The ACLU has long considered the bill of rights to be a menu, to pick and choose from. They're too busy with the left side of the menu to support anything on the right.
Who said anything about batteries? Use wind & solar directly - right to the inverter & to the load.
As far as cars and other mobile power units - wouldn't it make more sense to pursue the hybrid approach? Use a fuel-consuming device to turn a generator, which then runs motors at each wheel. You get the regenerative braking and all those benefits, while using a fuel that can be delivered by the existing infrastructure. There are no hydrogen stations at this time, but you sure can buy diesel and gasoline - great. Let's encourage use of those; might even be nice to emphasise biofuels that are compatible with the existing vehicles, and the hybrids.
Now, you've got a bunch of hybrids running around. Yay. You're getting road-time on the technology, economies of scale start working for you, and public accpetance improves. This isn't just a technical problem, after all, and the whole world doesn't think like engineers. Get 'em used to the idea of a motor indirectly running their electric cars, and make it convenient for 'em by letting them fill up wherever the heck they want to.
*then* is the time that the hybrid technologies are viable, accepted, and efficient enough, and it's time to roll a new fuel into the mix. Maybe it is hydrogen, maybe not. Get part of the system changed at a time - changing everything at once introduces too many new technologies at the same time, each of which come with an efficiency hit, a public understanding/acceptance hit, and a cost hit.
Like any new technology, a staged approach is the way to go. I think hybrid autos using existing fuel sources are a logical starting point.
Sure, but if you're going to go with wind & solar, which are barely cost-justifiable at this time, why then waste 2/3 of it converting to and from hydrogen rather than using it directly? You can get all touch-feely about it, but fact is, that doesn't sell technology. "Here; use this, it costs more and is 1/3 as good" is rarely an effective sales pitch. "Here; use this, it costs about the same, is just as good, and it's a cleaner technology" will sell systems. Initially, those who buy it are the ones who feel strongly about the technology or about the "green-ness" of it, which makes the cost come down, but not enough folks will adopt something that has built-in, systemic inefficiencies preventing it's use.
I'd like to buy a 25KW fuel cell - know anyone selling them? "more efficient overall" is useless, when the technology can't be bought, and if the cost is 10X that of a diesel/electric generator, a factor of 3X in efficiency isn't gonna sell the unit.
Yes, it could. However, wind or solar directly to electricity, for fixed sites, is much more efficient than converting them to hydrogen & using it for a mobile source. You lose quite a bit in converting to hydrogen, and then another "quite a bit" in consuming it, so it's not a very efficient way of using that wind or solar power.
Well, yeah, it'd be nice for prototyping, but really what's wrong with a protoboard or even some sort of simulation software? In reality, you're going to want to do this more quickly than soldering to a prototype board every time, right?
Oh - one thing...how are you planning to produce your hydrogen? Can't mine it - can't make a well to find it - gotta generate it by reforming another hydrocarbon (read: fuel) or by hydrolysis of water (read: takes fuel).
Other than those inconvenient facts, it's a great idea. How about biofuels instead - veggie oil runs diesel engines quite happily, for instance, and we've got plenty of excess capacity to grow the soybeans for it.
Go to spamcop.net and click on "report spam". It parses the headers for you, sends the reports, and uses the report to build up a pattern of abuse. Doesn't charge for the reporting service. I use them to filter my personal email; they clean the inbox & deliver the contents to where I want it...that takes a subscription,but reporting is free.
Of course, who knows what info iTunes is sending Apple on its own? By default, iTunes installs a service called "iTuneshelper.exe" that runs as a TSR even when iTunes is closed.
If you're concerned about this, what does your firewall show that it's doing? Even the free ZoneAlarm will tell you things such as "program (blah) is trying to send data to (blah)".
Your concerns regarding iTunes seem to be that you don't know what (if anything) it's sending out, which is a supremely easy thing to check, and that it comes with some options you don't want, and you're further expanding your "I don't know, and I apparently haven't bothered to check" to privacy concerns. Concerns are fine; go check it out & see what, if anything, it's sending where.
I'm doing that just now (installing PHP on Solaris). On the Linux box, the dependancies worked out nicely, on the Solaris 9 box, I'm in cascading-dependancy-hell. Yeah, I know, it's just making a bunch of stuff, but still...
Linux is still the ultimate free software desktop OS though. FreeBSD is good for hackers of all ages and servers, but definately not a desktop OS for newbies...
