Refilling toner carts is pretty easy and you can usually get 3 or 4 refills before the drum goes bad. Just do a google search for "toner refill kits" or something like that. Here's the breakdown for a Lexmark Optra S 1625 I have in my office (17k page toner cart): a new manufacturers cartridge is around $250 ($0.015/pg; $1=67 pgs). A new 3d party cartridge is about $150 ($0.009/pg; $1=111 pgs). And doing a toner refill myself is about $25 ($0.0015/pg, $1=667 pages).
I bought my 4l in 1995 (I think it was $400, 20% cheaper than my 1991 Deskjet 500 ($500)). At this point, I almost wish the beast would die! Except... the printing is excellent, economy is excellent, linux compatability is excellent - it's just that 4ppm is a bit slow. In all truth, I'll be a bit sad when it finally does give up the ghost. I've had this machine since the time I thought a 486DX-40 was speedy! I'll probably be chugging away on this thing 10 years from now. I refuse to replace it till it breaks.
Specifically, the amount of energy liberated during the reac-
tion of hydrogen, on a mass basis, is about 2.5 times the
heat of combustion of common hydrocarbon fuels (gasoline,
diesel, methane, propane, etc.) Therefore, for a given load
duty, the mass of hydrogen required is only about a third of
the mass of hydrocarbon fuel needed.
The high energy content of hydrogen also implies that the
energy of a hydrogen gas explosion is about 2.5 times that of
common hydrocarbon fuels. Thus, on an equal mass basis,
hydrogen gas explosions are more destructive and carry
further. However, the duration of a conflagration tends to be
inversely proportional to the combustive energy, so that
hydrogen fires subside much more quickly than hydrocarbon
fires.
However, elsewhere in the article, it says that because hydrogen is so light, leaks can be safely be dispersed by wind, passing cars, or fans. Propane for example is heavier than air and collects in depressions, making it hard to disperse. It seems fair to say that if hydrogen goes off, it's a bigger explosion, but that it might actually be more difficult to get to that damaging situation than with other fuels.
Studies show that living fast and dirty is cheaper overall. Living to be 80 or 90 will cost much much more than burning out in your 20's. Consequently, the wisest course of action is for people to think only about their immediate pleasure and have no concern for the future. The cost of foresight is just too damn high.
Hydrogen leaks are dangerous in that they pose a risk of fire
where they mix with air (Section 1.3.1). However, the small
molecule size that increases the likelihood of a leak also
results in very high buoyancy and diffusivity, so leaked hy-
drogen rises and becomes diluted quickly, especially out-
doors. This results in a very localized region of flammability
that disperses quickly. As the hydrogen dilutes with distance
from the leakage site, the buoyancy declines and the ten-
dency for the hydrogen to continue to rise decreases. Very
cold hydrogen, resulting from a liquid hydrogen leak, be-
comes buoyant soon after is evaporates.
In contrast, leaking gasoline or diesel spreads laterally and
evaporates slowly resulting in a widespread, lingering fire
hazard. Propane gas is denser than air so it accumulates in
low spots and disperses slowly, resulting in a protracted fire
or explosion hazard. Heavy vapors can also form vapor
clouds or plumes that travel as they are pushed by breezes.
Methane gas is lighter than air, but not nearly as buoyant as
hydrogen, so it disperses rapidly, but not as rapidly as hy-
drogen.
Tie bush to rock near the ocean. Let ocean take care of the problem. Granted, probably is a good idea to tie him so his head is down and feet in the air for two reasons. First, he'd probably float like a bobber "head up", and secondly, it will take a little while for the oceans to rise - best to solve the problem sooner.
The problem with all of this "declining" of returns is that it's in direct violation of the UCC as it's been enacted in most states- simply put, if a purchased Item doesn't meet the intended purpose for any reason that isn't disclaimed at the time of purchase, the retailer is obligated by law to accept it back for a refund for a reasonable amount of time.
I'm no expert on the UCC, but the concept you are talking about is commonly called the warranty of merchantability - i.e., if you sell something that claims to be an Xwidget - it will do the things Xwidgets do.
The example in the article was of a woman who bought a shirt, took it home, discovered she had a similar shirt already, and decided to return it. In this example, there was apparently nothing about the shirt that caused it to fail to perform as a shirt normally would (e.g. ripped seams). In other words, the item did fulfill it's intended purpose - don't cloud the item's inherent purpose with the customer's subjective purposes (e.g., having no duplicate shirts). In other words, "Buyer's Remorse" does not call into question whether the purchased item performs as the item was intended to perform.
