Actually it should be quite easy to work out. I expect that phorm does a man-in-the-middle attack and pretends to have the user agent of the web browser that has been tricked. All you need to do is ask some people who are using phorm to add "PhormIP" to their user agents.
It's easy to see if you're using phorm because it does an HTTP redirect to webwise.net.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but you definitely can't transmit information using entanglement. You can only know that both parties have them same *random* data.
It is effectively the same as writing a random number down on two bits of paper. Each party goes off and can now look at the paper if they like. Obviously there's no way to transmit information because they can't affect anything the other person sees or does.
"If I could know everything about a particle magically then of course I'd be able to write down its exact position and velocity; otherwise I'd be using pretty poor magic!"
No you couldn't! The point is it doesn't *have* an exact position and velocity.
From wikipedia:
"The uncertainty principle is often explained as the statement that the measurement of position necessarily disturbs a particle's momentum, and vice versaâ"i.e., that the uncertainty principle is a manifestation of the observer effect.
This explanation is sometimes misleading in a modern context, because it makes it seem that the disturbances are somehow conceptually avoidable â" that there are states of the particle with definite position and momentum, but the experimental devices we have today are just not good enough to produce those states. In fact, states with both definite position and momentum just do not exist in quantum mechanics, so it is not the measurement equipment that is at fault."
You're confusing the uncertainty principle with the observer effect.
It isn't possible to know the position and velocity of a particle exactly, *even in theory*. I.e. if you could know everything about the particle magically without doing any measurements then you still wouldn't be able to write down its exact position and velocity. In that sense the uncertainty principle is badly named - there isn't really any uncertainty involved.
It's just that velocity and position are macro quantities that don't make much sense on a quantum scale. It's the same as not being able to 'know' the frequency and arrival time of wave packets at the same time.
Well if they're anything like elbot, a simple question like:
"Which is faster, a car or a bullet?" would be enough to trip them up. I've still not seen anything that can answer even a simple question such as that.
Elbot: "Let's pretend we're in an infinite loop today and can't stop chatting with each other."
Erm. Right. Convincing. Anyone fooled by that is an idiot.
Good price, unlimited data quota, 24 Mb/s, free static IP, and they don't do anything to your traffic as far as I can tell. Oh and it's only a 3 month contract.
I also have no binocular vision, but I still have depth perception. I just have to use other cues - mainly texture, parallax and perspective. Doesn't work so well for things like catching balls.
In a recent episode they hacked into a submarine using a 'zero-day' exploit via a north sea internet cable. The submarine was in the process of tapping into the cable in order to launch a cyber attack against the UK which could DESTROY THE INTERNET!!!
Fortunately they were able to break through the submarine's three firewalls it for-some-reason had, in time to remotely sink it and avert catastrophe...
But Android doesn't have an on-screen keyboard, and the Neo Freerunner doesn't have a physical keyboard (and the screen doesn't really look big enough for an on screen one anyway). So how do you type?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually it should be quite easy to work out. I expect that phorm does a man-in-the-middle attack and pretends to have the user agent of the web browser that has been tricked. All you need to do is ask some people who are using phorm to add "PhormIP" to their user agents.
It's easy to see if you're using phorm because it does an HTTP redirect to webwise.net.
Woosh.
The joke is that 6*9=42 in base 13.
"it fully charges in between 5 and 30 minutes"
Isn't Tesla using laptop batteries? I doubt they can charge in much less than an hour...
Ohms law is completely different to Kirchoff's voltage and current laws.
KVL says the sum of the voltages around a loop is zero. KCL says the sum of the currents entering a node is zero.
Ohms law describes how voltage and current are related in a resistor. Totally unrelated.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but you definitely can't transmit information using entanglement. You can only know that both parties have them same *random* data.
It is effectively the same as writing a random number down on two bits of paper. Each party goes off and can now look at the paper if they like. Obviously there's no way to transmit information because they can't affect anything the other person sees or does.
You can only roll the dice once. After that they are no longer entangled.