Well, Mac OS-X has done an admirable job of making FreeBSD a desktop OS for newbies. Either a *BSD or Linux can be vastly preferable to Windows from my perspective - I'm usually the informal friends-and-family "help me" call recipient. I now have two problem users' boxes converted over to Linux. They use the system for email and "tha interweb'. I have root, they don't...so, they are very limited in how they can screw up their systems, and I can admin it from home.
Either way, I'm glad to see 5.1 is out, and may try it out at some point. Need to build a firewall box, seems like the logical choice.
You make technology decisions based on vague rememberings of something that you can't find evidence of?
Maybe you're thinking of the ads displayed during the install process rather than spyware? That's a pretty hefty accusation to be tossing around, even in a vaguely-worded statement such as yours.
It's not about messaging, it's about "StarKitty is typing a message" kind of notifications. It's been a long time since I used Unix 'talk', but I seem to recall it's in there.
I know most of the pulse sequence designers for GE's MRI scanners - trust me, the noises aren't the only strange thing in that department. A bunch of brilliant physicists and computer scientists, to be sure, but uniformly goofy.
That having been said - the physics dictates the sound. You've got three gradient coils around you, for X,Y, and Z, each of which are pulsing in the audio frequencies, so an RF pulse can excite a particular area for imaging.
Originally, the gradient amps for GE's scanners were Techron 8603's, which had an analog input on the front panel. Some interesting (and highly unauthorized) experiments took place involving Dark Side of the Moon and that analog input; an MRI scanner is a very good speaker...and the effect of lying in the tube with that music swirling around is absolutely indescribable.
Not at all. If they want to not release their source code, they're perfectly free to do that...but of course, they're then perfectly welcome to not use GPL software to build from in the first place, what with that being the deal and all.
Why, we didn't even have software, we had to build our own out of zeros and ones. Sometimes we didn't even have ones, so we had to use an "L" and cut the leg off it. Ah, but you tell kids these days, and they just don't understand...
I have a couple of primestar dishes that interested folks could have, just east of Madison, Wisconsin, USA - and I work in Milwaukee. If you're interested and close, send me a comment to arrange.
Exactly my thoughts - I have several DirectTV dishes lying around that I was going to use for a 1.1 mile 802.11b link, and it just wasn't worth the hassle. The offset feedhorn makes mounting (and the math) inconvenient, and to me it wasn't worth the risk of, ahem, going beyond the 24 dBi of gain that the FCC allows. Better to be able to point to published specs for each piece of gear, and cable losses, and explain how you're not exceeding the legal limits. Yeah it's cool and all that, but what's the gain of these? (I don't know either). is it worth taking a chance?
For what it's worth, two Linksys WAP11's in bridge mode, and two directional 24dBi gain antennae, and my link is rock solid at 1.1 miles.
OK, so I'm a Beatles fan. Big time. Got all the records they've released, and many they haven't. (Wups. Can I say that?)
And yet, I'm an Apple (as in, OS-X) zealot. So, I think I can claim to be at least as neutral as anyone else can claim to be, while feeling strongly aligned with both sides. So, as I understand it, Apple Computers agreed to not distribute music, so as not to be confused with Apple Corps, the Beatles' music distribution company. Seems to me, Apple computers has started distributing music, which is in direct violation of said agreement (if it really exists as I understand). If Apple said they wouldn't do it, and Apple is doing it, then Apple is justified in saying "Now wait just a damn minute here".
I don't really think that Paul and Ringo, and Yoko and, er, er, er, Mrs. Harrison, are saying "Let's get Jobs" here, but a deal is, after all, a deal. They said they wouldn't distribute music, that that was Apple Corps' territory, and now they've changed.
A logical conclusion here would be a peaceful, out of court settlement, saying "OK we changed our mind, how much do you want?". They *should* have taken care of that ahead of time, and I'm a bit surprised that they didn't.
This might not be (just) about being against SCOs ethics - given Darl's track record, there might be a very real possibility that if someone hires one of "his" people, he could come after that company and somehow claim that they have stolen "his" property (the intellectual property inside that person's head).
Problem with SCO is that since nothing they're doing makes sense, predicting future moves is equally difficult.
If there's going to be a line-by-line comparison, this is the tool to do it. Once those lines are identified, *then* it's simply a matter of finding out the origins of them; that's where we can roll it back to a textbook published in 1973 or whatever.
Until the lines that are common are identified, it's impossible to defend against the accusations. Because of that, I bet Darling Darl won't allow it to be used. The question is, how to turn the inevitable refusal into something that shuts him (up|down).
Slashdot Mirror
The ACLU has long considered the bill of rights to be a menu, to pick and choose from. They're too busy with the left side of the menu to support anything on the right.
Who said anything about batteries? Use wind & solar directly - right to the inverter & to the load.
