and yes, such a field would not just send forks flying and cause hallucinations: it'd probably be more than enough to cause everyone in the house to levitate.
Long before that happened it would have extracted any metal objects embedded in their bodies (fillings, surgical screws, leftover forceps, etc.) as well as most of the hemoglobin in their blood.
I hate when people post incorrect opinions as facts, yet they never seem to realize it turns a guy with a guess into a liar. Quit lying you lying liar.
He may be lying but he's actually correct. It's damned hard to affect a hard drive with any kind of external field: they're shielded pretty well for that reason. Also the voice coil positioning routines are pretty good at correcting positional errors on-the-fly: modern hard drives are fairly sophisticated real-time feedback systems. As other posters have pointed out, any field that intense would be having all kinds of other much more significant affects. Not to mention that a static field isn't going to have much of an effect on a cordless phone, as was also claimed.
Yeah. And I have the feeling the technical illiteracy of this whole case extends into the courtroom. I also have to wonder what kind of television sets these people have. Are they claiming that flat panels were affected by stray magnetic fields?
I also fail to see how a static magnetic field is going to bother a cordless phone, a computer, or any other piece of modern electronics. Maybe their neighbor is an amateur radio operator running a thousand watt linear in his living room. That would make a hell of a lot more sense than "magnetized joists."
Florida law treats a smartphone as a 'container' for the purposes of a search, similar to say a cardboard box open on the passenger seat
I don't know Floridian law, but does the box have to be open? If that's the case, a pass-coded cellphone is technically a sealed box.
What I want to know, is by what twisted reasoning did the California court not manage to interpret a cell phone as being a "personal effect"? And if not, what does constitute a "personal effect" such that it cannot be rifled through at will by a cop? Or maybe they just decided that "unreasonable search and seizure" is an outmoded concept.
Constitution-free society... coming soon to a State near you!
Ah - would you limit your replacement firmware choice to what that form shows is available for a given phone/orig-OS?
That's just one list and not all-inclusive. There are lots of third-party ROMs. Once you have your phone rooted, you can download a program called ROM Manager from the market: it will install a custom recovery partition and allow you to back up and restore your existing OS and applications, and will flash a number of the most popular mods, including Cyanogen and MIUI. It will only show ROMs that are compatible with your particular device.
For the sake of accuracy, the only carrier known to have ever done that in the US is AT&T
Okay, I'll take your word for that. I've never had a smartphone on anything other than T-Mobile at this point. On the other hand, even T-Mobile disallowed tethering apps early on (my first Android device was the venerable G1.) They eventually did a complete about-face on that score, and I haven't had any grief about non-Market apps or tethering or, well, anything else really. Which is why I was very upset when I first heard about the buyout.
The upper management of AT&T (or rather, SBC) should be in irons right now.
Will Sprint know that I've rooted my phone? How about if I enable WiFi hotspot on an unlimited data 4G phone... other than by auditing my total consumption and inferring? If they do guess, will I have violated some contract, or even just given them an excuse to cancel my contract?
If not, it seems there's practically nothing to lose except the HTC SenseUI, which seems worth losing. And in its absence, perhaps inspiration to write a different GUI shell myself, or with others.
Well, right now I have six different so-called "home apps" loaded on my G2. Some are variants of the stock launcher, others are completely and totally different. Sometimes I switch between them depending upon what I'm doing.
Well, you'd have to check cyanogenmod.com to see if your phone is on the list of supported devices. I've been running various CM versions continuously for almost three years now, and have yet to find an app that won't run. Quite the opposite: generally they perform better than under the equivalent stock release.
Yeah, I agree about HTC: that's too bad. I don't know if they've just gone "evil", or if this is an example of the known-evil carrier influence, but I stopped running stock firmware on any of my phones years ago and haven't looked back. That kind of behavior was a large part of my decision to go third-party (that and better battery life, more performance and more features than stock. Also, I didn't like being told that I can't do certain things, like tethering.)
Some carriers disable the "Allow Non-Market Apps" capability. That's enough right there to make me root and go with a CM or some other ROM.
I want a way to easily change the permissions granted to an application, without the application's knowledge. If I decide that an application has no business making or receiving a text message, I should be able to disable that capability, all without the application being aware that it's attempt to send a text message failed.
