"The Sprint Power Vision Network now covers 153 million people and services customers in 220 major metropolitan areas as well as 470 airports across the nation, the most of any carrier. "
What's that giant sucking noise? Ah yes, the blogger kissing the ass of Sprint in exchange for getting the "priviledge" of a "first look."
BMW was one of the first. VW's were around the same time. Then Prius owners got the same thing. Lots of companies brought back "mp3 player" jacks for their stereos.
My mother has had a changer-plug interface in her volvo for 2-3 years now, from Blitzsafe.
How is this johnny-come-last press release even remotely worthy of front-page status? How much did Ford's PR firm pay to get this put there?
Now the black and white hats in the computer science department will now have a new toy to fight over. Whoever gets the most freebies wins!
No, no. You see, the white hats aren't in it to drink soda. They're there just to test security, so they'll break in, take a picture to prove they did it, write an email to the designers, and get arrested by campus security.
The black hats in the department will break in, but they don't actually want anyone to know that they managed to break in, or how...so they won't take anything or tell anyone.
The grey hats willbreak in drink the sodas because even though it's theft, the soda is grossly overpriced compared to what it cost to produce, and Coke oppresses workers in 3rd world countries. The white hats will get blamed for the missing sodas (which is even better, since they're a bunch of goody-two-shoes.)
This is, however, NOT representative of a "police state" or anything like what some in the original article went on about. This is also not 1984, nor is it because of the "environment fostered by the PATRIOT Act" or the Bush administration, or anything similar.
Bullshit. You don't read sites like photo.net, where stories of police harassment and intimidation are the norm, not the exception, and many photographers have stopped trying to photograph anything they think they might get in the slightest trouble over.
Man was physically intimidated and threatened by private security and police after photographing, from public property, a commercial chemical plant.
Young photojournalism student in Provincetown is roughed up by Provincetown police after shooting some pictures of cops beating a bunch of drunks.
MBTA has never permitted photography anywhere on its property, and is well known for its officers harassing photographers. NYC just instituted a no-photography rule in the last year or two.
Vacationers at the Golden Gate Bridge have had film confiscated for taking pictures of the bridge. When they said they were just tourists, they were told to buy a postcard from the vendor nearby. Security risk, or helping the postcard sellers?
Photograhpers are often harassed for taking pictures of public buildings, bridges, reservoirs, dams, etc. It has been a prevalent experience that anyone with a camera taking a picture of some sort of infrastructure is deemed a potential terrorist, or terrorism is trotted out as an excuse (see the Golden Gate postcard fiasco.)
Parents are reported to police by film development labs for taking pictures of their babies playing in the bath and have been threatened with having their children removed from them.
Those are just the few examples that immediately come to mind.
People are rotuinely roughened up, threatened with arrest or being "reported" to the FBI, arrested and detained then released before the charge-or-release 24 hours are up, lied to about their rights, what the law is, or what they are criminally liable for, had film/cards confiscated, their IDs demanded (would it scare you more if I called them "papers"?), and so on. These days just about anything gets you on various watch lists and that means even more fun.
We live in a country where you can be arrested for taking a picture of a bridge on vacation and get harassed trying to board a flight home because you were placed on a "watch" or "no fly" list. Wake up and smell the fucking coffee- we're fast headed the way of fascist and communist countries.
These blue crab nanosensors will be used to improve security in airports, hospitals and other public locations by detecting tiny amounts of explosives or chemicals in air and water.
Because after all, we've had such a huge problem with explosives and "chemicals" in airports, hospitals, and "other public locations"...
Then there's that minority, the stereotype bitter socially retarded geeks with chips on their shoulders, doomed to eternally relive some perceived rejection from a woman or girl that dates back to elementary school...
Wow. Just...wow. You complain about one stereotype, and then use another.
Newsflash: I don't know, nor have I ever heard of, any guys who "eternally relive [sic] some perceived rejection from a woman or girl blah blah blah". I -do- know of a lot of women that come up with "theories" for why men acted a particular way, why their relationship failed, etc...which is exactly what you just did; you pulled that straight out of your ass, because I guarantee no man has EVER told you about obsessing over some playground rejection. Most of these theories are extremely condescending; men are stupid, have no emotions, think with their dick, are obsessive and single-minded, etc. Don't even get me started on some of the conversations I've overheard between two or more lesbians. It used to be in style for guys to make dumb blond jokes; now it's women making dumb guy jokes or statements, and they're usually quite viscious.
Want to talk about childish jokes? I have a camera with a fairly big zoom lens. Perhaps one guy has joked "hey, that's a really thick lens" or somesuch. About a dozen plus women have. Interesting percentages, eh?
Maybe you should stop and consider that most IT workers just don't give a flying fuck who they work with, as long as they're competent/professional, and easy to work with.
I lost significant respect for soldiers the day I found some clips on a military-ish website.
One was a surveilance helicopter (dunno which one...probably the one with the camera/sensor ball above the rotor) and the video was from a training session. Most of the video, however, was of the crew watching thermal imaging of a couple having sex in the back seat of a convertible. So, if you think your military isn't spying on you as a civilian, you're right- "The Military" isn't, but a bunch of bored 20-somethings in multi-million-dollar toys ARE. And discipline in the military is so lax that apparently that kind of crap is tolerated.
Second sealed the deal for me. It was video from one of the big cargo-plane gunships in either Iraq or Aghanistan. The video consisted of thermal camera footage of them systematically gunning down people at some sort of small building- almost like a small church, quite possibly a mosque.
