Look dude...
First of all, the database would *never* be finished. The idea is that as librarians come across sites, they can add them to the list.
Secondly, this is NOT a filter implementation. This is supposed to work on TOP of the existing filter(s). So if a user wants to take a look at www..com, the filter would first check to see if it was in the exemption list.
This WASN'T a 'total' solution. It's a step in the right direction. If all you can do is supply destructive and insulting critisism here, then please go elsewhere.
I think the validity of this law would depend on the overall computer usage of all libraries. How many children use these computers vs. the number of adults? If the number of children far outstrips the number of adults, then this law makes sense. Are there any library computer usage statistics anywhere on the net?
Secondly, do we have any idea how much legitamite information is getting blocked by the filters? I suppose any information relating to sex/sexuality would be blocked, and there are legitamite uses for that information by students. But what other types of content are getting blocked? And what is the total effect on the person doing the research?
I think one viable solution to this problem is to create a database of 'trusted' web sites, that are exempt from the filter. These web sites would be checked by adults beforehand, who would ensure that there is no inappropriate content. There are tens of thousands of libraries in the States, and at least that number of librarians. I'm sure such a database could be quickly created and maintained. If each librarian submitted a website or two to the database every month that they use often and know are appropriate, then in a very short period of time this database would be up and running.
In any case, I do think it is appropriate to block minors (especially younger children) from viewing unsuitable content. I personally am from Canada, so this decision dosn't affect me. But in my experiences (from our local libraries), the majority of library computer users are children. If the situation is similar in the states, then this law is understandable.
I would imagine that it depends on how fast the unit could generate power. Actually, I'm not sure this system would work.
In order for the Peltier junction/IANTP to work efficiently, they'd need a lot of heat. But the
problem here is that CPU heatsinks are designed to spread the heat over the maximum amount of
surface area. So you'd only be able to channel a small amount of the CPU heat to the Peltier
junction/IANTP. So if you wanted an efficient heat-to-power unit, you'd need to eliminate the
heatsink, or at least make it less eficient. Doing that would fry a hot CPU:)
So even if we did install some Peltier junction/IANTP, it wouldn't work efficiently, and I'd bet that the power it generates would be negligable.
I live in Toronto, Canada. Most winters, the average temperature is ~ -15 degrees centigrade.
This past winter, for some reason our central heating died for a few days. My room (with my
lovely AMD Athlon 1.2GHz) was the only warm room in the house:) It actually got quite annoying...
my room became a living room of sorts for the family that week.
In any case, the point is that those AMD CPU's run QUITE hot:)
I remember back when the AMD (socket not slot) Athlons were first released, some tech review
website had a video of a Athlon burning out in 2 seconds. The CPU went from room temperature to
300+ degrees in less than 2 seconds. Mind you, that was without any cooling (heatsink/fan), but
still it gives you an indication of how hot those suckers can get.
Thats actually a very interesting idea. I wonder if it's possible to channel some of the heat
coming from the CPU, HDD's, RAM etc to power the computer. I'm not suggesting that this could
possibly furnish all required power (IE not a perpetual computer:)). But perhaps the heat
could be transferred so that it would
contribute somewhat to the powering of the
computer. If this was efficient, and significant enough, it could save us a lot of money on our
power bills in the long run:) Plus, its a *very* elegant solution to the heating problem.
Any thermal physicists out there? I don't know much on this subject. Is it possible at all?
I think the aim is to increase the visual quality of the film so that the viewer can no longer tell that he is watching a movie.
Think about it, the object of a movie is to present you with an alternate reality for it's duration. Now, if the user is distracted by visual errors/color noise/etc, then he/she cannot totally immerse themselves into the movie; the errors are constant reminders that what the user is watching is not real.
I think the goal of improving the visual quality of movies is so that people will not notice it at all. Its the same idea in web design - a good web design is one that nobody notices. This is because you want to present information to the user. In the end, the design is just wrapping. Its the same idea in this case, just with movies.