Cyanogenmod can do this if you enable some of the advanced features. Once the app is installed you can go in where you view the permissions it needs and toggle some of them off. Badly designed apps may crash, but most stuff I've done it to has happily continued running.
True. And if you're still concerned, run Droidwall. I do... if an app has no need for Internet it goes in the blacklist. If it then fails to run because of some stupid license check, or just the dev being a dick and insisting that his app get out whenever it wants, it gets uninstalled.
Is there at least a grid or DB somewhere of phones vs firmwares that indicates which OEM features are covered, and perhaps by which optional replacement? I thought phone fans were obsessive about collecting those kinds of details about the objects of their fetish.
You'd think they'd be similar because they're all ARM-based, overwhelmingly use Qualcomm radio chipsets, and all theoretically run Android... but software-wise the differences start at the kernel and device drivers, and just explode from there.
Now you understand why Samsung just hired Steve Kondik, founder of the Cyanogenmod project. They need someone like him very badly. Besides I, for one, won't consider a device if I can't get rid of the stock firmware and put Cyanogenmod (or another decent third-party ROM) on it. If nothing else, I simply do not trust the vendors and the carriers to play straight with me on the operating system.
You also have to give a lot of credit to the Cyanogen crew, when you look at the sheer number of supported devices, all across the spectrum from HTC to Samsung.
Problem is, you lose HTC Sense, which is one of the best UIs for Android.
In that case try one of the Virtuous Sense ROMs. They work very well, but in my case I have a T-Mobile G2, so I had to installed engineering bootloader in order re-partition my flash to allow enough space for the OS. I ended up decided that Sense wasn't for me anyway, and went back to my Cyanogenmod.
Anything where your ability to see a custom display that others cannot gives you an advantage. An alphanumeric LCD with a UV back light and filter for example.
Replace the projection lamp in your DLP big-screen TV with a UV bulb. People will see you laughing and enjoying movies and TV shows on what is apparently a blank screen.
I don't know if the DMD chips will even reflect UV though.
I'd love to be superhuman, but I suspect that I could find better things to do with my time than fight crime. All that does is get all the bad guys trying to find ways to kill you.
UV light bulbs are used to kill germs (really all living things) in hospitals and to erase EPROMs.
UV light is extraordinarily dangerous for your skin and ESPECIALLY your eyes. I had moderate eye damage from looking at one as a kid for several minutes. It never goes away or gets better. It's a cool purpley-white color for those of you who want to know what it looks like.
Frankly I'm concerned about the health implications of having no natural UV filter. What protects the rest of your eye(s) from UV light?
Yes and no. Long-wave UV (such as what comes out of the typical black-light lamp you'll see at Toys 'R Us) isn't particularly harmful. Shortwave UV, like what you would get from a welding arc or a fluorescent tube with no phospor coating is. I knew a guy in high school that built himself a carbon-arc furnace, and made the mistake of starting at the naked arc for a couple of seconds. He was blind for a few days: fortunately he recovered. He was very lucky.
It is called visible light for a reason. UV wavelengths reflect poorly which makes "seeing" anything lit up in UV light unlikely. Items exposed to UV light fluoresce rather than reflect. Also, what makes you think UV light has anything to do with violet or purple? The wavelength is beyond violet. If you could see UV light, you would be seeing the next color in the spectrum, which would be very cool. What you are experiencing is sensitivity to UV light due to your natural UV filter being removed.
I once made a night vision viewer, gosh, thirty years ago or so by removing the IR filter from an old B&W TV camera. I think it was a vidicon tube: might have predated CCDs, I don't remember. Anyway, it worked well enough for near-infrared, although it wasn't very sensitive.
I put together a light source with a handheld spotlight (big old thing that used the sealed-beam from GE aircraft landing light) and used a layer of exposed camera film to get rid of the visible output. I could shine that thing and see for a half mile around in pitch darkness. Any of you know how dark a moonless Western night is? Yeah, dark. I was visiting a girlfriend's parents who lived out West near the Rockies. We mounted the camera and the light on the rail running around the deck on the back of their house.
There were all kinds of nocturnal animals there: you could hear them rustling around and making noises all night. So we hooked the output up to their TV set, and we had a private nature show right there on the screen. Some of them could see us, I think: they seemed to notice the infrared source. I have no idea what a lot of those creatures were, but we could see them plain as day. The bats were cool. Well, I think they were bats. I mean, the camera was an antique: not exactly hi-def. But it was a lot of fun.