It showed people running for cover and the crew gunning them down, and it went for a good 5-10 minutes. They didn't appear to have any weapons, and were trying to hide behind walls and such (which didn't work since the gunship was circling.) That turned my stomach. However, when I listened more closely to the radio chatter, I wanted to throw up. The gunners and crew were laughing and joking. "Oh, quick, get 'im, there he goes!" "Oh, he thinks he's safe now, ahaha!", "hey, good shot there man! You really got him good!" etc. It was like a video game to them; my portrayal just doesn't do it "justice". There was no hate or malice- just very sickening joy on the part of those watching a video screen and plugging real people with real bullets and shells from miles away up in the sky.
Talk about video game violence just doesn't compare to the joy these murderers (I don't think the term "soldier" is even appropriate) took in killing other human beings. I feel a twang of guilt after a session of Battlefield 2, but these guys took joy in the real thing.
For those who don't know, the DES patent is owned by N.S.A. so when you see that Verizon's latest gadget that is triple DES encrypted don't be impressed, Uncle Sammy can get right in.
First off, the patent is owned by the NSA because they developed it.
They developed it because they're the most qualified to come up with encryption and guarantee its security for government use.
Despite a decade plus of DES being in wide use, brute-force attacks remain the most practical means of "breaking" DES encryption. This is despite FOUR DECADES of close inspection of the algorithm (DES was published in 1976.)
If enough calls, emails, and IMs are encrypted with even moderately sophisticated encryption, the NSA doesn't have a prayer no matter how much hardware they have. It's been known for years they're swamped with unencrypted stuff...
If your government or seller or whatever doesn't trust you, doesn't even try in the least, how the hell are you supposed to trust him? The most logical path would be to fully distrust him.
Given how often and severely government suppliers and contractors like Halliburton, Bechtels-Parsons, etc engage in all manner of willful, obvious fraud- anyone in the government that trusts their supplier is most likely benefitting in some way from the fraud. I think the challenge wouldn't be to name all the suppliers/contrators that are accused/guilty of fraud, but rather to find those who AREN'T.
Hell, even companies like Boeing are in on the act, though I think the public has generally forgotten about the whole Boeing billing scandal, but investors haven't (though probably only because the settlement cost Boeing a good chunk of change.)
Used to be "war profiteer" would result in you being unable to show your face in public ever again; the shame of taking advantage of the nation's defenses, et al. Now, investors don't care as long as you don't hurt the bottom line getting caught, and the public soon forgets. Same thing with the WTC scene thefts (firefighters, police, FBI, and government officials all the way up to Rumsfeld helped themselves to "mementos" or had people do it for them. Then there were the emergency services companies that shipped tons of relief supplies out of NYC and sold them for hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit.)
The regular USB mighty-mouse sorta works, but is hypersensitive to the point of uselessness with regards to left vs. right button clicks.
Either the MacOS driver is loading an updated firmware, the MM provides analog 'click' values, or the driver sets thresholds/adjusts sensitivity...but I had to scrounge around and find a 6 year old Logitech mouse because the MM was mostly useless in XP.
Although be careful - the financial professional's first obligation is to enrich himself, otherwise he is self-selecting to not be a finance professional.
That's why you go with someone who isn't mixing recommendations with his or her commissions- ie, a fee-based financial advisor. They won't have the temptation to steer you towards any particular investment strategy (or worse, to a specific investment firm/fund/stock/etc) for personal gain; rather, they're motivated by having you tell friends/coworkers/family how good a job they did.
Much of the job is beyond "buy this now" type advice; much of it is "you might want to do ____ because it'll reduce your tax burden because _______", etc. Fee-based advisors could almost be considered "financial educators", because most of the job (from what a friend told me, who is a fee-based planner/advisor) is just helping people learn about investment strategy, taxes, and law around financial matters.
Furthermore, for something as (relatively) simple as "I'm a student, I've got X sitting in the bank, how can I be in better shape?"...the fee shouldn't be very much, although as a young person with little knowledge in these matters, the two of you could talk for hours upon hours (and you'd be all the better for it.) Still, the fees are usually based off of your assets, because the more assets, the harder it is to manage. Things are a lot simpler with a)no kids currently / in the immediate future b)no girlfriend-who-may-soon-be-wife, c)no house or other real estate d)no existing investments to evaluate and e)very low relative net worth.
I recommend getting an online brokerage account
The original story poster is obviously an "investing n00b"...how is he going to know where to begin?
Once you have invested whatever you want, ignore the money. It will go up, it will go down - but over 20-30 years it is a very safe investment.
Did you not read the part about how he wants a short-term investment? The simple answer was "an ING savings account making 4.5-5%, or similar".
The plasma discharge will draw international attention since some scientists are concerned with risks involved in such a process. But Chinese researchers involved in the project say any radiation will cease once the test is completed.
So...I don't get it. They probably have a good guess as to how much radiation will be generated and everyone camps out at a safe distance.
No, I meant fix your transmission yourself. With a reasonable amount of study on basic automotive engineering, it shouldn't be that hard at all.
I understand what the poster is trying to say, but I think it backfired, because auto repair is easier than many think.
In this case- the manual transmission for my car (which is full-time AWD and has a limited-slip center differential, so it is fairly complex as transmissions go) doesn't require much rocket science. It requires the factory repair manual, a few special tools (some are specific to the transmission, others are just standard measuring tools), attention to detail, and making sure all the tolerances are correct (they're adjusted via lots of extra washers/spacers/shims.)
Granted it is one of the more complex mechanical jobs aside from a full engine rebuild, but those aren't very hard either. If you're ever curious about it and want to learn- sign up for an appropriate class at the local tech school to get basic good practices down. Then, start with old car bought off the classifieds for which you can find factory manuals/rebuild guides for. Set aside a fair bit of cash for the various tools you'll need, although some can be rented.
