Here is an example use of this technology. The piece needed was to strengthen the jawbone of an elderly lady. We actually printed it out (plastic, not bone, but you get the idea), and it was shown to fit quite nicely during an operation.
The problem? FDA won't let the doctors leave it in there. They just got to put it in place and take a few pics before removing it again. So the woman still has a weakened jawbone, despite the fact that the technology exists to help her.
My post only mentioned the third, since I consider that to be the most interesting/plausible. (Small black holes actually evaporate via Hawking radiation, so I never really worried about them. And strangelets just seemed too silly altogether, especially since a strange quark decays weakly to an up quark, an electron, and an anti-neutrino.)
Anyway, you'll probably claim I'm just spouting more "technobabble", so read the article (and its references in Scientific American for yourself.
Or you could just take my word for it. I am, after all, completing a degree in particle physics.;)
Kinda sucks that 2 hours 14 minutes into it, the final conclusion is cut off. Reminds me of "The Matrix Reloaded". You'd think there would be some sort of conclusion.... Maybe it was just a glitch with that one.mp3? Guess I'll have to listen to another.
I take it the universe isn't "big", by your definition?
There was some mild concern in the scientific community before RHIC turned on that it might destroy the universe. As I recall, the idea was that the entire universe might be at an unstable equillibrium, and that this experiment could cause a transition to a lower ground state. In so doing, it catastrophically change the entire universe (which would really piss of those aliens, I'm sure).
The counterargument was that these energies have probably occurred somewhere else, so if that were a concern, it would already have happened (the aliens would have tried this experiment, for example).
In the end, it was decided that we might as well go ahead with it. We were pretty sure it was safe, and if we were wrong, there wouldn't be anyone left to complain anyway!
They say "rip-proof" and "self-destructing", but how can you prevent someone from copying the bits on a CD? And how does a CD self destruct?? Sounds like they're fooling with the Windoze registry. I find it highly unlikely their tactics will have any effect on Linux users....
Ok, so everyone knows our ingress filters should only allow specific ports (22, 25, 80, etc) that we need public access to, and RELATED/ESTABLISHED connections. But what about egress filters? I don't have a clue what can be reasonably blocked, other than perhaps requiring the "from" IP to be mine or broadcast (to prevent sourcing an IP-changing DoS attack).
One thing you can do under AIX/IRIX/etc that you can't do under linux is to grow a filesystem on the fly. You have to umount first, which is rather silly in a production environment. Of course, if you're running XFS on your linux box, this wouldn't be an issue.
That comment was modded up as funny, but I actually know of a house built like that. It was the architect's second design (after a three-story "solar" house that was always the wrong temperature).
And by the way, if the "standing AC" in the original question meant taking a window AC and putting it in the middle of your room, DON'T. That's equivalent to leaving the refrigerator door open. From a physics perspective, you're pulling energy into your place, so overall it will heat up.
One idea I had once was to run water (hot/cold depending on what you're trying to accomplish). Passing it slowly through a long metal pipe would help. Adding heat-sink fins would be best. And then I realized I'd invented the radiator! Oh well, it was a good idea anyway (free heat/AC if you don't pay for your hot/cold water).
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry for the second post, but here's a lot more information on that project, including a picture of the operation itself.
The problem? FDA won't let the doctors leave it in there. They just got to put it in place and take a few pics before removing it again. So the woman still has a weakened jawbone, despite the fact that the technology exists to help her.
Here's a summary of the discussions about these concerns. The article mentions three primary concerns:
- Formation of Mini Black Holes
- Strangelets and Strange Matter
- Vacuum instabilities
My post only mentioned the third, since I consider that to be the most interesting/plausible. (Small black holes actually evaporate via Hawking radiation, so I never really worried about them. And strangelets just seemed too silly altogether, especially since a strange quark decays weakly to an up quark, an electron, and an anti-neutrino.)Anyway, you'll probably claim I'm just spouting more "technobabble", so read the article (and its references in Scientific American for yourself.
Or you could just take my word for it. I am, after all, completing a degree in particle physics. ;)
Kinda sucks that 2 hours 14 minutes into it, the final conclusion is cut off. Reminds me of "The Matrix Reloaded". You'd think there would be some sort of conclusion.... Maybe it was just a glitch with that one .mp3? Guess I'll have to listen to another.
I take it the universe isn't "big", by your definition?
There was some mild concern in the scientific community before RHIC turned on that it might destroy the universe. As I recall, the idea was that the entire universe might be at an unstable equillibrium, and that this experiment could cause a transition to a lower ground state. In so doing, it catastrophically change the entire universe (which would really piss of those aliens, I'm sure).
The counterargument was that these energies have probably occurred somewhere else, so if that were a concern, it would already have happened (the aliens would have tried this experiment, for example).
In the end, it was decided that we might as well go ahead with it. We were pretty sure it was safe, and if we were wrong, there wouldn't be anyone left to complain anyway!
They say "rip-proof" and "self-destructing", but how can you prevent someone from copying the bits on a CD? And how does a CD self destruct?? Sounds like they're fooling with the Windoze registry. I find it highly unlikely their tactics will have any effect on Linux users....
Is DeCSS dead? Doesn't seem like it. Similarly, how could they seriously put an end to Linux?
Anyone have suggestions?
Prove it. Give a command that can do it, or something. I certainly don't know of a way, unless something changed in the past couple months.
One thing you can do under AIX/IRIX/etc that you can't do under linux is to grow a filesystem on the fly. You have to umount first, which is rather silly in a production environment. Of course, if you're running XFS on your linux box, this wouldn't be an issue.
Google starts their webcrawl with the Stanford University home page. (Info based on a talk given by Craig SIlverstein, the directory of technology at Google.)
My university blacklisted hotmail. I wouldn't be surprised if other places did the same.
That comment was modded up as funny, but I actually know of a house built like that. It was the architect's second design (after a three-story "solar" house that was always the wrong temperature).
And by the way, if the "standing AC" in the original question meant taking a window AC and putting it in the middle of your room, DON'T. That's equivalent to leaving the refrigerator door open. From a physics perspective, you're pulling energy into your place, so overall it will heat up.
One idea I had once was to run water (hot/cold depending on what you're trying to accomplish). Passing it slowly through a long metal pipe would help. Adding heat-sink fins would be best. And then I realized I'd invented the radiator! Oh well, it was a good idea anyway (free heat/AC if you don't pay for your hot/cold water).