Hear! Hear! Add this: Converting your car to electricity eliminates a point-source of pollution. If you moved all of your transportation's emissions back to the power plant, we can deal with them better. (The pollution controls at the power plant are better than the ones on your car: they don't get bumped around, have more consistent operating conditions, etc.)
Now if EVERYONE did this, we might get enough concentration that we could actually DO something with it. Problem is, our pollution's too diffuse to be exploited.
Consider: district heating. "Neighborhood" generators can be a way to exploit the waste heat.
Carbon sequestration: this still remains a sham-dance IMHO, but maybe we can pull it off when we've got enough stack-emissions in one place. Sure not putting an Einstein-Szilard fridge on your car's tailpipe to catch the CO2.
So mod the parent up. It's as simple as this: convert the energy as few times as possible (how did that gas get into your tank?) and concentrate the pollution where you can hopefully get some value from it.
I apologize for my lack of clarity, see Xenocrates.
I bought the new one because the mobile internet access tools are worth it. I've decided that having seamless email, some web, and relatively updated maps are indeed worth it.
As to the other poster "never" having lost an AT&T call: Bullshit. Unprovable, and clearly this thread's existence posits that the opposite might be true. (It is certainly true, but I'll stick to the more conservative case.)
I'm an idiot, I admit it: I've had BOTH versions of the iPhone. They're the same, folks, no better, no worse. If you're tinfoil hat's a little too snug (or you're holding it with either left or right hand) it tends to drop calls.
Really: the emperor's latest fashion is made of the same material. The instrument is no better as a phone, no faster as a PDA, no cleaner as a browser. It is still a very poorly designed phone, a not-TOO-bad PDA (esp. for Mac users) and a darned superior portable internet device.
Cellphone-to-cellphone reliability and call quality are illusions, get used to it. It's not how well the bear dances, it's that the bear dances AT ALL. Next, we'll rant about the fallacy of packet-switched vs. circuit-switched, at least as regards telephony.
from 3 Days of the Condor (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Three_Days_of_the_Condor)
Higgins: No. It's simple economics. Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. And maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?
Turner: Ask them.
Higgins: Not now -- then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!
Agreed: You want to do it right, you need to model the operations of Israeli airport/airline security.
The impressive thing was the flight INTO IL: Transferring in the EU, over an hour before boarding, 2 cars pulled up to the plane and unloaded non-uniformed armed security who inspected, then surrounded the plane, and remained in sight of each other at all times. This was long before we saw the security crew for us appear and setup their podia to perform the aforementioned interviews. The interview was very little, but eye contact was absolutely constant after the document review. Plus an old-fashioned second xray of the carry ons. It was very smooth, thorough and no doubt expensive.
Ben Gurion, for the flight out, was as-described, minus the wait: At 5am on a Saturday, it's rather quiet.
Interesting at TLV: the security interviews (2 plus bag searches for those without special letters) were all conducted by young women. The entire crew was 90% women, and no one looked older than mid 30's. Couldn't figure out if those observations were the results of scheduling, or a choice for strategic reasons.
My take on all of this is there is absolutely no substitute for an attentive person simply interviewing. US Customs has known this for years, it cannot be outsourced, it takes time to train these folks, a minor amount of time for us, and seems to be working. All reasons why Security Theater has no reason to fear: inertia will keep us on the current path well past every threshold of ridiculosity we could ever possibly imagine.
Sorry to go so far OT, but the parent poster is wildly misleading about the process of removing the fuel pump. "...removing the in tank fuel pump (not too hard on many cars)..."
The in-tank fuel pump is attached to a "manhole" opening on the top of the tank. Since the tank is mounted under the car this means removal requires first removing the gas tank, a nontrivial task. In the US market, the overwhelming majority require removal of the tank in order to service the in-tank fuel pump.
The only exceptions I know of were 2 European manufacturers' products, all from the early 80's through early 90's. There may be others, but I do not have 1st hand knowledge of them.
Hey, if I'm gonna take off on a tangent, I'm gonna take it well past the limits of sanity.