All this has me thinking, "gee, wouldn't it be nice if there was a 'Law for Citizens' class at the local community college?"
Techtarget's article is the equivalent of Father and Son at the baseball field. Dad throws 'em nice and slow, and Junior hits 'em every time.
To call this "press" is an insult to news media everywhere, even by their standards. This is nothing more than a fluff piece by Techtarget (and Techtarget isn't "media"; they're basically a "whitepaper rehasher") asking him exactly what he wants to be asked.
one day wireless USB devices will really work with out-of-the-box Linux!
Getting a driver into Linux is so full of road hazards because the "community"(read: the loudest mouths) is too idealistic, eccentric, and inflexible...and as a result, most companies go "fuck that 2% of the market" and release Windows drivers that, long as they work, nobody complains about, ever. Even MacOS X is easier; it's a much more stable "target" hardware/software-wise, and the community doesn't mix politics with purchases.
Not to mention most likely Brand X wireless card came complete with drivers from OEM company Z, just with Brand X silkscreened on the PCB...and Brand X couldn't "release" the drivers or write open-source ones if they wanted to.
...often happens by mistake, either directly (ie the famous mold story) or indirectly (something doesn't add up, everyone goes looking at why, and bam, finds something new.) We're also driven by competition (ego, vanity, etc), curiosity, etc. So one area to ponder, I suppose, is this:
AI's are human-designed/manufactured. Since we're prone to errors, it follows they are/will be as well. Does that mean AIs would make similar or different mistakes, and how would they handle them? The same, differently, or not at all? Will we see a regression, in that AIs will result to brute-force discovery much like early scientists? Will they evolve?
Another question area: Anyone who has built a compiler knows the three-tap rule. Build it, build it using itself, build it a third time, compare. Will AIs produce AIs, and if so, will they be better, or equally flawed? Will a 'perfect' AI still be capable of scientific invention/discovery? Will the mistakes of its human operators/supervisors/managers make up for its lack thereof?
What about drive? Will the drive of a human manager/supervisor/etc be sufficient substitute for an AI which can't posess them?
Calling anyone with a website who writes about something they saw on TV a journalist is kind of strange.
It's not just strange- it's wrong. My job title at one point was "Systems Engineer". I didn't have an engineering degree, and my father (who did) was severely irked, rightfully so; just because I came up with solutions involving computer systems did not make me an "engineer". This is the same kind of BS. "Journalist" is a professional title, and you can't slap it on a person simply because they yack about current events.
"Web loggers" point to FOX news and say "If THEY'RE journalists, I sure as hell am, especially since unlike them, I don't lie or distort things!" WRONG. FOX news staff are REPORTERS. If they went to school and studied journalism, THEN they are a journalist. Bill Oreilly is not a "journalist"; he's a cross between a commentator and a talk show host.
Go to Merriam-Webster and look up "journalism". Under "2B", you'll find "writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation". When anyone in the media talks about "journalism", that is the context they are referring to, not the OTHER definition of "someone who keeps a journal" (ie, diary.) Most of the "web loggers" who get up in a tizzy about this, compare themselves to professional journalists, which indicates they are using the 2B definition.
Most "web loggers" are PURELY in the business of interpreting news, events, or situations. That makes them news commentators ONLY!
I take it this will be the start of a series of "news articles" on Slash, AP, Reuters, etc about the movie?
I recall reading recently that entertainment "news" is very popular with newspapers and TV stations because they don't have to have a reporter do any leg-work or research, just get a clip or parrot a quote from the celeb's agent.
These days, thanks to newspaper/radio/tv mergers, all the big wigs care about is profit margin. Entertainment "news" like "Britney marries again!" can be made to fill the same amount of time as a story about (gasp) some bill before the House of Representatives that takes a reporter, camera crew and van travelling to the statehouse, fact checking, interviewing a couple representatives etc. Guess which is cheaper, by far?
You can't put regular gas in a Ferrari? What's the difference between regular gas and this special stuff? Does that mean when you buy a Ferrari you spend half you life looking for Ferrari-approved filling stations?
Someone (with a lot of money) bought one of Schumacher's old F1 cars and yes, it was contractually required that the car only be run on a specific brand of fuel.
The article summary is pretty oblivious though- you run the octane your car requires, 95% of the time. Gasolene companies love to make you think that filling up your low-compression engine (that requires 89) with 94 octane will make it faster, or "clean" it more. All grades of gas from the same brand have the same level of detergents, generally...furthermore, each kind of detergent is good at removing certain deposits but leaves others, so you're actually best off rotating which brand you fill up with. If you're obsessed about it, just pop in a bottle of Techron cleaner one tank before your next oil-change; it's the stuff BMW, Audi, and others recommend, though they'll charge you a lot more for Techron in a BMW or Audi bottle.) Also, most gas is delivered from port by a distributor that slosh-mixes in a bottle of stuff that "makes" the gas Exxon, Shell, Hess, BP, whatever. When a supertanker crosses the ocean, it doesn't have a "Shell" crude compartment and a "Exxon" crude compartment, etc. It's all the same stuff, a commodity...even though Shell likes to run commercials saying their gas meets manufacturer standards blah blah blah. EVERYONE's gas does, because EVERYONE's gas comes from the same damn crude, gets refined at the same places, and distributed by the same companies.
This is similar kind of "inadequacy" based BS. High end digital cameras have large buffers in part because flash memory is so effing slow; a Nikon D70 has enough buffer for something like 40 full resolution JPEG shots! Running a slow memory card in them won't harm them, damage them, etc etc. There are other factors to consider as well- my canon 10D has a 9 shot buffer for RAW shots, and some sort of in-between buffer for writing them to the card. I used to hit the end of the buffer all the time, because I never noticed that it wouldn't process the buffer while the shutter was held half-down in the focus position. Talk about a design flaw- but knowing that, I kept my finger off the shutter button whenever possible if the buffer had anything in it (displayed in the viewfinder) and the problem disappeared.