I tried it again with a CCD imager a few years ago: picked up the output from TV remotes quite nicely.
Many things appear different and downright gross under UV light. I've rented a UV CCD imager
Yeah. The fact that UV sensitivity in humans is possible yet exceedingly rare indicates that it doesn't have any evolutionary advantage. I guess going around being grossed out by most of what you see would be problematic.
Every LL quote I've posted on/. in the last few years is moderated troll.
The single worst indicator of how fucked/. is.
For example watch the moderation:
Violence is the last resort of the incompetent. Because by the time it's your last resort it's usually too late. The competent go to violence much sooner. (L.L. Paraphrase).
Yeah... there's someone out there who does not like Robert A. Heinlein. I could see it if it were L. Ron Hubbard quotes but... Heinlein? I mean, Lazarus Long was something of a elitist in his own way (so was Heinlein for that matter) but he was right about a lot of things.
I mean, small change can, in fact, be found beneath seat cushions.
Yep, Go find a really nicely filtered LED UV torch that only emits 400nm light.
That would still make loads of stuff fluoresce unless you treated your entire house with special paint and hope the burglar isn't wearing any cotton and everybody keeps their mouth closed and hasn't washed their hair with certain brands of shampoo.
Man, you are one serious buzz-kill. Lots of fun at parties, I'm sure.
Sorry; you do not have special UV-sensitive super-powers. So-called "black" lights are not, by any stretch of the imagination, UV-only. They have a filter on them that blocks most, but not all, visible light. They are called "black" lights because the UV causes appropriately fluorescent and phosphorescent materials to glow out of proportion to the visible light emitted by the bulb.
Incandescent UV bulbs have a filter, fluorescent UV lamps are just a different phosphor. The discharge through the mercury vapor generates copious amounts of rather dangerous shortwave UV, which is downconverted by the phosphor coating the tube.
Slashdot Mirror
and yes, such a field would not just send forks flying and cause hallucinations: it'd probably be more than enough to cause everyone in the house to levitate.
Long before that happened it would have extracted any metal objects embedded in their bodies (fillings, surgical screws, leftover forceps, etc.) as well as most of the hemoglobin in their blood.
I hate when people post incorrect opinions as facts, yet they never seem to realize it turns a guy with a guess into a liar. Quit lying you lying liar.
He may be lying but he's actually correct. It's damned hard to affect a hard drive with any kind of external field: they're shielded pretty well for that reason. Also the voice coil positioning routines are pretty good at correcting positional errors on-the-fly: modern hard drives are fairly sophisticated real-time feedback systems. As other posters have pointed out, any field that intense would be having all kinds of other much more significant affects. Not to mention that a static field isn't going to have much of an effect on a cordless phone, as was also claimed.
Yeah. And I have the feeling the technical illiteracy of this whole case extends into the courtroom. I also have to wonder what kind of television sets these people have. Are they claiming that flat panels were affected by stray magnetic fields?
I also fail to see how a static magnetic field is going to bother a cordless phone, a computer, or any other piece of modern electronics. Maybe their neighbor is an amateur radio operator running a thousand watt linear in his living room. That would make a hell of a lot more sense than "magnetized joists."
Florida law treats a smartphone as a 'container' for the purposes of a search, similar to say a cardboard box open on the passenger seat
I don't know Floridian law, but does the box have to be open? If that's the case, a pass-coded cellphone is technically a sealed box.
What I want to know, is by what twisted reasoning did the California court not manage to interpret a cell phone as being a "personal effect"? And if not, what does constitute a "personal effect" such that it cannot be rifled through at will by a cop? Or maybe they just decided that "unreasonable search and seizure" is an outmoded concept.
... coming soon to a State near you!
Constitution-free society
Ah - would you limit your replacement firmware choice to what that form shows is available for a given phone/orig-OS?
That's just one list and not all-inclusive. There are lots of third-party ROMs. Once you have your phone rooted, you can download a program called ROM Manager from the market: it will install a custom recovery partition and allow you to back up and restore your existing OS and applications, and will flash a number of the most popular mods, including Cyanogen and MIUI. It will only show ROMs that are compatible with your particular device.
