Moreover, one factor not taken into account is the packaging: what are they going to do, start printing fingernail-sized booklets of the artwork and lyrics that you can only read with an electron microscope?
No, this will be when the record companies backtrack on their previous claims of CD value and start telling customers that they don't want bulky inserts and artwork since they detract from the overall portability and convenience. They'll tell us that nobody ever bought CDs because of the packaging and that it contributed to the high price of CDs. Prices, of course, will not go down upon moving to the new format due to manufacturing and production costs.
most military applications are *not* shielded against EM pulses
That's incorrect. Working on military vehicles and weapon systems, I can tell you that EM shielding has been an important factor for over 30 years. Some that I've worked on specify a 60dB reduction in EM radiation.
While individual components may not be shielded all that well (especially with off the shelf components) you can be assured that the enclosure they are used in is EM shielded.
For many ruggedized components encasing them in a heavy metal case is standard practice. A faraday cage is not an monetarily expensive solution although adding 50 pounds of steel to a computer has other, more backbreaking drawbacks.
Is it me, or does the Caldera logo appear as Mickey Mouse's head in blue overshadowing a red globe? Isn't that copyright infringement? Maybe it's just a portent of Disney's future global domination.
The article states SunnComm's position that "Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted."
This makes me sick. This statement pretty much attempts to validate any DRM or spyware that a company tries to install on my machine without me really knowing about it. They're also claiming that I can't go tell people what their software does to my system and what files it uses because some of them might be "unpublished" DRM features. Maybe circumvention of their software shouldn't be so easy that simply knowing this information makes it possible to undermine it.
Translation:
"By installing our software that is automatically run by default by your OS without really knowing what it does, you have agreed not to disclose the identity of its running processes which can be identified by viewing the OS's task manager (a secret feature that nobody is supposed to use). Oh, and you better not go looking into the program directory because if you start telling people what's in there we'll sue you. And another thing, don't you dare tell people about that shift key!"
These cans will have to transmit their position to Coca-cola. The article does not say how they do this. I assume that GPS enabled cell phones use the cellular network to transmit their positions. Will the cans use the cell phone network? Some other radio transmission?
you've got to wonder why Raytheon would pump $5M into it if there wasn't something in it for them...
Raytheon makes the most radar systems in the U.S.. They make most of the radar systems in boats and in the planes you fly in as well as those at the airport. Who else would you want to make them?
I'm not sure Raytheon could make radars that do more than track weather for ultra-cheap (relatively). Radars are very specifically designed for different purposes. It would involve some heavy software reliance and versatility to make a weather/aircraft/slashdot user tracking radar. I say this as an engineer that works for them.
It certainly wouldn't be worth their money unless there was government funding behind it or there was the potential for vast investment from the military. I don't really see that here. It would, however, be worth the money to be responsible for/own a national weather tracking system.
Just curious as to what, if any, impact this would have on your eyes since each one would be seeing a separate image therefore working a bit harder to make sense of it.
I'm remembering the strain of looking at stereoscopic images and this sounds a bit like that.
It doesn't matter that the images are different for both eyes. Your eyes normally see two different images anyway (that's how you perceive depth). What matters is how good the software is at generating two different images that the brain will perceive as a 3D scene. Since 3D software has been around a while, I assume they could do this fairly well. The limiting factor would then be if the hardware can handle rendering 2 scenes at once at a decent framerate. In my experience, what makes your eyes hurt is the flicker.
If evolution were "fact", then it would be possible to reproduce the process experimentally.
I applaud the well-worded post, but the problem is that things get tricky when working on the timescale of evolutionary theory. I can, however, fathom such an experiment where a population of organisms are kept in a controlled and self-sufficient environment and monitored for evolutionary signs. Practically, I cannot monitor such an experiment for the time duration required, nor can I sufficiently control the immensely numerous variables.
But the one pro-creation element in all his experiments that could not be avoided: Who did Miller himself represent in the experiment if not an intelligent creator? In the actual event, who takes the place of Miller?
Can creationism be proven scientifically? As you said, Stanley Miller FAILED at his attempt to create life. If he indeed played the role of creator and failed to create, didn't he just as equally work toward a disproof of creationist theory? Had he succeeded, the next question would have been: "What if some entity did this with the early Earth?" even after religious faith had been shaken to its core. If you are implying that creation on earth requires extra-scientific principles, then why make the argument you made?