As someone who has shot with a semi-pro dSLR for more than two years, I can summarize that article in one sentence: "if you need to shoot images as fast as possible and have a camera with a limited buffer, buy the fastest card within reason, only if Rob Galbraith's tests show it'll make a substantial difference. Otherwise, buy a reasonably heard-of brand with a decent warranty in case it stops working." Why? Because just like with the gas, under the label you'll often find exactly the same thing- and only a very small number of people actually NEED the extra speed of a card that costs 50%+ more.
Oh, last piece of advice: don't buy huge memory cards. Three reasons: 1)you pay more per MB, usually. 2)You put all your eggs in one basket- if you drop a card and step on it, accidentally hit "erase all", or loose it... you get the idea. 3)"Photo tanks" with laptop hard drives offer MUCH cheaper $/GB storage. You could shoot 2,3,4,5GB/day in RAWs on a big vacation and still not fill the smallest of these widgets after a week. Buying one without a drive and putting in the old laptop drive you've got hanging around from an upgrade (provided it's not too power-hungry) is the way to go, as even 30-40GB is a BOATLOAD of space for digital photos.
Oh, and should you be on a trip- bring a few DVD-Rs, and burn the files to one or two if you really want to have the photos. Laptops get stolen/dropped/lost/seized/whatevered, and you can be absent minded / mistake-prone about transferring photos after a week of fun in the sun (aka rm -rf * type mistakes). Put one set in your suitcase, another set in your SO's/friend's/etc.
The link from the editor points to a slashdot story about "Global Frequency", which after getting leaked, becoming very popular on the interbutt, and supposedly "picked up", was so successful...
absolutely nothing happened and the series still hasn't been produced, and likely never will be. The slashdot editor implies that getting leaked to BitTorrent resulted in it turning into a real series, or at least some additional episodes were produced. Absolutely nothing of the sort happened, and the series had already been considered a shoe-in for production before it was leaked.
Also, I'm skeptical that you'll be getting 250 miles at 70 mph. If I remember right, electric motor efficiency and power typically increase with load, but fall off with speed, which makes them awesome for say, a 0-60 run in 3 seconds, but marginal at best for high speed cruising.
Electric cars are much more efficient compared to internal combustion engines- much of the inefficiencies and losses pale in comparison to ICE's. Turbines are around 40-45% (BIG turbines), and ICE's are about 30%. I don't have a figure handy for the current state of the art in electric AC induction motors, but it's very high, comparatively. Modern chargers are better, and modern battery packs are more efficient as well (ie how much juice is lost to heat during charging.)
Battery pack technology is a big restraint; one poster in the old thread idiotically said "we don't need better technology, we need stations where you pull up and swap packs!"
Wrong. 1)Lead acid batteries are pretty much the cheapest W/$, but they are HUGE and they weigh so much the vehicle suspension has to usually be modified; they also don't last very long unless well taken care of. NiMH batteries are superior in many ways, except the current patent holder on NiMH packs won't allow companies like Panasonic to sell large NiMH packs for cars. Busses, great, sure. Mid-size sedan? Nope. Why? Probably they want to get nice plentiful royalties.
NiMH is about to be completely eclipsed by Lithium Ion-like technologies. NiMH batteries loose a substantial amount of energy during charging to heat. At least two companies have figured out how to make LiIon more stable (able to withstand charging abuse, physical abuse like getting punctured with a giant steel rod, etc) and charge faster. One of the companies has packs that can be recharged in a few minutes, provided you have a powerful enough charger. Density is better, and they're finding cheaper materials to make them with.
The other big advance has been with motor controller technology and brushless motors; before, people were using industrial-application DC motors which were brushed (which meant PITA maintenance- brushes have to be replaced, you have to have a blower to keep carbon dust from building up inside the motor, etc), inefficient, low-speed, and VERY heavy. Now you've got AC induction motors that produce a TON of power, and really nice inverter systems with regenerative braking and charging built-in.
The main problem with electric cars has always been, and always will be, that nobody is willing to SHARE, and everyone is hideously greedy. Half the industry thinks they'll be the next Henry Ford; the other half thinks someone will figure out how to make a mass-produced vehicle and license their technology for astronomical prices (NiMH patent holders, Tzero with their integrated drivetrain.) Instead, the industry has skipped to LiIon, and Honda/Toyota/GM/Ford have done their electric drivetrain (for hybrid vehicles) development in-house, or worked with industry giants like Siemens.
If you think the new crop of vehicles are different- look in the history books. Every 10-20 years someone gets a bunch of dough, and slaps together an electric vehicle for limited production. It has been going on since the 60's. Even big companies like Solectra have struggled. ZAP! has survived by diversifying, though they're pretty much gone now from the commuter car market now that Mercedes is re-assuming SMART importing in a year or two.
Things seem a little different now though- technology has leap-frogged some previous barriers. The two remaining challenges are market adoption/acceptance, and power generation. MA tried to get a wind farm planted in the middle of a shallow bay, and the fucking environmentalists screamed blue-bloody-murder about everything little thing...from a small diesel tank (1000 gal) for maintenance equipment which was portrayed as the next Exxon Valdeez, to birds hitting the things, to sounds supposedly transmitted into the ocean that woul
If you're telling me that my college gymnasium had better security than these places, then I am apalled.
A palm scanner is cheaper in the long run; when you signed up, you didn't have to have an ID printed, or remember a pin, etc. When you go to an on-campus gym, do you have your wallet+campus ID with you? What is to stop you from sharing your ID card?