As far as cars and other mobile power units - wouldn't it make more sense to pursue the hybrid approach? Use a fuel-consuming device to turn a generator, which then runs motors at each wheel. You get the regenerative braking and all those benefits, while using a fuel that can be delivered by the existing infrastructure. There are no hydrogen stations at this time, but you sure can buy diesel and gasoline - great. Let's encourage use of those; might even be nice to emphasise biofuels that are compatible with the existing vehicles, and the hybrids.
Now, you've got a bunch of hybrids running around. Yay. You're getting road-time on the technology, economies of scale start working for you, and public accpetance improves. This isn't just a technical problem, after all, and the whole world doesn't think like engineers. Get 'em used to the idea of a motor indirectly running their electric cars, and make it convenient for 'em by letting them fill up wherever the heck they want to.
*then* is the time that the hybrid technologies are viable, accepted, and efficient enough, and it's time to roll a new fuel into the mix. Maybe it is hydrogen, maybe not. Get part of the system changed at a time - changing everything at once introduces too many new technologies at the same time, each of which come with an efficiency hit, a public understanding/acceptance hit, and a cost hit.
Like any new technology, a staged approach is the way to go. I think hybrid autos using existing fuel sources are a logical starting point.
Sure, but if you're going to go with wind & solar, which are barely cost-justifiable at this time, why then waste 2/3 of it converting to and from hydrogen rather than using it directly? You can get all touch-feely about it, but fact is, that doesn't sell technology. "Here; use this, it costs more and is 1/3 as good" is rarely an effective sales pitch. "Here; use this, it costs about the same, is just as good, and it's a cleaner technology" will sell systems. Initially, those who buy it are the ones who feel strongly about the technology or about the "green-ness" of it, which makes the cost come down, but not enough folks will adopt something that has built-in, systemic inefficiencies preventing it's use.
I'd like to buy a 25KW fuel cell - know anyone selling them? "more efficient overall" is useless, when the technology can't be bought, and if the cost is 10X that of a diesel/electric generator, a factor of 3X in efficiency isn't gonna sell the unit.
Yes, it could. However, wind or solar directly to electricity, for fixed sites, is much more efficient than converting them to hydrogen & using it for a mobile source. You lose quite a bit in converting to hydrogen, and then another "quite a bit" in consuming it, so it's not a very efficient way of using that wind or solar power.
Well, yeah, it'd be nice for prototyping, but really what's wrong with a protoboard or even some sort of simulation software? In reality, you're going to want to do this more quickly than soldering to a prototype board every time, right?
Yay hydrogen.
Oh - one thing...how are you planning to produce your hydrogen? Can't mine it - can't make a well to find it - gotta generate it by reforming another hydrocarbon (read: fuel) or by hydrolysis of water (read: takes fuel).
Other than those inconvenient facts, it's a great idea. How about biofuels instead - veggie oil runs diesel engines quite happily, for instance, and we've got plenty of excess capacity to grow the soybeans for it.
Check out fink, it's as close as I needed, might do it for you.
Go to spamcop.net and click on "report spam". It parses the headers for you, sends the reports, and uses the report to build up a pattern of abuse. Doesn't charge for the reporting service. I use them to filter my personal email; they clean the inbox & deliver the contents to where I want it...that takes a subscription,but reporting is free.
Of course, who knows what info iTunes is sending Apple on its own? By default, iTunes installs a service called "iTuneshelper.exe" that runs as a TSR even when iTunes is closed.
If you're concerned about this, what does your firewall show that it's doing? Even the free ZoneAlarm will tell you things such as "program (blah) is trying to send data to (blah)".
Your concerns regarding iTunes seem to be that you don't know what (if anything) it's sending out, which is a supremely easy thing to check, and that it comes with some options you don't want, and you're further expanding your "I don't know, and I apparently haven't bothered to check" to privacy concerns. Concerns are fine; go check it out & see what, if anything, it's sending where.
I'm doing that just now (installing PHP on Solaris). On the Linux box, the dependancies worked out nicely, on the Solaris 9 box, I'm in cascading-dependancy-hell. Yeah, I know, it's just making a bunch of stuff, but still...
Linux is still the ultimate free software desktop OS though. FreeBSD is good for hackers of all ages and servers, but definately not a desktop OS for newbies...
Well, Mac OS-X has done an admirable job of making FreeBSD a desktop OS for newbies. Either a *BSD or Linux can be vastly preferable to Windows from my perspective - I'm usually the informal friends-and-family "help me" call recipient. I now have two problem users' boxes converted over to Linux. They use the system for email and "tha interweb'. I have root, they don't...so, they are very limited in how they can screw up their systems, and I can admin it from home.