Don't take this to mean I approve of stores doing this - I don't. I'm just a bit apprehensive about relying on the UCC to legislate against a long standing common law doctrine. By the same token, it isn't so interesting to me that I'd want to research it. Got a citation?
... or, in the case of this story, a store backing off its own stated return policy.
RTFA (2nd to last paragraph - gotta read the whole thing almost):
Retailers like the Limited are fighting back. Sometime in the spring, consumers and Express workers say, the store began replacing the placards denoting its return policy with new signs saying the company uses an "industrywide" system to authorize returns and that "under certain circumstances we reserve the right to deny returns."
Read the linked article or go straight to the Bard's Tale info site. Then touch the characters a lot, in particular, the barmaid. Do it enough and you get sent to.... it's really very funny.
If anything, Star Trek fans would (and should) be appalled by this.
My sentiments exactly. I'm a bit taken aback by the negative comments you got on this. I think Trek fans are probably bothered when ST deviates from a hard sci-fi stance. But, I think even when ST deviates into new-agey garbage, there is still a basis to say it isn't magic, just a technology humans don't yet understand. For example - worm hole aliens = Bajor's gods. I placate myself with Clark's "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (or something close to that) statement (gosh - hope I got attribution right as well).
The difference between ST and X-Files for example, is that ST presumes there is an explanation for things, even if it is one we don't yet know or can't understand. Fantasy (like X-Files or whatnot) - deals only with mysticism and paranoia. Star Trek hasn't always avoided that, but it sure is better than most.
The reference to ST fans is offensive to the fans, most of whom, I presume, have a soft spot for hard sci-fi - even if ST fails to be hard sci-fi all the time, that says nothing about the fans' preferences for stories rooted in non-mystical plots.
No, it is the fruitless attempts at interdiction that ruin whole countries. Colombia used to be one of the prime tourist spots of the world, and they've been 'doing coke' for millenia
You mean before one of their main sources of income was kidnapping tourists and threating to shop their heads off if we don't pay them? Yes sounds like Colombia is a great vacation spot.
One point made in the article is that the guerillas derive their funding from coco now. The guerillas were able to tap into this revenue stream because the cartels were wiped out with US help. So, fighting the profiteers and winning created fertile ground for political revolutionaries to thrive. We've done good (that's sarcastic).
The only reason guerillas are interested in coco is because the price is artificially high. Think about it, there are no corn, beet, or potato black markets. Not profitable enough.
Yup, just about everyone with even an ounce of sensibility wants a paper trail for electronic voting - both the Democrat and Republican candidates for WA Secretary of State placed that among their top priorities. Makes it hard to choose when both of them say they're going to do the same thing.:)
Well, the libertarian candidate for SOS has them both beat. Here's what she says:
To ensure transparency we must have voter verified paper ballots, mandatory random audits, and open source elections software.
She's also the cutest of any candidate running for state office in WA.
FYI - no dirty words in the clips although HS does make reference to the "S-word" and "F-word" - he makes the references just as quoted here without actually saying them.
Now, for some reason, the person who built the device decided for me they didn't like items 1 - 4. So they built the device not to allow this. Now this law says such locks are illegal. And since the actions were legal to start with, where's your beef?
Just a quibble. This ruling doesn't say it is illegal to do what Lexmark did (make an ink cart that requires a chip to use it). The ruling says Lexmark can't stop others from making compatible cartridges. But Lexmark could make these lockouts increasingly difficult till the cows come home. It just can't sue when some 3d party figures out how to defeat the locks. The locks aren't illegal, and picking them isn't illegal - that's all that is said.
Only if the appeals reach the Supreme Court and only if the Supreme Court issues an opinion, is precedent set for the entire US.
And add to this, the Supreme Court gets to pick which cases it will hear - they could choose to refuse to even hear the appeal (although this refusal has some value, it isn't worth anything close to an actual decision).
Knucklehead. The next president will put at least two judges in the Supreme Court. Push through some "yes-man" and when Lexmark appeals to the SC, the current ruling will be overruled.
I have one and it works with linux - though I haven't tried going through whatever it takes to do hardware decoding of video - everything else works out of the box. It has RH9 on it now. A bit slugish though - it's just a backup computer for guests, or when mine breaks down for whatever reason.
Price though - although these systems are complete - they don't include memory. So that's going to put you at $150 or so total at least.
Actually, the first 'holocaust denier' to publish was Paul Rassinier, a French Communist Resistance fighter who was interred in a concentration camp himself, and he's far from the only leftist who's had doubts on that score.