You can't "loose" or forget your hand, so they never have to deal with replacing ID cards (which require programming the security system, which requires someone trained+trusted to do so) or resetting PINs. You also can't "share" your hand with your roommate who isn't paying gym dues (if it was required to pay extra for gym access), etc.
Only if Myspace knew what was going on (which they almost certainly did not).
I'll make this very simple for you: Is myspace responsible for the content they put on their site, or not?
When you are a website the size of myspace, failing to vett your advertising borders on gross negligence and incompetence.
Furthermore, if you study how 'responsibility' plays out in the business world, particularly with lawsuits- the first party on the food chain is responsible. If that company wants to take action against its employees, suppliers, etc- so be it. But the buck, figuratively, stops at "round one".
Slashdot Mirror
From the article:
"The Sprint Power Vision Network now covers 153 million people and services customers in 220 major metropolitan areas as well as 470 airports across the nation, the most of any carrier. "
What's that giant sucking noise? Ah yes, the blogger kissing the ass of Sprint in exchange for getting the "priviledge" of a "first look."
BMW was one of the first. VW's were around the same time. Then Prius owners got the same thing. Lots of companies brought back "mp3 player" jacks for their stereos.
My mother has had a changer-plug interface in her volvo for 2-3 years now, from Blitzsafe.
How is this johnny-come-last press release even remotely worthy of front-page status? How much did Ford's PR firm pay to get this put there?
Now the black and white hats in the computer science department will now have a new toy to fight over. Whoever gets the most freebies wins!
No, no. You see, the white hats aren't in it to drink soda. They're there just to test security, so they'll break in, take a picture to prove they did it, write an email to the designers, and get arrested by campus security.
The black hats in the department will break in, but they don't actually want anyone to know that they managed to break in, or how...so they won't take anything or tell anyone.
The grey hats willbreak in drink the sodas because even though it's theft, the soda is grossly overpriced compared to what it cost to produce, and Coke oppresses workers in 3rd world countries. The white hats will get blamed for the missing sodas (which is even better, since they're a bunch of goody-two-shoes.)
This is, however, NOT representative of a "police state" or anything like what some in the original article went on about. This is also not 1984, nor is it because of the "environment fostered by the PATRIOT Act" or the Bush administration, or anything similar.
Bullshit. You don't read sites like photo.net, where stories of police harassment and intimidation are the norm, not the exception, and many photographers have stopped trying to photograph anything they think they might get in the slightest trouble over.
Those are just the few examples that immediately come to mind.
Try this search on for size. Add on fun keywords like "harassment","arrested", "questioned", etc.
People are rotuinely roughened up, threatened with arrest or being "reported" to the FBI, arrested and detained then released before the charge-or-release 24 hours are up, lied to about their rights, what the law is, or what they are criminally liable for, had film/cards confiscated, their IDs demanded (would it scare you more if I called them "papers"?), and so on. These days just about anything gets you on various watch lists and that means even more fun.
We live in a country where you can be arrested for taking a picture of a bridge on vacation and get harassed trying to board a flight home because you were placed on a "watch" or "no fly" list. Wake up and smell the fucking coffee- we're fast headed the way of fascist and communist countries.
These blue crab nanosensors will be used to improve security in airports, hospitals and other public locations by detecting tiny amounts of explosives or chemicals in air and water.
Because after all, we've had such a huge problem with explosives and "chemicals" in airports, hospitals, and "other public locations"...
The stereotype humor appears to be alive and well
Then there's that minority, the stereotype bitter socially retarded geeks with chips on their shoulders, doomed to eternally relive some perceived rejection from a woman or girl that dates back to elementary school...
Wow. Just...wow. You complain about one stereotype, and then use another.
Newsflash: I don't know, nor have I ever heard of, any guys who "eternally relive [sic] some perceived rejection from a woman or girl blah blah blah". I -do- know of a lot of women that come up with "theories" for why men acted a particular way, why their relationship failed, etc...which is exactly what you just did; you pulled that straight out of your ass, because I guarantee no man has EVER told you about obsessing over some playground rejection. Most of these theories are extremely condescending; men are stupid, have no emotions, think with their dick, are obsessive and single-minded, etc. Don't even get me started on some of the conversations I've overheard between two or more lesbians. It used to be in style for guys to make dumb blond jokes; now it's women making dumb guy jokes or statements, and they're usually quite viscious.
Want to talk about childish jokes? I have a camera with a fairly big zoom lens. Perhaps one guy has joked "hey, that's a really thick lens" or somesuch. About a dozen plus women have. Interesting percentages, eh?
Maybe you should stop and consider that most IT workers just don't give a flying fuck who they work with, as long as they're competent/professional, and easy to work with.
I lost significant respect for soldiers the day I found some clips on a military-ish website.
One was a surveilance helicopter (dunno which one...probably the one with the camera/sensor ball above the rotor) and the video was from a training session. Most of the video, however, was of the crew watching thermal imaging of a couple having sex in the back seat of a convertible. So, if you think your military isn't spying on you as a civilian, you're right- "The Military" isn't, but a bunch of bored 20-somethings in multi-million-dollar toys ARE. And discipline in the military is so lax that apparently that kind of crap is tolerated.
Second sealed the deal for me. It was video from one of the big cargo-plane gunships in either Iraq or Aghanistan. The video consisted of thermal camera footage of them systematically gunning down people at some sort of small building- almost like a small church, quite possibly a mosque.
