Perhaps you have never studied the United States' system, but once elected, there is not much we, the people can do about a president unless he commits "High crimes of misdemeanors". Like it or not, Bush hasn't done anything that can lead to an impeachment, and the next election is still 3 years away. Bush is a lame duck anyway and can't be re-elected again anyway.
By the way, the war in Iraq was/is not illegal. Saddam violated the peace treaty he signed way back in the day. Right wrong or indifferent, if a peace treaty is violated, you revert to a state of war. Just because we weren't shooting in earnest for the 12 years between Gulf I and Gulf II doesn't mean we weren't at war, in a legal sense. So, there's a no-go on impeachment for that.
Only one kind of asbestos particles are truely bad for lungs. When heat and pressure are applied to asbestos, small fibers come off with hooked ends. Its those hooks that are the real problem with asbestos. When you inhale them, they are like millions of tiny fish hooks that grab on to your lungs preventing you from coughing them out. Carbon nanotubes have exactly the opposite problem from a materials viewpoint, they are slippery little buggers so you can't bind them together. At least with nanotubes, comparing them to asbestos would be rediculous.
Lets talk simple physics. The energy of a moving body is equal to half the mass of the object times its velocity squared.
E=(.5)mv^2
As velocity increases the mass differential less and less of a factor in the total energy of the system.
When two cars collide at freeway speeds, the energy has to go somewhere. Yup, the body of the car. Protecting you from the energy that is trying to get transfered to you (via the car collapsing) requires some significant structural members at these sorts of energies. If you are in a lightweight car, you have largely the same amount of energy to dissapate, but your car's structure has much less mass to resist things like folding into an accordian. Heavier cars will just plain fare better, the extra mass will not add much more energy to dissapate, but the car will be stronger.
Ever wonder why there are no lightweight Mercedes or Volvos? Even the small ones weigh in at close to 2 tonnes.
Until telnetd is totally removed (not just turned off) from Linux, Linux will not be secure. There are just too many exploits involving telnet to take Linux seriously.
Bad example. There's a telnet service in Windows too.
When was the last time telnet was exploitable? telnet is sniffable. Big deal, so is imap, pop3, smtp, http, you name it. Sniffing should not count against an OS - its a problem with the protocol, which is inherint to all internet based OSes. Heck, lets just say anything that uses TCP/IP is too insecure for internet access.
w00t ssh and ssl are too insecure for the internet because they use TCP/IP as the transport layer! Shame on OpenSSL Org for using TCP/IP when they obviously should have used DecNet or AppleTalk. SHAME!
Re:87 octane? Isn't that little?
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 0
This is a common myth that requires some remediation.
First there is a need to define just what the hell the octane rating is. There are two standards. The first is based on a particular hydrocarbon chain (Octane. 8 carbon atoms in a line, single bonds between the carbon if I recall correctly. All other bonds taken up by Hydrogen.) Way back in the day (beginning of our use of gasoline) the hydrocarbon that had the most resistance to preignition (read slowest detonation speed and a higher flash point) was octane. That was arbitrarily set to be the 100 on a 100 point scale. Later they discovered that things like toluene(sp?) and benzene had a much higher flash point than the previous longest chain hydrocarbone they knew of. These had values that were approx 104 and 106.
Currently, the method (at least in the US is a method that uses a percentage based of a standard . You will notice a sticker that says (r1 -r2)/(r1 + r2)*100 or something like that. the two octane ratings are not the same however.
Now, what does the octane rating mean. The most important aspect is its resistance to auto-ignition (higher flash point). Why is this important? Because you can make a higher compression engine with a higher flashpoint (remember compressing a gas raises its temperature. The greater the compression allows the peak temperature in the cylender to be higher. Gasoline engines (all engines) operate on thermal differences. The higher the peak temp and the lower the exaust temp, the more thermally efficient the engine.
Because I am familiar with Dodge Intrepids and the engines that go in them, I will use them as an example. My car, a '95 Intrepid with a 3.3l engine has a compression ratio of about 9:1 It develops about 170 horsepower at the wheel. A 2.7l for '98 and up mated to the same tranny develops about 200hp. How does this smaller engine make more power? Its compression ratio is around 10.5:1. A better comparison is the '95 3.5l, the difference between the base and the high output is 50hp and 9:1 -> 10.5:1 compression. The higher compression of the high output motor requires high octane fuel, however.