Ah hell - isn't it obvious? The neo-hippies of the world are more often than not anti-semitic pretentious hipocrites. Truth is, the whole idea of a left|right continuum is bogus - it's a circle. pick a point, any point and call that the center - the point of freedom loving people the world over. Go too far left, or two far right, and you meet at a point 180 degrees around called fascism. The radical right and the radical left are equivalent jerks.
I bet you could make a fortune just explaining why google can make as much money they want. I bet google could make a fortune just selling the information of how they got to where they are today.
P/E is over 200. It will take more than 200 years for GOOG to earn as much per share, as it costs to buy a share today. Don't get me wrong, Google is great, but at some point, investors are going to demand a little bit back for their money. That's when Google will start to backslide morally.
So while I do generally find anything with voices distracting, I think it's awfully unfair to accuse the rest of us of never "fully" concentrating.
Actually, that is a good point and I think I used too broad of a brush when I wrote what I did earlier. I was really thinking more of TV type noise. I have friends who have the TV on constantly when I go to their places and conversation is difficult - I get sucked in or they are constantly flipping channels. I sense my distraction but I think they don't sense theirs. Anyway, please consider my overly broad characterization hereby narrowed.;-)
It doesn't matter how horrendous the show that's on is either. If it's there, I zone in on it.
I gave up TV watching in 1992 and I also have this problem now. There is something mezmerizing about television that is hard to ignore - even if it is something completely uninteresting (as 99.999% of it is - watch the rest on DVD when it comes out).
I've read a couple posts above in which people intimate that a person who gets sucked into TV has a concentration problem. I think that's backwards. I know I'm personally able to focus extremely intently - in fact I like doing that, gives me a sort of buz.
My theory is that people who are hooked on background "noise" never fully concentrate. They're floating from one thing to another without giving any single subject their full attention. Call it "multi-tasking" or whatever, but quality requires attention to detail and distractions inhibit attention.
But then, I like thinking. I like concentrating. I find it annoying that everywhere I go, someone or something is trying to distract me. At least when I'm home or in my office, the mindless worthless noise of the world is absent (unless I seek it out - gratuitous slashdot slam).
I have used a linux workstation for work since 1999. I have noticed vast improvements since redhat 5.2. I now run redhat 9.0 and love the openoffice apps as well as xine which had to be added after install. I have always felt linux was ready for the office, I now feel linux is ready for the home.
I agree with you. Two years ago, my partner and I quit our gov't jobs and opened our own law office. We use Red Hat 9.0 but will probably move to Suse 9.1 shortly. Anyway, my business partner is NOT computer savy. Hell - she's still using AOL.
I just set up the essential parts and let her loose. Within a couple months, I noticed that she had changed the wallpaper on her desktops to different pictures of her kid. Later, she had it do some slide-show thing w/ her kid's pics. I never showed her how do these "desktop customization" things. She figured it out just by "clicking around". Further, she had no problem switching from MS-Office to Open Office, IE to Mozilla, or Outlook to Evolution (at our former workplace, we used only MS stuff). Between the OS, wordprocessor, database stuff, we probably saved a couple grand (even after paying for the update service Red Hat used to offer).
Suse 9.1 is even slicker than RH9.0 - truth is, any of the distros are probably just fine for most small businesses. Of course, for my business, a DB, wordprocessor, and email is about all I need. For any business needing only those things, and not some obscure custom application, there's nothing but fear or inertia behind the failure of the public to switch en masse.
PS - I know games suck, but so what. We're talking business machines here. Besides, when I'm home, I'm happy enough with my PS2 for games, and my linux system for everything else.
Slashdot Mirror
Refilling toner carts is pretty easy and you can usually get 3 or 4 refills before the drum goes bad. Just do a google search for "toner refill kits" or something like that. Here's the breakdown for a Lexmark Optra S 1625 I have in my office (17k page toner cart): a new manufacturers cartridge is around $250 ($0.015/pg; $1=67 pgs). A new 3d party cartridge is about $150 ($0.009/pg; $1=111 pgs). And doing a toner refill myself is about $25 ($0.0015/pg, $1=667 pages).