It showed people running for cover and the crew gunning them down, and it went for a good 5-10 minutes. They didn't appear to have any weapons, and were trying to hide behind walls and such (which didn't work since the gunship was circling.) That turned my stomach. However, when I listened more closely to the radio chatter, I wanted to throw up. The gunners and crew were laughing and joking. "Oh, quick, get 'im, there he goes!" "Oh, he thinks he's safe now, ahaha!", "hey, good shot there man! You really got him good!" etc. It was like a video game to them; my portrayal just doesn't do it "justice". There was no hate or malice- just very sickening joy on the part of those watching a video screen and plugging real people with real bullets and shells from miles away up in the sky.
Talk about video game violence just doesn't compare to the joy these murderers (I don't think the term "soldier" is even appropriate) took in killing other human beings. I feel a twang of guilt after a session of Battlefield 2, but these guys took joy in the real thing.
First off, the patent is owned by the NSA because they developed it.
They developed it because they're the most qualified to come up with encryption and guarantee its security for government use.
Despite a decade plus of DES being in wide use, brute-force attacks remain the most practical means of "breaking" DES encryption. This is despite FOUR DECADES of close inspection of the algorithm (DES was published in 1976.)
If enough calls, emails, and IMs are encrypted with even moderately sophisticated encryption, the NSA doesn't have a prayer no matter how much hardware they have. It's been known for years they're swamped with unencrypted stuff...
If your government or seller or whatever doesn't trust you, doesn't even try in the least, how the hell are you supposed to trust him? The most logical path would be to fully distrust him.
Given how often and severely government suppliers and contractors like Halliburton, Bechtels-Parsons, etc engage in all manner of willful, obvious fraud- anyone in the government that trusts their supplier is most likely benefitting in some way from the fraud. I think the challenge wouldn't be to name all the suppliers/contrators that are accused/guilty of fraud, but rather to find those who AREN'T.
Hell, even companies like Boeing are in on the act, though I think the public has generally forgotten about the whole Boeing billing scandal, but investors haven't (though probably only because the settlement cost Boeing a good chunk of change.)
Used to be "war profiteer" would result in you being unable to show your face in public ever again; the shame of taking advantage of the nation's defenses, et al. Now, investors don't care as long as you don't hurt the bottom line getting caught, and the public soon forgets. Same thing with the WTC scene thefts (firefighters, police, FBI, and government officials all the way up to Rumsfeld helped themselves to "mementos" or had people do it for them. Then there were the emergency services companies that shipped tons of relief supplies out of NYC and sold them for hundreds of thousands of dollars in profit.)
Either the MacOS driver is loading an updated firmware, the MM provides analog 'click' values, or the driver sets thresholds/adjusts sensitivity...but I had to scrounge around and find a 6 year old Logitech mouse because the MM was mostly useless in XP.
I figured there was a Windows driver, but nope...
Although be careful - the financial professional's first obligation is to enrich himself, otherwise he is self-selecting to not be a finance professional.
That's why you go with someone who isn't mixing recommendations with his or her commissions- ie, a fee-based financial advisor. They won't have the temptation to steer you towards any particular investment strategy (or worse, to a specific investment firm/fund/stock/etc) for personal gain; rather, they're motivated by having you tell friends/coworkers/family how good a job they did.
Much of the job is beyond "buy this now" type advice; much of it is "you might want to do ____ because it'll reduce your tax burden because _______", etc. Fee-based advisors could almost be considered "financial educators", because most of the job (from what a friend told me, who is a fee-based planner/advisor) is just helping people learn about investment strategy, taxes, and law around financial matters.
Furthermore, for something as (relatively) simple as "I'm a student, I've got X sitting in the bank, how can I be in better shape?"...the fee shouldn't be very much, although as a young person with little knowledge in these matters, the two of you could talk for hours upon hours (and you'd be all the better for it.) Still, the fees are usually based off of your assets, because the more assets, the harder it is to manage. Things are a lot simpler with a)no kids currently / in the immediate future b)no girlfriend-who-may-soon-be-wife, c)no house or other real estate d)no existing investments to evaluate and e)very low relative net worth.
I recommend getting an online brokerage account
The original story poster is obviously an "investing n00b"...how is he going to know where to begin?
Once you have invested whatever you want, ignore the money. It will go up, it will go down - but over 20-30 years it is a very safe investment.
Did you not read the part about how he wants a short-term investment? The simple answer was "an ING savings account making 4.5-5%, or similar".
The plasma discharge will draw international attention since some scientists are concerned with risks involved in such a process. But Chinese researchers involved in the project say any radiation will cease once the test is completed.
So...I don't get it. They probably have a good guess as to how much radiation will be generated and everyone camps out at a safe distance.
What's everyone so worried about?
I understand what the poster is trying to say, but I think it backfired, because auto repair is easier than many think.
In this case- the manual transmission for my car (which is full-time AWD and has a limited-slip center differential, so it is fairly complex as transmissions go) doesn't require much rocket science. It requires the factory repair manual, a few special tools (some are specific to the transmission, others are just standard measuring tools), attention to detail, and making sure all the tolerances are correct (they're adjusted via lots of extra washers/spacers/shims.)
Granted it is one of the more complex mechanical jobs aside from a full engine rebuild, but those aren't very hard either. If you're ever curious about it and want to learn- sign up for an appropriate class at the local tech school to get basic good practices down. Then, start with old car bought off the classifieds for which you can find factory manuals/rebuild guides for. Set aside a fair bit of cash for the various tools you'll need, although some can be rented.
All this has me thinking, "gee, wouldn't it be nice if there was a 'Law for Citizens' class at the local community college?"
Techtarget's article is the equivalent of Father and Son at the baseball field. Dad throws 'em nice and slow, and Junior hits 'em every time.
To call this "press" is an insult to news media everywhere, even by their standards. This is nothing more than a fluff piece by Techtarget (and Techtarget isn't "media"; they're basically a "whitepaper rehasher") asking him exactly what he wants to be asked.