Conveniently, the "fact" of creationist ideology has no experiment and can only be disproved by the success of an alternate theory.
From the article: In flights conducted Aug. 27 on the same test range where Chuck Yeager first broke the sound barrier nearly 56 years ago...
Of course it works here. They admit themselves that the sound barrier is already broken at this location. Did anyone ever bother to FIX it in 56 years? Nooooooo. Maybe if it works at another location I will be impressed.
Expect laptop system prices to eventually drop because of this technology. Any business knows that consumables are the real way to make a profit. Just like your inkjet printer that cost barely more than the refill cartidge (just so you don't just go buy a new printer with a starter ink cartridge), your laptop will cost a couple hundred dollars while its "official" and proprietary fuel cell refill will cost about $45.
In the long run, you'll spend much more on refills than on the original hardware, but the initial purchase will seem cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
The only corruption here is the horrible corruption of the English language that somehow lead to CmdrTaco thinking "to savage" meant "to ravage."
:to attack or treat brutally
:to wreak havoc on : affect destructively
From m-w.com:
savage v.
ravage v.
Seems like either of these is just fine in the context provided.
Moreover, one factor not taken into account is the packaging: what are they going to do, start printing fingernail-sized booklets of the artwork and lyrics that you can only read with an electron microscope?
No, this will be when the record companies backtrack on their previous claims of CD value and start telling customers that they don't want bulky inserts and artwork since they detract from the overall portability and convenience. They'll tell us that nobody ever bought CDs because of the packaging and that it contributed to the high price of CDs. Prices, of course, will not go down upon moving to the new format due to manufacturing and production costs.
[/cynicism]
It is possible that the bakeout will happen in mid December...
I, for one, plan to buy as many Rice Krispies treats as I can carry in order to support this worthwhile repair effort.
Ssveral [sic] years will pass before improved artificial hips come to market. But the needs are growing.
And if the market for improved hips doesn't grow as expected they can always hire a goon squad to artificially inflate demand.
...Of course, whether or not these measures are adequate for this purpose is another question.
most military applications are *not* shielded against EM pulses
That's incorrect. Working on military vehicles and weapon systems, I can tell you that EM shielding has been an important factor for over 30 years. Some that I've worked on specify a 60dB reduction in EM radiation.
While individual components may not be shielded all that well (especially with off the shelf components) you can be assured that the enclosure they are used in is EM shielded.
For many ruggedized components encasing them in a heavy metal case is standard practice. A faraday cage is not an monetarily expensive solution although adding 50 pounds of steel to a computer has other, more backbreaking drawbacks.
How do you tell which one of us has "more" love?
I believe this is one of the rare disputes that can only be settled by a fight to the death.
Is it me, or does the Caldera logo appear as Mickey Mouse's head in blue overshadowing a red globe? Isn't that copyright infringement? Maybe it's just a portent of Disney's future global domination.
A la Dave Barry:
sonic womb would be a great name for a band.
How Do You Store Your Media?
Is that some sort of geek come-on?
Old Lady #1: It's so hard nowadays, with all the gangs and rap music..
Old Lady #2: What about the robots?
Old Lady #3: Oh, they're everywhere!
Old Lady #2: I don't even know why the scientists make them.
[/SNL]
Karate capable robots. Just what we need.
The article states SunnComm's position that "Halderman has violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by disclosing unpublished MediaMax management files placed on a user's computer after user approval is granted."
This makes me sick. This statement pretty much attempts to validate any DRM or spyware that a company tries to install on my machine without me really knowing about it. They're also claiming that I can't go tell people what their software does to my system and what files it uses because some of them might be "unpublished" DRM features. Maybe circumvention of their software shouldn't be so easy that simply knowing this information makes it possible to undermine it.
Translation:
"By installing our software that is automatically run by default by your OS without really knowing what it does, you have agreed not to disclose the identity of its running processes which can be identified by viewing the OS's task manager (a secret feature that nobody is supposed to use). Oh, and you better not go looking into the program directory because if you start telling people what's in there we'll sue you. And another thing, don't you dare tell people about that shift key!"
Anyone else feeling queasy?