Either way, I'm glad to see 5.1 is out, and may try it out at some point. Need to build a firewall box, seems like the logical choice.
Well, I for one wecome our {thwack}
Surely the OS was sophisticated enough to allow you to kill the errant process and resume working as normal.
You apparently missed the bit about this only running on Windows?
You make technology decisions based on vague rememberings of something that you can't find evidence of?
Maybe you're thinking of the ads displayed during the install process rather than spyware? That's a pretty hefty accusation to be tossing around, even in a vaguely-worded statement such as yours.
It's not about messaging, it's about "StarKitty is typing a message" kind of notifications. It's been a long time since I used Unix 'talk', but I seem to recall it's in there.
I know most of the pulse sequence designers for GE's MRI scanners - trust me, the noises aren't the only strange thing in that department. A bunch of brilliant physicists and computer scientists, to be sure, but uniformly goofy.
That having been said - the physics dictates the sound. You've got three gradient coils around you, for X,Y, and Z, each of which are pulsing in the audio frequencies, so an RF pulse can excite a particular area for imaging.
Originally, the gradient amps for GE's scanners were Techron 8603's, which had an analog input on the front panel. Some interesting (and highly unauthorized) experiments took place involving Dark Side of the Moon and that analog input; an MRI scanner is a very good speaker...and the effect of lying in the tube with that music swirling around is absolutely indescribable.
Is that soo much to ask?
Not at all. If they want to not release their source code, they're perfectly free to do that...but of course, they're then perfectly welcome to not use GPL software to build from in the first place, what with that being the deal and all.
Why, we didn't even have software, we had to build our own out of zeros and ones. Sometimes we didn't even have ones, so we had to use an "L" and cut the leg off it. Ah, but you tell kids these days, and they just don't understand...
I have a couple of primestar dishes that interested folks could have, just east of Madison, Wisconsin, USA - and I work in Milwaukee. If you're interested and close, send me a comment to arrange.
Exactly my thoughts - I have several DirectTV dishes lying around that I was going to use for a 1.1 mile 802.11b link, and it just wasn't worth the hassle. The offset feedhorn makes mounting (and the math) inconvenient, and to me it wasn't worth the risk of, ahem, going beyond the 24 dBi of gain that the FCC allows. Better to be able to point to published specs for each piece of gear, and cable losses, and explain how you're not exceeding the legal limits. Yeah it's cool and all that, but what's the gain of these? (I don't know either). is it worth taking a chance?
For what it's worth, two Linksys WAP11's in bridge mode, and two directional 24dBi gain antennae, and my link is rock solid at 1.1 miles.
I apologize - I didn't intend that as a slap against The Onion. I shall be more careful in the future.
OK, so I'm a Beatles fan. Big time. Got all the records they've released, and many they haven't. (Wups. Can I say that?)
And yet, I'm an Apple (as in, OS-X) zealot. So, I think I can claim to be at least as neutral as anyone else can claim to be, while feeling strongly aligned with both sides. So, as I understand it, Apple Computers agreed to not distribute music, so as not to be confused with Apple Corps, the Beatles' music distribution company. Seems to me, Apple computers has started distributing music, which is in direct violation of said agreement (if it really exists as I understand). If Apple said they wouldn't do it, and Apple is doing it, then Apple is justified in saying "Now wait just a damn minute here".
I don't really think that Paul and Ringo, and Yoko and, er, er, er, Mrs. Harrison, are saying "Let's get Jobs" here, but a deal is, after all, a deal. They said they wouldn't distribute music, that that was Apple Corps' territory, and now they've changed.
A logical conclusion here would be a peaceful, out of court settlement, saying "OK we changed our mind, how much do you want?". They *should* have taken care of that ahead of time, and I'm a bit surprised that they didn't.
This might not be (just) about being against SCOs ethics - given Darl's track record, there might be a very real possibility that if someone hires one of "his" people, he could come after that company and somehow claim that they have stolen "his" property (the intellectual property inside that person's head).
Problem with SCO is that since nothing they're doing makes sense, predicting future moves is equally difficult.
If there's going to be a line-by-line comparison, this is the tool to do it. Once those lines are identified, *then* it's simply a matter of finding out the origins of them; that's where we can roll it back to a textbook published in 1973 or whatever.
Until the lines that are common are identified, it's impossible to defend against the accusations. Because of that, I bet Darling Darl won't allow it to be used. The question is, how to turn the inevitable refusal into something that shuts him (up|down).