Getting a driver into Linux is so full of road hazards because the "community"(read: the loudest mouths) is too idealistic, eccentric, and inflexible...and as a result, most companies go "fuck that 2% of the market" and release Windows drivers that, long as they work, nobody complains about, ever. Even MacOS X is easier; it's a much more stable "target" hardware/software-wise, and the community doesn't mix politics with purchases.
Not to mention most likely Brand X wireless card came complete with drivers from OEM company Z, just with Brand X silkscreened on the PCB...and Brand X couldn't "release" the drivers or write open-source ones if they wanted to.
Please define drive.
I did:
We're also driven by competition (ego, vanity, etc), curiosity, etc
If you want a simpler definition, "motivation."
AI's are human-designed/manufactured. Since we're prone to errors, it follows they are/will be as well. Does that mean AIs would make similar or different mistakes, and how would they handle them? The same, differently, or not at all? Will we see a regression, in that AIs will result to brute-force discovery much like early scientists? Will they evolve?
Another question area: Anyone who has built a compiler knows the three-tap rule. Build it, build it using itself, build it a third time, compare. Will AIs produce AIs, and if so, will they be better, or equally flawed? Will a 'perfect' AI still be capable of scientific invention/discovery? Will the mistakes of its human operators/supervisors/managers make up for its lack thereof?
What about drive? Will the drive of a human manager/supervisor/etc be sufficient substitute for an AI which can't posess them?
"May the best sentience win."
(Psst: obscure nerdy reference.)
Calling anyone with a website who writes about something they saw on TV a journalist is kind of strange.
It's not just strange- it's wrong. My job title at one point was "Systems Engineer". I didn't have an engineering degree, and my father (who did) was severely irked, rightfully so; just because I came up with solutions involving computer systems did not make me an "engineer". This is the same kind of BS. "Journalist" is a professional title, and you can't slap it on a person simply because they yack about current events.
"Web loggers" point to FOX news and say "If THEY'RE journalists, I sure as hell am, especially since unlike them, I don't lie or distort things!" WRONG. FOX news staff are REPORTERS. If they went to school and studied journalism, THEN they are a journalist. Bill Oreilly is not a "journalist"; he's a cross between a commentator and a talk show host.
Go to Merriam-Webster and look up "journalism". Under "2B", you'll find "writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation". When anyone in the media talks about "journalism", that is the context they are referring to, not the OTHER definition of "someone who keeps a journal" (ie, diary.) Most of the "web loggers" who get up in a tizzy about this, compare themselves to professional journalists, which indicates they are using the 2B definition.
Most "web loggers" are PURELY in the business of interpreting news, events, or situations. That makes them news commentators ONLY!
I recall reading recently that entertainment "news" is very popular with newspapers and TV stations because they don't have to have a reporter do any leg-work or research, just get a clip or parrot a quote from the celeb's agent.
These days, thanks to newspaper/radio/tv mergers, all the big wigs care about is profit margin. Entertainment "news" like "Britney marries again!" can be made to fill the same amount of time as a story about (gasp) some bill before the House of Representatives that takes a reporter, camera crew and van travelling to the statehouse, fact checking, interviewing a couple representatives etc. Guess which is cheaper, by far?
You can't put regular gas in a Ferrari? What's the difference between regular gas and this special stuff? Does that mean when you buy a Ferrari you spend half you life looking for Ferrari-approved filling stations?
Someone (with a lot of money) bought one of Schumacher's old F1 cars and yes, it was contractually required that the car only be run on a specific brand of fuel.
The article summary is pretty oblivious though- you run the octane your car requires, 95% of the time. Gasolene companies love to make you think that filling up your low-compression engine (that requires 89) with 94 octane will make it faster, or "clean" it more. All grades of gas from the same brand have the same level of detergents, generally...furthermore, each kind of detergent is good at removing certain deposits but leaves others, so you're actually best off rotating which brand you fill up with. If you're obsessed about it, just pop in a bottle of Techron cleaner one tank before your next oil-change; it's the stuff BMW, Audi, and others recommend, though they'll charge you a lot more for Techron in a BMW or Audi bottle.) Also, most gas is delivered from port by a distributor that slosh-mixes in a bottle of stuff that "makes" the gas Exxon, Shell, Hess, BP, whatever. When a supertanker crosses the ocean, it doesn't have a "Shell" crude compartment and a "Exxon" crude compartment, etc. It's all the same stuff, a commodity...even though Shell likes to run commercials saying their gas meets manufacturer standards blah blah blah. EVERYONE's gas does, because EVERYONE's gas comes from the same damn crude, gets refined at the same places, and distributed by the same companies.
This is similar kind of "inadequacy" based BS. High end digital cameras have large buffers in part because flash memory is so effing slow; a Nikon D70 has enough buffer for something like 40 full resolution JPEG shots! Running a slow memory card in them won't harm them, damage them, etc etc. There are other factors to consider as well- my canon 10D has a 9 shot buffer for RAW shots, and some sort of in-between buffer for writing them to the card. I used to hit the end of the buffer all the time, because I never noticed that it wouldn't process the buffer while the shutter was held half-down in the focus position. Talk about a design flaw- but knowing that, I kept my finger off the shutter button whenever possible if the buffer had anything in it (displayed in the viewfinder) and the problem disappeared.
As someone who has shot with a semi-pro dSLR for more than two years, I can summarize that article in one sentence: "if you need to shoot images as fast as possible and have a camera with a limited buffer, buy the fastest card within reason, only if Rob Galbraith's tests show it'll make a substantial difference. Otherwise, buy a reasonably heard-of brand with a decent warranty in case it stops working." Why? Because just like with the gas, under the label you'll often find exactly the same thing- and only a very small number of people actually NEED the extra speed of a card that costs 50%+ more.
