the only way to detect nat is with protocol-based packet inspection. the tcp header would appear the same whether there was a router doing nat or a regular pc hanging off the circuit. unless the router is assigning a tos value or some other such malarkey of course.
(not sure why i posted this on their website. i blame the booze).
Did a bit of math and figured out that at 60mph you would need a complete obstruction every 2.5 feet to induce a state change (on-off), 5 feet for a full flicker (on-off-on).
This compound cycles on-off 33.333 (repeating, of course) times/sec. Halve that for a full on-off-on cycle. The human eye can do fine with a video frame rate of 30/sec, but can detect up to 72 frames/sec.
It is possible the flicker may induce optical illusions, but not likely considering the optimal cycle time produces the highest flicker rate. Any UV transition slower will produce less flickers/sec, while a faster transition will create an increasingly static tint (chemical can't transition quickly enough).
Now sitting under a 60Hz black light, that may be kind of trippy.
Step 1: Dude! Did you hear about that new profit motive thingy? With this new profit motive we can spur all kinds of new innovation! Like being able to differentiate between different hardware manufacturers to ensure innovative limits to conference calls! YEAH!
Ebay is getting pretty big for its britches. Legal/financial problems with paypal, losses from skype (once everyone figures out skype is irrelevant), and niche/innovative competition will eventually lead to ebay's demise.
Either to avoid future litigation costs from consumer rights groups or the government on anti-trust. Also possibly to avoid tarnishing their 'good image' when consumers realize they have, again, been duped by the corps.
How, in all of Hades, do you draw that conclusion?
Because I, dear Sir, are slightly more knowledgable about the subject than you.
Isn't any cancer a genetic mutation of sorts?
Exactly my point! The idea behind testicular or ovarian cancer, however, is that it can affect the reproductive organs of an individual. This makes a larger difference in an individual that has yet to reproduce than in someone who has already reproduced.
...despite the age of the victim.
Ah. But the age of the victim is all too important here. With a young enough victim of a non-fatal mutation, you can be sure that any reproducing they will do incorporates that mutation. This is more true in males, who continually generate new reproductive cells, than in females, who are born with all their reproductive cells already generated. In this case, males produce a longer-term target for mutation because any changes made to their reproductive stem cells will affect ALL of their sperm produced from that point. With females, only one ovum at a time will be affected by any mutations that occur, and any mutations that happen to their reproductive stem cells would need to occur before they are born to have any effect on their ova.
I would think, if anything, that your arguement would demonstrate a sort of anti-evolution....one in which the subjects to not mutate for the betterment of its species.
Evolutions' premise, IIRC, lay's in the belief that species will adapt to environmental and physical stimula to ensure survival. If there is not a need, then there is not a mutation.
If there didn't need to be a need to cause a mutation...then we would have horn's growing out of our head, or feathers on our butt...or something almost as silly as your conclusion.
You have no idea how evolution is supposed to work, so let me help you out a bit. Evolution is not something that an individual or species chooses to happen (except for humans). The idea of mutations being introduced into a population is what makes evolution actually work. These mutations are neither good nor bad, they just are. Where we are today, why we do not have feathers or horns was dependent upon a very very long process where certain mutations in populations were eliminated via death and certain mutations were accentuated via enchanced reproduction.
Also, after you are done with your evolutionary reading assignment, I suggest you read about the use of the apostrophe. Specifically about its usage regarding pluralization and possessiveness.
So you have genetic structures being manipulted in pre-pubescent humans? Is there such a thing as early-onset testicular or ovarian cancer? Something like that could affect the stem cells producting reproductive cells.
If so, this could be concrete evidence of an evolutionary mechanism.
Slashdot Mirror
for an announcement this big they would have to have found adenosine triadenide.
capitalism is grand. king quarter. year over year increase or die at home crying.
There is also a huge difference between verizon's wireless, landline and longhaul divisions.
Just migrate to Subsonic. Much better imnsho.
i guess that eliminates all their directly connected ethernet customers...
the only way to detect nat is with protocol-based packet inspection. the tcp header would appear the same whether there was a router doing nat or a regular pc hanging off the circuit. unless the router is assigning a tos value or some other such malarkey of course.
did not know that.
also, i never said anything about a car :)
(not sure why i posted this on their website. i blame the booze).