"If I could know everything about a particle magically then of course I'd be able to write down its exact position and velocity; otherwise I'd be using pretty poor magic!"
No you couldn't! The point is it doesn't *have* an exact position and velocity.
From wikipedia:
"The uncertainty principle is often explained as the statement that the measurement of position necessarily disturbs a particle's momentum, and vice versaâ"i.e., that the uncertainty principle is a manifestation of the observer effect.
This explanation is sometimes misleading in a modern context, because it makes it seem that the disturbances are somehow conceptually avoidable â" that there are states of the particle with definite position and momentum, but the experimental devices we have today are just not good enough to produce those states. In fact, states with both definite position and momentum just do not exist in quantum mechanics, so it is not the measurement equipment that is at fault."
You're confusing the uncertainty principle with the observer effect.
It isn't possible to know the position and velocity of a particle exactly, *even in theory*. I.e. if you could know everything about the particle magically without doing any measurements then you still wouldn't be able to write down its exact position and velocity. In that sense the uncertainty principle is badly named - there isn't really any uncertainty involved.
It's just that velocity and position are macro quantities that don't make much sense on a quantum scale. It's the same as not being able to 'know' the frequency and arrival time of wave packets at the same time.
Well if they're anything like elbot, a simple question like:
"Which is faster, a car or a bullet?" would be enough to trip them up. I've still not seen anything that can answer even a simple question such as that.
Elbot: "Let's pretend we're in an infinite loop today and can't stop chatting with each other."
Erm. Right. Convincing. Anyone fooled by that is an idiot.
KMail and gmail have missing attachment detectors.
True, but nearly every UK ISP does this:
http://www.iwf.org.uk/funding/page.64.htm
And I've looked at the IWF blacklist. I don't think I'll be missing any of those sites. What sites do you want to access that the IWF blocks you from?
I recommend Be Unlimited: www.bethere.co.uk
Good price, unlimited data quota, 24 Mb/s, free static IP, and they don't do anything to your traffic as far as I can tell. Oh and it's only a 3 month contract.
I'm waiting for the plastic logic reader:
http://www.plasticlogic.com/
It is almost A4 size, mm-thin and doesn't look like shit.
Unfortunately it won't be out until 2010 and will probably be quite expensive ('aimed at the business market').
Still, it will be awesome for reading scientific papers, sheet music, manuals, reports and of course books.
"The Beatles wrote straight-up, standard pop music."
Rubbish! The Beatles created a new genre of music. A good one too. Britney Spears just continued the manufactured pop popularised by The Spice Girls.
Yeah I was wondering about that. At what point did it make sense to introduce a standard with a range of 2-32 GB?
I also have no binocular vision, but I still have depth perception. I just have to use other cues - mainly texture, parallax and perspective. Doesn't work so well for things like catching balls.
But anything is an improvement on low pressure sodium. Those only outputs a single frequency so everything looks the same manky orange colour.
Cider
Ha, you obviously don't watch spooks!
In a recent episode they hacked into a submarine using a 'zero-day' exploit via a north sea internet cable. The submarine was in the process of tapping into the cable in order to launch a cyber attack against the UK which could DESTROY THE INTERNET!!!
Fortunately they were able to break through the submarine's three firewalls it for-some-reason had, in time to remotely sink it and avert catastrophe...
Oh dear. :-(
It's not supposed to look good on screen. It is to save ink when printing.
You're making the assumption that people work continuously whenever their computer is on, and do no work when it is off/starting up.
> I think you'd need a ginormous matrix for this to be useful
There are ginormous matrices. For example finite element analysis often uses matrices with millions of rows.
So when you need to enter someone's name, write a text message or type in a URL you need to get out your bluetooth keyboard?
Are you being serious?
But Android doesn't have an on-screen keyboard, and the Neo Freerunner doesn't have a physical keyboard (and the screen doesn't really look big enough for an on screen one anyway). So how do you type?
Interesting... didn't know Americans pronounce foyer like that.
http://forthright.livejournal.com/151045.html