My desklight flickers during printing (just a 4l) too. Built like a Mac truck though so you gotta assume a bit of juice suckage. ;-)
I bought my 4l in 1995 (I think it was $400, 20% cheaper than my 1991 Deskjet 500 ($500)). At this point, I almost wish the beast would die! Except
The high energy content of hydrogen also implies that the energy of a hydrogen gas explosion is about 2.5 times that of common hydrocarbon fuels. Thus, on an equal mass basis, hydrogen gas explosions are more destructive and carry further. However, the duration of a conflagration tends to be inversely proportional to the combustive energy, so that hydrogen fires subside much more quickly than hydrocarbon fires.
However, elsewhere in the article, it says that because hydrogen is so light, leaks can be safely be dispersed by wind, passing cars, or fans. Propane for example is heavier than air and collects in depressions, making it hard to disperse. It seems fair to say that if hydrogen goes off, it's a bigger explosion, but that it might actually be more difficult to get to that damaging situation than with other fuels.
Studies show that living fast and dirty is cheaper overall. Living to be 80 or 90 will cost much much more than burning out in your 20's. Consequently, the wisest course of action is for people to think only about their immediate pleasure and have no concern for the future. The cost of foresight is just too damn high.
where is the uproar over propane??
A quick google for comparative explosive propane hydrogen yields:this html conversion of original pdf:
In contrast, leaking gasoline or diesel spreads laterally and evaporates slowly resulting in a widespread, lingering fire hazard. Propane gas is denser than air so it accumulates in low spots and disperses slowly, resulting in a protracted fire or explosion hazard. Heavy vapors can also form vapor clouds or plumes that travel as they are pushed by breezes. Methane gas is lighter than air, but not nearly as buoyant as hydrogen, so it disperses rapidly, but not as rapidly as hy- drogen.
Tie bush to rock near the ocean. Let ocean take care of the problem. Granted, probably is a good idea to tie him so his head is down and feet in the air for two reasons. First, he'd probably float like a bobber "head up", and secondly, it will take a little while for the oceans to rise - best to solve the problem sooner.
I'm no expert on the UCC, but the concept you are talking about is commonly called the warranty of merchantability - i.e., if you sell something that claims to be an Xwidget - it will do the things Xwidgets do.
The example in the article was of a woman who bought a shirt, took it home, discovered she had a similar shirt already, and decided to return it. In this example, there was apparently nothing about the shirt that caused it to fail to perform as a shirt normally would (e.g. ripped seams). In other words, the item did fulfill it's intended purpose - don't cloud the item's inherent purpose with the customer's subjective purposes (e.g., having no duplicate shirts). In other words, "Buyer's Remorse" does not call into question whether the purchased item performs as the item was intended to perform.
Don't take this to mean I approve of stores doing this - I don't. I'm just a bit apprehensive about relying on the UCC to legislate against a long standing common law doctrine. By the same token, it isn't so interesting to me that I'd want to research it. Got a citation?
RTFA (2nd to last paragraph - gotta read the whole thing almost):
Read the linked article or go straight to the Bard's Tale info site. Then touch the characters a lot, in particular, the barmaid. Do it enough and you get sent to
If anything, Star Trek fans would (and should) be appalled by this.
My sentiments exactly. I'm a bit taken aback by the negative comments you got on this. I think Trek fans are probably bothered when ST deviates from a hard sci-fi stance. But, I think even when ST deviates into new-agey garbage, there is still a basis to say it isn't magic, just a technology humans don't yet understand. For example - worm hole aliens = Bajor's gods. I placate myself with Clark's "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (or something close to that) statement (gosh - hope I got attribution right as well).
The difference between ST and X-Files for example, is that ST presumes there is an explanation for things, even if it is one we don't yet know or can't understand. Fantasy (like X-Files or whatnot) - deals only with mysticism and paranoia. Star Trek hasn't always avoided that, but it sure is better than most.
The reference to ST fans is offensive to the fans, most of whom, I presume, have a soft spot for hard sci-fi - even if ST fails to be hard sci-fi all the time, that says nothing about the fans' preferences for stories rooted in non-mystical plots.
You mean before one of their main sources of income was kidnapping tourists and threating to shop their heads off if we don't pay them? Yes sounds like Colombia is a great vacation spot.
One point made in the article is that the guerillas derive their funding from coco now. The guerillas were able to tap into this revenue stream because the cartels were wiped out with US help. So, fighting the profiteers and winning created fertile ground for political revolutionaries to thrive. We've done good (that's sarcastic).
The only reason guerillas are interested in coco is because the price is artificially high. Think about it, there are no corn, beet, or potato black markets. Not profitable enough.
Well, the libertarian candidate for SOS has them both beat. Here's what she says:
She's also the cutest of any candidate running for state office in WA.