High performace cars and engines use high compressions because they can more efficiently use their fuel. Unfortunately, the higher temps in high compression engines create NOx and other "worse" pollutants
Diesel engines (the most thermally efficient internal combustion engines) have compression ratios anywhere from 14:1 to 20:1 and higher.
Diesel has a LOWER energy content (per pound) than gasoline, but we can use it much more efficiently in diesel engines.
While a small car's usage of energy is less, the engines are much smaller because they move less weight. They use 87 octane because "economy" means cheap and cheap means people will burn cheap gas. They could be much more efficient if they required the use of high octane because the engines could be smaller still and develop the same power
PS Sorry for the poor spelling. If you want to fight, bring facts.
Protel DXP 2004 [http://www.protel.com] (A FPGA synthesis and electronic circuit design package) features menus similar to the Apple patent. When laying out a circuit, the menus that normaly get in your way fade out while you are trying to place a component "under" them. Call your lawyer?
ByeBye karma, but why are we really trying to feed the all the hungry of the world? We feed them, they keep reproducing, the land they live on, that COULDN'T FEED THEM BEFORE, still can't feed them. We have to send more food which lets them have an even higher population which... you get the picture.
Not to mention the fact that your average coal burning plant simply doesn't have the potential to cause a catastrophe on the scale of Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc.
Why does everyone insist on calling the accident at Three Mile Island a catastrophe? As I recall, the accident released Xenon 133 and Krypton 85, certainly bad gasses, but hardly anything to freak out about.
Xenon 133 is a beta emitter, which means it launches electrons fast. (Cathode ray tubes anyone?) In addition, its half life is about 5.25 days, (in a month, less than 2 percent of the isotope is left at all). The end product? Caesium 133, non-radioactive.
As for Krypton 88, it has a slightly more interesting decay pattern, it undergoes beta decay, like Kr133. First from Kr88 -> Rubidnium(sp) 88, with a half life of about 2.8 hours, so in the first week(about 60 half lives), it was all gone (to at least ten nines.0000000001% of its original mass)
Rb88 is radioactive, again with beta emmission to Strontium 88, only this time, its half life is a bit shorter at roughly 18 minutes (17.78 minutes). In the same week, there would have been 567 half-lives, so effectively, there is no Rb88 out there.
Strontium 88 is stable. So, within a month, the only radiation we have out of this is effectively that of the Krypton, and at less than 2% of its original level. All of the radiation is beta-emissions, the kind that all of you (LCD panels excluded) have aimed at your faces right now from your monitors.
Not one person died, not one person got sick. Containment CONTAINED, as it was supposed to. Effective contamination now? Zero. Where is the problem?
Not to mention the fact that your average coal burning plant simply doesn't have the potential to cause a catastrophe on the scale of Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc.
Why does everyone insist on calling the accident at Three Mile Island a catastrophe? As I recall, the accident released Xenon 133 and Krypton 85, certainly bad gasses, but hardly anything to freak out about.
Xenon 133 is a beta emitter, which means it launches electrons fast. (Cathode ray tubes anyone?) In addition, its half life is about 5.25 days, (in a month, less than 2 percent of the isotope is left at all). The end product? Caesium 133, non-radioactive.
As for Krypton 88, it has a slightly more interesting decay pattern, it undergoes beta decay, like Kr133. First from Kr88 -> Rubidnium(sp) 88, with a half life of about 2.8 hours, so in the first week(about 60 half lives), it was all gone (to at least ten nines.0000000001% of its original mass)
Rb88 is radioactive, again with beta emmission to Strontium 88, only this time, its half life is a bit shorter at roughly 18 minutes (17.78 minutes). In the same week, there would have been 567 half-lives, so effectively, there is no Rb88 out there.
Strontium 88 is stable. So, within a month, the only radiation we have out of this is effectively that of the Krypton, and at less than 2% of its original level. All of the radiation is beta-emissions, the kind that all of you (LCD panels excluded) have aimed at your faces right now from your monitors.
Not one person died, not one person got sick. Containment CONTAINED, as it was supposed to. Effective contamination now? Zero. Where is the problem?