For the sake of accuracy, the only carrier known to have ever done that in the US is AT&T
Okay, I'll take your word for that. I've never had a smartphone on anything other than T-Mobile at this point. On the other hand, even T-Mobile disallowed tethering apps early on (my first Android device was the venerable G1.) They eventually did a complete about-face on that score, and I haven't had any grief about non-Market apps or tethering or, well, anything else really. Which is why I was very upset when I first heard about the buyout.
The upper management of AT&T (or rather, SBC) should be in irons right now.
Will Sprint know that I've rooted my phone? How about if I enable WiFi hotspot on an unlimited data 4G phone... other than by auditing my total consumption and inferring? If they do guess, will I have violated some contract, or even just given them an excuse to cancel my contract?
If not, it seems there's practically nothing to lose except the HTC SenseUI, which seems worth losing. And in its absence, perhaps inspiration to write a different GUI shell myself, or with others.
Well, right now I have six different so-called "home apps" loaded on my G2. Some are variants of the stock launcher, others are completely and totally different. Sometimes I switch between them depending upon what I'm doing.
Well, you'd have to check cyanogenmod.com to see if your phone is on the list of supported devices. I've been running various CM versions continuously for almost three years now, and have yet to find an app that won't run. Quite the opposite: generally they perform better than under the equivalent stock release.
Yeah, I agree about HTC: that's too bad. I don't know if they've just gone "evil", or if this is an example of the known-evil carrier influence, but I stopped running stock firmware on any of my phones years ago and haven't looked back. That kind of behavior was a large part of my decision to go third-party (that and better battery life, more performance and more features than stock. Also, I didn't like being told that I can't do certain things, like tethering.)
Some carriers disable the "Allow Non-Market Apps" capability. That's enough right there to make me root and go with a CM or some other ROM.
Cyanogenmod can do this if you enable some of the advanced features. Once the app is installed you can go in where you view the permissions it needs and toggle some of them off. Badly designed apps may crash, but most stuff I've done it to has happily continued running.
True. And if you're still concerned, run Droidwall. I do ... if an app has no need for Internet it goes in the blacklist. If it then fails to run because of some stupid license check, or just the dev being a dick and insisting that his app get out whenever it wants, it gets uninstalled.
Is there at least a grid or DB somewhere of phones vs firmwares that indicates which OEM features are covered, and perhaps by which optional replacement? I thought phone fans were obsessive about collecting those kinds of details about the objects of their fetish.
This may be helpful to you.
You'd think they'd be similar because they're all ARM-based, overwhelmingly use Qualcomm radio chipsets, and all theoretically run Android... but software-wise the differences start at the kernel and device drivers, and just explode from there.
Now you understand why Samsung just hired Steve Kondik, founder of the Cyanogenmod project. They need someone like him very badly. Besides I, for one, won't consider a device if I can't get rid of the stock firmware and put Cyanogenmod (or another decent third-party ROM) on it. If nothing else, I simply do not trust the vendors and the carriers to play straight with me on the operating system.
You also have to give a lot of credit to the Cyanogen crew, when you look at the sheer number of supported devices, all across the spectrum from HTC to Samsung.
Problem is, you lose HTC Sense, which is one of the best UIs for Android.
In that case try one of the Virtuous Sense ROMs. They work very well, but in my case I have a T-Mobile G2, so I had to installed engineering bootloader in order re-partition my flash to allow enough space for the OS. I ended up decided that Sense wasn't for me anyway, and went back to my Cyanogenmod.
If you are rooted, you can use Titanium Backup to uninstall HTC Loggers or you can manually delete HTCLoggers.apk from /system/app/.
If you are rooted you can just install Cyanogenmod and forget about it.
apparantly not if some women can see in UV
Well ... they are from Venus after all.
I wish this were a joke, but I really wonder about peoples' blind-sightedness when it comes to physics and trade.
Call it "enlightened capitalism", but we used to be a society that understood the idea of "give and take". Now we're mostly about the take.
He's more machine than man now
"Steve Austin, a man barely alive. We can rebuild him ... we have the technology."
Anything where your ability to see a custom display that others cannot gives you an advantage. An alphanumeric LCD with a UV back light and filter for example.
Replace the projection lamp in your DLP big-screen TV with a UV bulb. People will see you laughing and enjoying movies and TV shows on what is apparently a blank screen.
I don't know if the DMD chips will even reflect UV though.
i'd love to be a super human crime-fighter.
I'd love to be superhuman, but I suspect that I could find better things to do with my time than fight crime. All that does is get all the bad guys trying to find ways to kill you.