This is an extremely concise summary of events - perfectly accurate in less than 20 words.
FYI - no dirty words in the clips although HS does make reference to the "S-word" and "F-word" - he makes the references just as quoted here without actually saying them.
Just a quibble. This ruling doesn't say it is illegal to do what Lexmark did (make an ink cart that requires a chip to use it). The ruling says Lexmark can't stop others from making compatible cartridges. But Lexmark could make these lockouts increasingly difficult till the cows come home. It just can't sue when some 3d party figures out how to defeat the locks. The locks aren't illegal, and picking them isn't illegal - that's all that is said.
And add to this, the Supreme Court gets to pick which cases it will hear - they could choose to refuse to even hear the appeal (although this refusal has some value, it isn't worth anything close to an actual decision).
Knucklehead. The next president will put at least two judges in the Supreme Court. Push through some "yes-man" and when Lexmark appeals to the SC, the current ruling will be overruled.
I have one and it works with linux - though I haven't tried going through whatever it takes to do hardware decoding of video - everything else works out of the box. It has RH9 on it now. A bit slugish though - it's just a backup computer for guests, or when mine breaks down for whatever reason.
Price though - although these systems are complete - they don't include memory. So that's going to put you at $150 or so total at least.
Fixed link to the neurally controlled animat (pdf)
Ah hell - isn't it obvious? The neo-hippies of the world are more often than not anti-semitic pretentious hipocrites. Truth is, the whole idea of a left|right continuum is bogus - it's a circle. pick a point, any point and call that the center - the point of freedom loving people the world over. Go too far left, or two far right, and you meet at a point 180 degrees around called fascism. The radical right and the radical left are equivalent jerks.
P/E is over 200. It will take more than 200 years for GOOG to earn as much per share, as it costs to buy a share today. Don't get me wrong, Google is great, but at some point, investors are going to demand a little bit back for their money. That's when Google will start to backslide morally.
So while I do generally find anything with voices distracting, I think it's awfully unfair to accuse the rest of us of never "fully" concentrating.
;-)
Actually, that is a good point and I think I used too broad of a brush when I wrote what I did earlier. I was really thinking more of TV type noise. I have friends who have the TV on constantly when I go to their places and conversation is difficult - I get sucked in or they are constantly flipping channels. I sense my distraction but I think they don't sense theirs. Anyway, please consider my overly broad characterization hereby narrowed.
- It doesn't matter how horrendous the show that's on is either. If it's there, I zone in on it.
I gave up TV watching in 1992 and I also have this problem now. There is something mezmerizing about television that is hard to ignore - even if it is something completely uninteresting (as 99.999% of it is - watch the rest on DVD when it comes out).I've read a couple posts above in which people intimate that a person who gets sucked into TV has a concentration problem. I think that's backwards. I know I'm personally able to focus extremely intently - in fact I like doing that, gives me a sort of buz.
My theory is that people who are hooked on background "noise" never fully concentrate. They're floating from one thing to another without giving any single subject their full attention. Call it "multi-tasking" or whatever, but quality requires attention to detail and distractions inhibit attention.
But then, I like thinking. I like concentrating. I find it annoying that everywhere I go, someone or something is trying to distract me. At least when I'm home or in my office, the mindless worthless noise of the world is absent (unless I seek it out - gratuitous slashdot slam).
I agree with you. Two years ago, my partner and I quit our gov't jobs and opened our own law office. We use Red Hat 9.0 but will probably move to Suse 9.1 shortly. Anyway, my business partner is NOT computer savy. Hell - she's still using AOL.
I just set up the essential parts and let her loose. Within a couple months, I noticed that she had changed the wallpaper on her desktops to different pictures of her kid. Later, she had it do some slide-show thing w/ her kid's pics. I never showed her how do these "desktop customization" things. She figured it out just by "clicking around". Further, she had no problem switching from MS-Office to Open Office, IE to Mozilla, or Outlook to Evolution (at our former workplace, we used only MS stuff). Between the OS, wordprocessor, database stuff, we probably saved a couple grand (even after paying for the update service Red Hat used to offer).
Suse 9.1 is even slicker than RH9.0 - truth is, any of the distros are probably just fine for most small businesses. Of course, for my business, a DB, wordprocessor, and email is about all I need. For any business needing only those things, and not some obscure custom application, there's nothing but fear or inertia behind the failure of the public to switch en masse.
PS - I know games suck, but so what. We're talking business machines here. Besides, when I'm home, I'm happy enough with my PS2 for games, and my linux system for everything else.