Isotope and half life information from This periodic table
Most of the designs I have seen include an "electron injector" of some sort. Basicly, high voltage electrons are sent into the exhaust stream to maintain both the ship's and the exhaust's neutrality. (IIRC I stole "electron injector" from Scientific American)
Actually, the xenon gas is reaction mass not fuel. Fuel implies that energy is bound up in the material. (Useable, we don't have a good supply of anti-xenon to use the xenon as fuel)
If we go back to the orignal copyright laws and the Constitution (all assuming United States) The point of copyrights (and in fact patents) were to protect the creators original time invested in the creation of the protected work. After a period of time, the copyright and patent would pass into the public domain. US constitution,
article 1 section 8 states clearly:
To
promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries
emphasis mine. Why copyrights/patents were ever extended beyond 25 years is beyond me.... Well, no its not. Big corps. can basicly write laws by hireing enough senators. Instead of forcing people to renew their copyrights at the end of 50 years by paying "a dollar" or something, copyrighted works should pass into public domain as they were supposed to!
Just to be the pedantic bastard, pounds are a measure of weight and kilo's are a measure of mass. The imperial measure of mass is the slug which ways ~32lbs under standard conditions See this A newton is the SI unit of weight... apples to apples people.
Why on gods green earth does it follow "2nd amendment" == more criminals? What? "I've got a gun now, lets go shoot some people, rob a liquor store and set shit on fire!" NO! Thats idiotic reasoning *AT BEST* at worst criminal stupidity. To ascribe such a simple cause to the problem of crime... What if I said Austraila was settled by criminals (Early british penal colony), all crime in Austraila is because of its settlers. You'd think I was dumb, wouldn't you. Read before you post!!!!
Abortion? I'm all for it, the world has too many idiots as it is!
What the hell is wrong with you people? While slashdot may be a forum for the open forum for the exchange of ideas, but PLEASE, stay on topic. In this thread we are talking about Free Software and wether or not there is too much of it. If you can't say anything about THAT, then don't post. If you think its newsworthy, submit it as an article or an Ask Slashdot, don't clutter the threads with your political rants, at least don't clutter non-political threads with your political rants. I for one, don't appreciate it.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you have never studied the United States' system, but once elected, there is not much we, the people can do about a president unless he commits "High crimes of misdemeanors". Like it or not, Bush hasn't done anything that can lead to an impeachment, and the next election is still 3 years away. Bush is a lame duck anyway and can't be re-elected again anyway.
By the way, the war in Iraq was/is not illegal. Saddam violated the peace treaty he signed way back in the day. Right wrong or indifferent, if a peace treaty is violated, you revert to a state of war. Just because we weren't shooting in earnest for the 12 years between Gulf I and Gulf II doesn't mean we weren't at war, in a legal sense. So, there's a no-go on impeachment for that.
Only one kind of asbestos particles are truely bad for lungs. When heat and pressure are applied to asbestos, small fibers come off with hooked ends. Its those hooks that are the real problem with asbestos. When you inhale them, they are like millions of tiny fish hooks that grab on to your lungs preventing you from coughing them out. Carbon nanotubes have exactly the opposite problem from a materials viewpoint, they are slippery little buggers so you can't bind them together. At least with nanotubes, comparing them to asbestos would be rediculous.
Lets talk simple physics. The energy of a moving body is equal to half the mass of the object times its velocity squared.
E=(.5)mv^2
As velocity increases the mass differential less and less of a factor in the total energy of the system.
When two cars collide at freeway speeds, the energy has to go somewhere. Yup, the body of the car. Protecting you from the energy that is trying to get transfered to you (via the car collapsing) requires some significant structural members at these sorts of energies. If you are in a lightweight car, you have largely the same amount of energy to dissapate, but your car's structure has much less mass to resist things like folding into an accordian. Heavier cars will just plain fare better, the extra mass will not add much more energy to dissapate, but the car will be stronger.
Ever wonder why there are no lightweight Mercedes or Volvos? Even the small ones weigh in at close to 2 tonnes.
Concerns about the eventual return of the waste were dismissed as depressing
Until telnetd is totally removed (not just turned off) from Linux, Linux will not be secure. There are just too many exploits involving telnet to take Linux seriously.