Does this make me a cyborg?
Answer the following true/false questions:
1. I'm cybernetic.
2. I'm an organism.
If you answered Yes to both questions, you are, in fact, a Cybernetic Organism.
Otherwise, you're either a computer or not even alive.
Don't look at UV light.
UV light bulbs are used to kill germs (really all living things) in hospitals and to erase EPROMs.
UV light is extraordinarily dangerous for your skin and ESPECIALLY your eyes. I had moderate eye damage from looking at one as a kid for several minutes. It never goes away or gets better. It's a cool purpley-white color for those of you who want to know what it looks like.
Frankly I'm concerned about the health implications of having no natural UV filter. What protects the rest of your eye(s) from UV light?
Yes and no. Long-wave UV (such as what comes out of the typical black-light lamp you'll see at Toys 'R Us) isn't particularly harmful. Shortwave UV, like what you would get from a welding arc or a fluorescent tube with no phospor coating is. I knew a guy in high school that built himself a carbon-arc furnace, and made the mistake of starting at the naked arc for a couple of seconds. He was blind for a few days: fortunately he recovered. He was very lucky.
It is called visible light for a reason. UV wavelengths reflect poorly which makes "seeing" anything lit up in UV light unlikely. Items exposed to UV light fluoresce rather than reflect. Also, what makes you think UV light has anything to do with violet or purple? The wavelength is beyond violet. If you could see UV light, you would be seeing the next color in the spectrum, which would be very cool. What you are experiencing is sensitivity to UV light due to your natural UV filter being removed.
I once made a night vision viewer, gosh, thirty years ago or so by removing the IR filter from an old B&W TV camera. I think it was a vidicon tube: might have predated CCDs, I don't remember. Anyway, it worked well enough for near-infrared, although it wasn't very sensitive.
I put together a light source with a handheld spotlight (big old thing that used the sealed-beam from GE aircraft landing light) and used a layer of exposed camera film to get rid of the visible output. I could shine that thing and see for a half mile around in pitch darkness. Any of you know how dark a moonless Western night is? Yeah, dark. I was visiting a girlfriend's parents who lived out West near the Rockies. We mounted the camera and the light on the rail running around the deck on the back of their house.
There were all kinds of nocturnal animals there: you could hear them rustling around and making noises all night. So we hooked the output up to their TV set, and we had a private nature show right there on the screen. Some of them could see us, I think: they seemed to notice the infrared source. I have no idea what a lot of those creatures were, but we could see them plain as day. The bats were cool. Well, I think they were bats. I mean, the camera was an antique: not exactly hi-def. But it was a lot of fun.
I tried it again with a CCD imager a few years ago: picked up the output from TV remotes quite nicely.
Many things appear different and downright gross under UV light. I've rented a UV CCD imager
Yeah. The fact that UV sensitivity in humans is possible yet exceedingly rare indicates that it doesn't have any evolutionary advantage. I guess going around being grossed out by most of what you see would be problematic.
Every LL quote I've posted on /. in the last few years is moderated troll.
The single worst indicator of how fucked /. is.
For example watch the moderation:
Yeah ... there's someone out there who does not like Robert A. Heinlein. I could see it if it were L. Ron Hubbard quotes but ... Heinlein? I mean, Lazarus Long was something of a elitist in his own way (so was Heinlein for that matter) but he was right about a lot of things.
I mean, small change can, in fact, be found beneath seat cushions.
Yep, Go find a really nicely filtered LED UV torch that only emits 400nm light.
That would still make loads of stuff fluoresce unless you treated your entire house with special paint and hope the burglar isn't wearing any cotton and everybody keeps their mouth closed and hasn't washed their hair with certain brands of shampoo.
Man, you are one serious buzz-kill. Lots of fun at parties, I'm sure.
Sorry; you do not have special UV-sensitive super-powers. So-called "black" lights are not, by any stretch of the imagination, UV-only. They have a filter on them that blocks most, but not all, visible light. They are called "black" lights because the UV causes appropriately fluorescent and phosphorescent materials to glow out of proportion to the visible light emitted by the bulb.
Incandescent UV bulbs have a filter, fluorescent UV lamps are just a different phosphor. The discharge through the mercury vapor generates copious amounts of rather dangerous shortwave UV, which is downconverted by the phosphor coating the tube.