Did a bit of math and figured out that at 60mph you would need a complete obstruction every 2.5 feet to induce a state change (on-off), 5 feet for a full flicker (on-off-on).
This compound cycles on-off 33.333 (repeating, of course) times/sec. Halve that for a full on-off-on cycle. The human eye can do fine with a video frame rate of 30/sec, but can detect up to 72 frames/sec.
It is possible the flicker may induce optical illusions, but not likely considering the optimal cycle time produces the highest flicker rate. Any UV transition slower will produce less flickers/sec, while a faster transition will create an increasingly static tint (chemical can't transition quickly enough).
Now sitting under a 60Hz black light, that may be kind of trippy.
Last I checked, the x86 instruction set has been public knowledge for 20+ years.
How about the P-P-P-Powerbook?
Perhaps you meant proprietarize, to bring proprietary to the internet?
You should quitize using izes... you are havizing no needize to verbalize a noun all the time...
Well... It WAS working. Then i did a search for 'Johnson' and now the webserver seems to be stuck in never-never land.
*sigh*
what's going to convince them that this is a bad idea?
maybe someone posting a link to the broward county public records site...
Step 1: Dude! Did you hear about that new profit motive thingy? With this new profit motive we can spur all kinds of new innovation! Like being able to differentiate between different hardware manufacturers to ensure innovative limits to conference calls! YEAH!
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!
Ebay is getting pretty big for its britches. Legal/financial problems with paypal, losses from skype (once everyone figures out skype is irrelevant), and niche/innovative competition will eventually lead to ebay's demise.
Either to avoid future litigation costs from consumer rights groups or the government on anti-trust. Also possibly to avoid tarnishing their 'good image' when consumers realize they have, again, been duped by the corps.
Hopefully this wonderful community does not succumb to the disease known as 'Poplaritis'
I remember the days before Counter Strike was sold on store shelves... way more mature.
affect/effect, meh! who really cares?
in this context:
effect = make gambling bigger
affect = make gambling bigger or smaller
the author probably wanted to use affect.
Throw a book into all the engines at 30,000 feet and see what happens...
My first thought as well, you beat me to it. Great set of books!
Because I, dear Sir, are slightly more knowledgable about the subject than you.
Isn't any cancer a genetic mutation of sorts?
Exactly my point! The idea behind testicular or ovarian cancer, however, is that it can affect the reproductive organs of an individual. This makes a larger difference in an individual that has yet to reproduce than in someone who has already reproduced.
Ah. But the age of the victim is all too important here. With a young enough victim of a non-fatal mutation, you can be sure that any reproducing they will do incorporates that mutation. This is more true in males, who continually generate new reproductive cells, than in females, who are born with all their reproductive cells already generated. In this case, males produce a longer-term target for mutation because any changes made to their reproductive stem cells will affect ALL of their sperm produced from that point. With females, only one ovum at a time will be affected by any mutations that occur, and any mutations that happen to their reproductive stem cells would need to occur before they are born to have any effect on their ova.
I would think, if anything, that your arguement would demonstrate a sort of anti-evolution....one in which the subjects to not mutate for the betterment of its species.
Evolutions' premise, IIRC, lay's in the belief that species will adapt to environmental and physical stimula to ensure survival. If there is not a need, then there is not a mutation.
If there didn't need to be a need to cause a mutation...then we would have horn's growing out of our head, or feathers on our butt...or something almost as silly as your conclusion.
You have no idea how evolution is supposed to work, so let me help you out a bit. Evolution is not something that an individual or species chooses to happen (except for humans). The idea of mutations being introduced into a population is what makes evolution actually work. These mutations are neither good nor bad, they just are. Where we are today, why we do not have feathers or horns was dependent upon a very very long process where certain mutations in populations were eliminated via death and certain mutations were accentuated via enchanced reproduction.
Also, after you are done with your evolutionary reading assignment, I suggest you read about the use of the apostrophe. Specifically about its usage regarding pluralization and possessiveness.
Have A Nice Day.
So you have genetic structures being manipulted in pre-pubescent humans? Is there such a thing as early-onset testicular or ovarian cancer? Something like that could affect the stem cells producting reproductive cells.
If so, this could be concrete evidence of an evolutionary mechanism.
They will call their new technology... Divx?
You are thinking too hard about dog ownership.
Get a cat. Seriously.
Do they have an anti-face-biting-off attachment for rottweilers?