Bad example. There's a telnet service in Windows too.
When was the last time telnet was exploitable? telnet is sniffable. Big deal, so is imap, pop3, smtp, http, you name it. Sniffing should not count against an OS - its a problem with the protocol, which is inherint to all internet based OSes. Heck, lets just say anything that uses TCP/IP is too insecure for internet access.
w00t ssh and ssl are too insecure for the internet because they use TCP/IP as the transport layer! Shame on OpenSSL Org for using TCP/IP when they obviously should have used DecNet or AppleTalk. SHAME!
This is a common myth that requires some remediation. First there is a need to define just what the hell the octane rating is. There are two standards. The first is based on a particular hydrocarbon chain (Octane. 8 carbon atoms in a line, single bonds between the carbon if I recall correctly. All other bonds taken up by Hydrogen.) Way back in the day (beginning of our use of gasoline) the hydrocarbon that had the most resistance to preignition (read slowest detonation speed and a higher flash point) was octane. That was arbitrarily set to be the 100 on a 100 point scale. Later they discovered that things like toluene(sp?) and benzene had a much higher flash point than the previous longest chain hydrocarbone they knew of. These had values that were approx 104 and 106. Currently, the method (at least in the US is a method that uses a percentage based of a standard . You will notice a sticker that says (r1 -r2)/(r1 + r2)*100 or something like that. the two octane ratings are not the same however. Now, what does the octane rating mean. The most important aspect is its resistance to auto-ignition (higher flash point). Why is this important? Because you can make a higher compression engine with a higher flashpoint (remember compressing a gas raises its temperature. The greater the compression allows the peak temperature in the cylender to be higher. Gasoline engines (all engines) operate on thermal differences. The higher the peak temp and the lower the exaust temp, the more thermally efficient the engine. Because I am familiar with Dodge Intrepids and the engines that go in them, I will use them as an example. My car, a '95 Intrepid with a 3.3l engine has a compression ratio of about 9:1 It develops about 170 horsepower at the wheel. A 2.7l for '98 and up mated to the same tranny develops about 200hp. How does this smaller engine make more power? Its compression ratio is around 10.5:1. A better comparison is the '95 3.5l, the difference between the base and the high output is 50hp and 9:1 -> 10.5:1 compression. The higher compression of the high output motor requires high octane fuel, however. High performace cars and engines use high compressions because they can more efficiently use their fuel. Unfortunately, the higher temps in high compression engines create NOx and other "worse" pollutants Diesel engines (the most thermally efficient internal combustion engines) have compression ratios anywhere from 14:1 to 20:1 and higher. Diesel has a LOWER energy content (per pound) than gasoline, but we can use it much more efficiently in diesel engines. While a small car's usage of energy is less, the engines are much smaller because they move less weight. They use 87 octane because "economy" means cheap and cheap means people will burn cheap gas. They could be much more efficient if they required the use of high octane because the engines could be smaller still and develop the same power PS Sorry for the poor spelling. If you want to fight, bring facts.
Protel DXP 2004 [http://www.protel.com] (A FPGA synthesis and electronic circuit design package) features menus similar to the Apple patent. When laying out a circuit, the menus that normaly get in your way fade out while you are trying to place a component "under" them. Call your lawyer?
ByeBye karma, but why are we really trying to feed the all the hungry of the world? We feed them, they keep reproducing, the land they live on, that COULDN'T FEED THEM BEFORE, still can't feed them. We have to send more food which lets them have an even higher population which... you get the picture.
Not to mention the fact that your average coal burning plant simply doesn't have the potential to cause a catastrophe on the scale of Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc.
.0000000001% of its original mass)
Why does everyone insist on calling the accident at Three Mile Island a catastrophe? As I recall, the accident released Xenon 133 and Krypton 85, certainly bad gasses, but hardly anything to freak out about.
Xenon 133 is a beta emitter, which means it launches electrons fast. (Cathode ray tubes anyone?) In addition, its half life is about 5.25 days, (in a month, less than 2 percent of the isotope is left at all). The end product? Caesium 133, non-radioactive.