Someone with some points, mod the parent up!! The link to the article in Foreign Affairs is brilliant.
There will not be a war, it's all nuanced.
Let's not forget that China's overwhelming concern for centuries has been how to keep things in order. Esp. now, if 10^9 peasants decide to act, there aren't enough bullets in the world to "restore order." So all external moves must have an internal component that the US is unfamiliar with. Without the opiate of mass media and "popular culture" China has a serious challenge to keep the homeboys happy.
Having set up several, and helped a company to standardize their installation of many, I gotta tell you that with rare exceptions* in-room internet access is the most dangerous network imagineable.
The "lowest bidder" effect will apply all through the chain of decisions with the end result of that little wire (or wifi) linking you to every possible attack vector known to man. Even in the hotels with firewalls (mostly to save address-space costs with the ISP, not for your safety) the inside will almost always feature some knucklehead with something on their laptop.
And all the above refers to the innocent sources. The malicious types, well, they have free reign for the most part.
For What It's Worth.
*the exceptions would be those hotels that employ some rudiments of network security, usually segregating sections of the hotel. Only one that I know of had per-room VLANs, which was certainly a good start.
You're right, at this time our skills in subtractive production far, far exceed our abilities in additive.
However, in the long run--say another few decades--CNC (subtractive) tools will be dinosaurs. They are, ultimatly, just an interim technology. When you can't put the atoms you want where you want them, then you start with a block and carve away the excess. The result of years of sophistication is the ability to carve with such precision, speed, and complexity that it's pretty impressive.
But when you can put whatever atom in whatever orientation/relationship to others, then throw the vertical mill and lathe out. Want that one-piece turbine-rotor coated in diamond?
As impressive as they are, the major vendors must all be spending a decent amount of man-hours watching every single developement in this area. All real long lead-time effort, but the only "buggy whip" insurance they have right now.
Um, sorry: Caribou, S'bucks et al are NOT really in the coffee business. Coffee's the apparent center, I'll agree, but the real foundations of the business are very different. S'bucks--at one time--said they wanted to form the basis of a new civil forum. A place to share with other people. Oh yeah, and have some coffee.
Look, movie theaters stopped being in the "movie business" when Hollywood took 100% of the door. (70's in major markets, ubiquitous by mid 80's) That's when they became "Quik E Marts with moving pictures on the back wall." McDonalds, I'm told, is not principally in the burger biz: they own/control so much primo real estate that their worth is not in meat served but in land owned.
Your store is trying to make a place for meeting, and hoping to capitalize on that by selling coffee and sundries to those who chose to meet there. So it's the place first, then the coffee. Wifi's part of the decor, do it right, sell more coffee.
Put another way: if WiFi were a cost in excess of return, your bosses would be enforcing that "one card per purchase" rule with an iron fist. So like you said, it's not worth the hassle: give it away upon request. That's a high enough bar for the boardroom, it should be for you too.
And relax about the schlubs in the seats. If turnover were an issue, your bosses' bonuses would depend on solving the problem. (Imagine: A norovirus policy, wherein the whole place needs to be bleached every 90 minutes. Turnover problem solved.)
In an interesting "life imitates art" crusing Wisconsin's stretches of I-90/94 you may notice some cell towers bearing a strong resemblence to one Crow T. Robot.
2phar (137027) It's not like the CC company isn't falling over itself to try and sell every possible data about you to all comers anyway.
2phar's found the hole in my logic: The profit of selling our privacy, which we happily singed away like lemmings. I think in reverse of my previous post, I'd say now that exchange of data is far worse than inertialess, it is in fact profitmaking.
Thanks, I am now going to live in a cave.
(There's a nice one in Cheyenne Mountain they're not really using anymore...)
blanks (108019) wrote: "Every purchase with your CC is tracked."
Perhaps I'm naive, but it was my belief that the big retailers do not touch the CC info, they use a 3rd party to approve the transaction. So the only info they get are transaction and approval codes, and the last 4 dgits of your CC.