Oh, last piece of advice: don't buy huge memory cards. Three reasons: 1)you pay more per MB, usually. 2)You put all your eggs in one basket- if you drop a card and step on it, accidentally hit "erase all", or loose it... you get the idea. 3)"Photo tanks" with laptop hard drives offer MUCH cheaper $/GB storage. You could shoot 2,3,4,5GB/day in RAWs on a big vacation and still not fill the smallest of these widgets after a week. Buying one without a drive and putting in the old laptop drive you've got hanging around from an upgrade (provided it's not too power-hungry) is the way to go, as even 30-40GB is a BOATLOAD of space for digital photos.
Oh, and should you be on a trip- bring a few DVD-Rs, and burn the files to one or two if you really want to have the photos. Laptops get stolen/dropped/lost/seized/whatevered, and you can be absent minded / mistake-prone about transferring photos after a week of fun in the sun (aka rm -rf * type mistakes). Put one set in your suitcase, another set in your SO's/friend's/etc.
Where was this guy last year?
The link from the editor points to a slashdot story about "Global Frequency", which after getting leaked, becoming very popular on the interbutt, and supposedly "picked up", was so successful...
absolutely nothing happened and the series still hasn't been produced, and likely never will be. The slashdot editor implies that getting leaked to BitTorrent resulted in it turning into a real series, or at least some additional episodes were produced. Absolutely nothing of the sort happened, and the series had already been considered a shoe-in for production before it was leaked.
Electric cars are much more efficient compared to internal combustion engines- much of the inefficiencies and losses pale in comparison to ICE's. Turbines are around 40-45% (BIG turbines), and ICE's are about 30%. I don't have a figure handy for the current state of the art in electric AC induction motors, but it's very high, comparatively. Modern chargers are better, and modern battery packs are more efficient as well (ie how much juice is lost to heat during charging.)
Battery pack technology is a big restraint; one poster in the old thread idiotically said "we don't need better technology, we need stations where you pull up and swap packs!"
Wrong. 1)Lead acid batteries are pretty much the cheapest W/$, but they are HUGE and they weigh so much the vehicle suspension has to usually be modified; they also don't last very long unless well taken care of. NiMH batteries are superior in many ways, except the current patent holder on NiMH packs won't allow companies like Panasonic to sell large NiMH packs for cars. Busses, great, sure. Mid-size sedan? Nope. Why? Probably they want to get nice plentiful royalties.
NiMH is about to be completely eclipsed by Lithium Ion-like technologies. NiMH batteries loose a substantial amount of energy during charging to heat. At least two companies have figured out how to make LiIon more stable (able to withstand charging abuse, physical abuse like getting punctured with a giant steel rod, etc) and charge faster. One of the companies has packs that can be recharged in a few minutes, provided you have a powerful enough charger. Density is better, and they're finding cheaper materials to make them with.
The other big advance has been with motor controller technology and brushless motors; before, people were using industrial-application DC motors which were brushed (which meant PITA maintenance- brushes have to be replaced, you have to have a blower to keep carbon dust from building up inside the motor, etc), inefficient, low-speed, and VERY heavy. Now you've got AC induction motors that produce a TON of power, and really nice inverter systems with regenerative braking and charging built-in.
The main problem with electric cars has always been, and always will be, that nobody is willing to SHARE, and everyone is hideously greedy. Half the industry thinks they'll be the next Henry Ford; the other half thinks someone will figure out how to make a mass-produced vehicle and license their technology for astronomical prices (NiMH patent holders, Tzero with their integrated drivetrain.) Instead, the industry has skipped to LiIon, and Honda/Toyota/GM/Ford have done their electric drivetrain (for hybrid vehicles) development in-house, or worked with industry giants like Siemens.
If you think the new crop of vehicles are different- look in the history books. Every 10-20 years someone gets a bunch of dough, and slaps together an electric vehicle for limited production. It has been going on since the 60's. Even big companies like Solectra have struggled. ZAP! has survived by diversifying, though they're pretty much gone now from the commuter car market now that Mercedes is re-assuming SMART importing in a year or two.
Things seem a little different now though- technology has leap-frogged some previous barriers. The two remaining challenges are market adoption/acceptance, and power generation. MA tried to get a wind farm planted in the middle of a shallow bay, and the fucking environmentalists screamed blue-bloody-murder about everything little thing...from a small diesel tank (1000 gal) for maintenance equipment which was portrayed as the next Exxon Valdeez, to birds hitting the things, to sounds supposedly transmitted into the ocean that woul
If you're telling me that my college gymnasium had better security than these places, then I am apalled.
A palm scanner is cheaper in the long run; when you signed up, you didn't have to have an ID printed, or remember a pin, etc. When you go to an on-campus gym, do you have your wallet+campus ID with you? What is to stop you from sharing your ID card?
You can't "loose" or forget your hand, so they never have to deal with replacing ID cards (which require programming the security system, which requires someone trained+trusted to do so) or resetting PINs. You also can't "share" your hand with your roommate who isn't paying gym dues (if it was required to pay extra for gym access), etc.
Only if Myspace knew what was going on (which they almost certainly did not).
I'll make this very simple for you: Is myspace responsible for the content they put on their site, or not?
When you are a website the size of myspace, failing to vett your advertising borders on gross negligence and incompetence.
Furthermore, if you study how 'responsibility' plays out in the business world, particularly with lawsuits- the first party on the food chain is responsible. If that company wants to take action against its employees, suppliers, etc- so be it. But the buck, figuratively, stops at "round one".