Just dock at the Rusty Scupper and whip out your laptop.
I almost didn't make it to the end of that sentence. I'm glad the last word was "laptop".
These cans will have to transmit their position to Coca-cola. The article does not say how they do this. I assume that GPS enabled cell phones use the cellular network to transmit their positions. Will the cans use the cell phone network? Some other radio transmission?
Also, for info on how GPS works, click.
you've got to wonder why Raytheon would pump $5M into it if there wasn't something in it for them...
Raytheon makes the most radar systems in the U.S.. They make most of the radar systems in boats and in the planes you fly in as well as those at the airport. Who else would you want to make them?
I'm not sure Raytheon could make radars that do more than track weather for ultra-cheap (relatively). Radars are very specifically designed for different purposes. It would involve some heavy software reliance and versatility to make a weather/aircraft/slashdot user tracking radar. I say this as an engineer that works for them.
It certainly wouldn't be worth their money unless there was government funding behind it or there was the potential for vast investment from the military. I don't really see that here. It would, however, be worth the money to be responsible for/own a national weather tracking system.
In 10 years the cheap availability of digital textbooks will be offset by the animated ads for fast food and deoderant that appear in the margins.
::Runs to patent office::
Ummm... Patent Pending!
You need an inverted soup bowel or something to give clearance over the turntable drive peg.
Look, I don't know what the hell you just said, but you're not allowed in my kitchen.
Just curious as to what, if any, impact this would have on your eyes since each one would be seeing a separate image therefore working a bit harder to make sense of it. I'm remembering the strain of looking at stereoscopic images and this sounds a bit like that.
It doesn't matter that the images are different for both eyes. Your eyes normally see two different images anyway (that's how you perceive depth). What matters is how good the software is at generating two different images that the brain will perceive as a 3D scene. Since 3D software has been around a while, I assume they could do this fairly well. The limiting factor would then be if the hardware can handle rendering 2 scenes at once at a decent framerate. In my experience, what makes your eyes hurt is the flicker.
If evolution were "fact", then it would be possible to reproduce the process experimentally.
I applaud the well-worded post, but the problem is that things get tricky when working on the timescale of evolutionary theory. I can, however, fathom such an experiment where a population of organisms are kept in a controlled and self-sufficient environment and monitored for evolutionary signs. Practically, I cannot monitor such an experiment for the time duration required, nor can I sufficiently control the immensely numerous variables.
But the one pro-creation element in all his experiments that could not be avoided: Who did Miller himself represent in the experiment if not an intelligent creator? In the actual event, who takes the place of Miller?
Can creationism be proven scientifically? As you said, Stanley Miller FAILED at his attempt to create life. If he indeed played the role of creator and failed to create, didn't he just as equally work toward a disproof of creationist theory? Had he succeeded, the next question would have been: "What if some entity did this with the early Earth?" even after religious faith had been shaken to its core. If you are implying that creation on earth requires extra-scientific principles, then why make the argument you made?
Conveniently, the "fact" of creationist ideology has no experiment and can only be disproved by the success of an alternate theory.
From the article:
In flights conducted Aug. 27 on the same test range where Chuck Yeager first broke the sound barrier nearly 56 years ago...
Of course it works here. They admit themselves that the sound barrier is already broken at this location. Did anyone ever bother to FIX it in 56 years? Nooooooo. Maybe if it works at another location I will be impressed.
From the page source:
[font class=textsmall]This story has been viewed 1128 times. [/font]
( [] used to get through the comment form. )
It's static text. Someone should inform the Taipei Times how counters work.
THE SKY IS NOT BLUE
It depends on what your definition of "is" is.
Expect laptop system prices to eventually drop because of this technology. Any business knows that consumables are the real way to make a profit. Just like your inkjet printer that cost barely more than the refill cartidge (just so you don't just go buy a new printer with a starter ink cartridge), your laptop will cost a couple hundred dollars while its "official" and proprietary fuel cell refill will cost about $45.
In the long run, you'll spend much more on refills than on the original hardware, but the initial purchase will seem cheap.
Wow, 4 posts and already Slashdotted.
Soon the structure of the server will be "reordered".
Would it even be feasible to send probes to Venus, or is it just too hot?
Yeah, according to Roman mythology, Venus was pretty hot.