincing reason for that.
You can simply measure the direct wave coming from the access point as well. After all, it's not that you get only the reflected wave. As added bonus, any distortion of the signal by going through the wall applies simlarly to both the direct and the reflected wave, therefore allowing you to compensate for that.
You have to use a material which absorbs the microwaves. Water should be a good absorber, therefore prepare to live in a gigantic aquarium ... which has the added advantage that it will also protect you from neutron bombs :-)
Or how long until the RIAA uses it to find out which music you hear, so they can charge you on it?
Tinfoil is an excellent reflector. Therefore I'm sure tinfoil hats will actually help the snooper by creating much better signals.
I strongly doubt Einstein ever said that. After all, he was a die-hard realist, which was also the reason why he had big problems with the interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Maybe the NSA will just use the waves your WLAN sends out anyway. Which has the advantage (to the NSA) that there's no additional wave source which you might be able to detect.
What about inserting/deleting single frames at well-known (to Disney, of course not to the receiver) positions before/after cuts? There's no way the person copying it could know if the cut should have been one frame earlier or later. Moreover this is likely to be relatively robust to recompression (yes, there may be some dropped frames, but unless it's a very bad quality recording, the probability that more than one or two are exactly at movie cuts should be very low.
Now you may claim that it's possible to randomly cut frames at any cut on recompression. But that assumes the one copying it knows or at least suspects that information may be coded in this way (I'm sure Disney will never say in which way they watermark those movies).
I'm sure there are other simple ways to robustly hide data in a movie which one finds with very little thinking. If several of them are used, I'm sure almost anyone wanting to remove the watermark will miss at least one of them, unless he is very well informed about the watermarking used.
Of course with enough knowledge of the type of watermarking, one can destroy any watermark (simply overwrite it with a different one).
What if you don't have Windows? ...? I doubt so.
Are the BIOS producers providing flash programs for Linux, *BSD,
And I also doubt the BIOS flashing programs will work under Wine.
Nougat Praline End User License Agreement (EULA)
:-)
The Whatever Chocklate Company (in the following named PRODUCER) gives you (in the following named LICENSEE) the non-exclusive license to eat the nougat pralines (in the following named PRODUCT) subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. The PRODUCT is licensed, not sold. Any use of the PRODUCT other than explicitly permitted by this license is prohibited.
2. The PRODUCT is licensed to the LICENSEE personally. Any sublicensing, further selling or other redistribution of the PRODUCT is not allowed.
3. The LICENSEE agrees not to reverse-engineer or modify the PRODUCT in any form, except for the modifications which typically are made by the process of eating the PRODUCT.
4. The license is automatically terminated at the date printed on the side of the box the pralines came in.
5. The LICENSEE agrees not to speak negatively about our product in any public or larger private forum, included, but not limited to internet forums, public and private festivities, TV and print media.
6. The LICENSEE agrees not to eat this product together with competing products.
7. Disclaimer of Waranty: THIS PRODUCT IS PROVIDED AS-IS, WITHOUT ANY EXPLICIT OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTY OF EATABILITY OR TASTINESS, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. THE LICENSEE AGREES TO INDEMNIFY THE PRODUCER FROM ANY LEGAL ACTIONS WHICH MIGHT ARISE FROM THE USE OF THIS PRODUCT.
I hope I got the legalese right
Try to give back the whole product you got (that is, including the computer it was pre-installed on). I guess if you buy a box of pralines and try to give back only the nougat pralines, you'll have problems as well.
Of course, there may be no observer to whom the use of both is simultaneous. Which is completely compatible with the Theory of Relativity, since the non-simultaneousness of events which are inside the lightcones of each other (which especially is true for the events along the world line of a single observer) is invariant under Lorentz transforms.
The same is of course true for the brain.
In addition, soon any unauthorized reproduction of genetical material will be forbidden. If you want children, you first have to buy a patent license. It has not yet been determined if reproduction of genetic material during normal life cycle will also need a license. The president pointed out the huge advantage this would have in the war on terror: Then the terrorists could be caught when they tried to renew their patent licenses.
Maybe a more informative number would be lawyers per tech employee. After all, it makes a big difference if a company with 10000 employees has 9 lawyers, or if a company with 10 employees has 9 lawyers.
:-)
I'd like to know that relation specifically for SCO