As for Krypton 88, it has a slightly more interesting decay pattern, it undergoes beta decay, like Kr133. First from Kr88 -> Rubidnium(sp) 88, with a half life of about 2.8 hours, so in the first week(about 60 half lives), it was all gone (to at least ten nines
Rb88 is radioactive, again with beta emmission to Strontium 88, only this time, its half life is a bit shorter at roughly 18 minutes (17.78 minutes). In the same week, there would have been 567 half-lives, so effectively, there is no Rb88 out there.
Strontium 88 is stable. So, within a month, the only radiation we have out of this is effectively that of the Krypton, and at less than 2% of its original level. All of the radiation is beta-emissions, the kind that all of you (LCD panels excluded) have aimed at your faces right now from your monitors.
Not one person died, not one person got sick. Containment CONTAINED, as it was supposed to. Effective contamination now? Zero. Where is the problem?
Isotope and half life information from This periodic table
Not to mention the fact that your average coal burning plant simply doesn't have the potential to cause a catastrophe on the scale of Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, etc. Why does everyone insist on calling the accident at Three Mile Island a catastrophe? As I recall, the accident released Xenon 133 and Krypton 85, certainly bad gasses, but hardly anything to freak out about. Xenon 133 is a beta emitter, which means it launches electrons fast. (Cathode ray tubes anyone?) In addition, its half life is about 5.25 days, (in a month, less than 2 percent of the isotope is left at all). The end product? Caesium 133, non-radioactive. As for Krypton 88, it has a slightly more interesting decay pattern, it undergoes beta decay, like Kr133. First from Kr88 -> Rubidnium(sp) 88, with a half life of about 2.8 hours, so in the first week(about 60 half lives), it was all gone (to at least ten nines .0000000001% of its original mass)
Rb88 is radioactive, again with beta emmission to Strontium 88, only this time, its half life is a bit shorter at roughly 18 minutes (17.78 minutes). In the same week, there would have been 567 half-lives, so effectively, there is no Rb88 out there.
Strontium 88 is stable. So, within a month, the only radiation we have out of this is effectively that of the Krypton, and at less than 2% of its original level. All of the radiation is beta-emissions, the kind that all of you (LCD panels excluded) have aimed at your faces right now from your monitors.
Not one person died, not one person got sick. Containment CONTAINED, as it was supposed to. Effective contamination now? Zero. Where is the problem?
Isotope and half life information from This periodic table
Most of the designs I have seen include an "electron injector" of some sort. Basicly, high voltage electrons are sent into the exhaust stream to maintain both the ship's and the exhaust's neutrality. (IIRC I stole "electron injector" from Scientific American)
Actually, the xenon gas is reaction mass not fuel. Fuel implies that energy is bound up in the material. (Useable, we don't have a good supply of anti-xenon to use the xenon as fuel)
Well, we now know the rock and roll source for the Free Software movement Maybe we can get some bands and have an open-source concert!
Just to be the pedantic bastard, pounds are a measure of weight and kilo's are a measure of mass. The imperial measure of mass is the slug which ways ~32lbs under standard conditions See this A newton is the SI unit of weight... apples to apples people.
IIRC Europeans use million where those of us from the states would use billion and vice versa. Don't you just love dialects?
Why on gods green earth does it follow "2nd amendment" == more criminals? What? "I've got a gun now, lets go shoot some people, rob a liquor store and set shit on fire!" NO! Thats idiotic reasoning *AT BEST* at worst criminal stupidity. To ascribe such a simple cause to the problem of crime... What if I said Austraila was settled by criminals (Early british penal colony), all crime in Austraila is because of its settlers. You'd think I was dumb, wouldn't you. Read before you post!!!! Abortion? I'm all for it, the world has too many idiots as it is!
What the hell is wrong with you people? While slashdot may be a forum for the open forum for the exchange of ideas, but PLEASE, stay on topic. In this thread we are talking about Free Software and wether or not there is too much of it. If you can't say anything about THAT, then don't post. If you think its newsworthy, submit it as an article or an Ask Slashdot, don't clutter the threads with your political rants, at least don't clutter non-political threads with your political rants. I for one, don't appreciate it.
Lets get pedantic: int main(int argc, char *argv[], char *env[]) Knowing is half the battle?