If the movie-makers can accomplish this goal, then the user can watch the movie and concentrate fully on the events being portrayed. So indirectly, by increasing the visual quality of the movie, then you indirectly increase the quality of the movie. But if the acting stinks, then no amount of visual tricks will make the movie any better. I wish hollywood would realize this.
This is actually quite cool; if movies ever become pure digital (no 35mm film anywhere in the filming process) then it would remove all of those weird artifacts from the screen. You know, those little color blips that happen every few seconds in a movie?
I was told by a film-student friend of mine that those blips occur during the editing phase, due to some physical process. I think it may have been because the editors needed to physically splice the film or something, but I'm not absolutely sure (I dont know very much about the process). But now, if all of the movie is done purely digitally, then all editing can be cone via computer, thereby eliminating all color noise.
Eventually, I hope they'll replace the current projector system with some sort of LCD/plasma screen. Even though it would cost waaaaaay more, it would make visual quality amazing! Maybe in ten years, they'll find a way to make them cheap.
Wasn't this the subject of an Aurthur C. Clarke SCI-FI novel? Apparently they found methods to create a super strong material that allowed them to make an elevator to space?
It was a very interesting read, especially to us nerds. The book dabbled in some interesting physics, the methods required to create such an elevator (given that a strong enough material exists), etc.
Anyone remember the title of this book? I vaguely remember 'paradise' as one of the words.
Alex
LOL! The guy wasn't saying that IBM gave in. He was just saying 'OK, well nobody expected IBM to give in anyway, so this isn't much of a surprise'. Though I admit it WAS worded somewhat ambiguously.
Say that the average male thinks of sex once every 6 seconds (i dont know the actual stat). Assuming there are 6,000,000,000 people in the world, of which 3,000,000,000 are men, then in every period of 6 seconds, there are on average 3,000,000,000 thoughts of sex that occur. That means, there are roughly 500,000,000 million sex-thoughts per second.
Slashdot Mirror
Lol :) It's more like
...
1) Design slashdot t-shirt
2)
3) Profit!
Look dude... First of all, the database would *never* be finished. The idea is that as librarians come across sites, they can add them to the list.
Secondly, this is NOT a filter implementation. This is supposed to work on TOP of the existing filter(s). So if a user wants to take a look at www..com, the filter would first check to see if it was in the exemption list.
This WASN'T a 'total' solution. It's a step in the right direction. If all you can do is supply destructive and insulting critisism here, then please go elsewhere.
I think the validity of this law would depend on the overall computer usage of all libraries. How many children use these computers vs. the number of adults? If the number of children far outstrips the number of adults, then this law makes sense. Are there any library computer usage statistics anywhere on the net?
Secondly, do we have any idea how much legitamite information is getting blocked by the filters? I suppose any information relating to sex/sexuality would be blocked, and there are legitamite uses for that information by students. But what other types of content are getting blocked? And what is the total effect on the person doing the research?
I think one viable solution to this problem is to create a database of 'trusted' web sites, that are exempt from the filter. These web sites would be checked by adults beforehand, who would ensure that there is no inappropriate content. There are tens of thousands of libraries in the States, and at least that number of librarians. I'm sure such a database could be quickly created and maintained. If each librarian submitted a website or two to the database every month that they use often and know are appropriate, then in a very short period of time this database would be up and running.
In any case, I do think it is appropriate to block minors (especially younger children) from viewing unsuitable content. I personally am from Canada, so this decision dosn't affect me. But in my experiences (from our local libraries), the majority of library computer users are children. If the situation is similar in the states, then this law is understandable.
I would imagine that it depends on how fast the unit could generate power. Actually, I'm not sure this system would work.
:)
In order for the Peltier junction/IANTP to work efficiently, they'd need a lot of heat. But the
problem here is that CPU heatsinks are designed to spread the heat over the maximum amount of
surface area. So you'd only be able to channel a small amount of the CPU heat to the Peltier
junction/IANTP. So if you wanted an efficient heat-to-power unit, you'd need to eliminate the
heatsink, or at least make it less eficient. Doing that would fry a hot CPU
So even if we did install some Peltier junction/IANTP, it wouldn't work efficiently, and I'd bet that the power it generates would be negligable.
I live in Toronto, Canada. Most winters, the average temperature is ~ -15 degrees centigrade. :) It actually got quite annoying...
:)
This past winter, for some reason our central heating died for a few days. My room (with my
lovely AMD Athlon 1.2GHz) was the only warm room in the house
my room became a living room of sorts for the family that week.
In any case, the point is that those AMD CPU's run QUITE hot
I remember back when the AMD (socket not slot) Athlons were first released, some tech review
website had a video of a Athlon burning out in 2 seconds. The CPU went from room temperature to
300+ degrees in less than 2 seconds. Mind you, that was without any cooling (heatsink/fan), but
still it gives you an indication of how hot those suckers can get.
Thats actually a very interesting idea. I wonder if it's possible to channel some of the heat :)). But perhaps the heat
:) Plus, its a *very* elegant solution to the heating problem.
coming from the CPU, HDD's, RAM etc to power the computer. I'm not suggesting that this could
possibly furnish all required power (IE not a perpetual computer
could be transferred so that it would contribute somewhat to the powering of the
computer. If this was efficient, and significant enough, it could save us a lot of money on our
power bills in the long run
Any thermal physicists out there? I don't know much on this subject. Is it possible at all?
Geez has the link been slashdotted already? My browser times out when I try visiting it. Anyone have a google link?
I think the aim is to increase the visual quality of the film so that the viewer can no longer tell that he is watching a movie.
Think about it, the object of a movie is to present you with an alternate reality for it's duration. Now, if the user is distracted by visual errors/color noise/etc, then he/she cannot totally immerse themselves into the movie; the errors are constant reminders that what the user is watching is not real.
I think the goal of improving the visual quality of movies is so that people will not notice it at all. Its the same idea in web design - a good web design is one that nobody notices. This is because you want to present information to the user. In the end, the design is just wrapping. Its the same idea in this case, just with movies.
If the movie-makers can accomplish this goal, then the user can watch the movie and concentrate fully on the events being portrayed. So indirectly, by increasing the visual quality of the movie, then you indirectly increase the quality of the movie. But if the acting stinks, then no amount of visual tricks will make the movie any better. I wish hollywood would realize this.
Thats my two cents.
Wasn't this the subject of an Aurthur C. Clarke SCI-FI novel? Apparently they found methods to create a super strong material that allowed them to make an elevator to space? It was a very interesting read, especially to us nerds. The book dabbled in some interesting physics, the methods required to create such an elevator (given that a strong enough material exists), etc. Anyone remember the title of this book? I vaguely remember 'paradise' as one of the words. Alex
I remember when altavista was the best search engine lol. Am I that old?!
LOL! The guy wasn't saying that IBM gave in. He was just saying 'OK, well nobody expected IBM to give in anyway, so this isn't much of a surprise'. Though I admit it WAS worded somewhat ambiguously.
Man... anybody else remember nibbles? I'm going to pull out my old MS DOS 6 disks and install it on my old 486, and play it when i get home :)
Alex
woohoo!
You've got it all wrong!
:)
:)
Say that the average male thinks of sex once every 6 seconds (i dont know the actual stat). Assuming there are 6,000,000,000 people in the world, of which 3,000,000,000 are men, then in every period of 6 seconds, there are on average 3,000,000,000 thoughts of sex that occur. That means, there are roughly 500,000,000 million sex-thoughts per second.
Compare that to 1 GBA sp sold every 6 seconds
Don't worry, sex is still WAAAAY ahead
Alex