That means that the big retailer doesn't know anymore about you than they did before. (Unless you use a legit loyalty card, then all bets are off.)
Now at a tiny retailer, esp. if the form is manually filled out, you're vulnerable to a scam. (I doubt Ed's Pizza is tracking your purchases through it's world-wide chain of 2 stores.)
So the only place that knows everything about the transaction (ID, amount, place and time) would be the approval and credit card companies. And I think perhaps we're just a bit too worried here, because they hate each other and unfunded mandates from the government. I think greed and stupidity will prevent inertia-less data sharing for quite a while.
Come on, we're all smart people here, we can each of us figure out how this COULD work. The question is, are we smart enough to realize how it DOESN'T work?
Do not confuse anonymity with privacy, though it's easy to do. The only way I can think of to do this while protecting privacy is that the viewer must have no idea where/when he's watching, and no control over what he sees. You can still see faces (violating anonymuty) but with no idea where/when they were, you cannot violate the viewed-subject's privacy.
And has everyone on/. forgotten to ask "who's watching the watchers?" Forget the CCTV feeds, we need cameras in the police stations' monitoring rooms to watch what the cops are watching!
Does this conjure visions of the N-1 for anybody else?
Re:Linda *is* a female (Was: Re: One of ...)
on
V For Vendetta Trailer
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I am violating the rule "You argue with idiots, you become one" but... The evidence of my tolerance for your worldview is exhibited by my attempts to broaden yours, the proof of your intolerance is in your work to limit ours.
>Lol. So if you call yourself the president you are the president? Nonsense. You do not become a women by pretending to be one.
1) "President" is an office. Gender is a quality decided by the observer with the methods permitted by both parties and available in the situation. DNA testing is invasive, therefore for special circumstances. For the purposes of getting along, it should be considered diplomatic on your part to grant certain assumptions of the other person in the situation.
2) This person literally risked her life to accomplish this feat, it therefore rises above mere pretense, though that makes little difference in my opinion. It does, however, deserve more respect in yours.
>...that doesn't make him a women. Sadly, you are semantically correct.
> Why dont you shut the fuck up and show some of that tolerance you don't have - hypocrite.
My hypocrisy is limited only to this forum, and IRL I will not merely tolerate your opinion, but I will defend to the death your right to believe and express them.
I apologize for my loss of control earlier, I allowed my utter disdain for your opinion to color my commentary.
>> Wrong. One of the Wachowski's is a woman, and her name is Linda.
> No. They are both men,regardless of what he calls himself. Gender is not in the mind.
No. You are who you present.
You may be biologically correct (Linda has a reasonably normal X & Y chromosome pair) and surely her evident secondary sex characterstics (her phenotype) are artificial, but for the sake of tolerance, wisdom, and simply getting along with the six or so billion people on this planet, you must take someone's presentation as granted.
Just STFU and accept people for what they're doing, not what you think they "are."
Had this in tradeshows for years. If you cannot control both Layers 2 & 3, forget it.
You need to AT LEAST be able to login to the switches/routers to read MAC tables at the instant there's a problem. ARP would be nice too. You need make no changes, but read-only in non-negotiable. Otherwise give up the job.
Once you have that, you can perfect the steps to find out what's happening when it's happening. THEN you may use whatever eloquently violent steps others are suggesting.
A b/w mgmt appliance would also be a smart investment, they can provide unusual evidence that's remarkably useful. (We'd look at the top talkers, when TCP sessions >800/5 min, we'd know we're lookin' at a naughty person.)
If your responsible for an improvement of the situation, and you're not given the tools, then resignation is the only course. Sticking it out with your hands tied is pointless torture: you'll never get a break, and the torturer will get tired.
Re:Top Five reasons - all completely wrong
on
Apollo 12 at 35
·
· Score: 1
3. We must expand from Earth to escape {...}
All six billion of us suddenly escape? That would be a neat trick.
If you'd like, you can stay behind to save the cat.
Slashdot Mirror
Hear! Hear!
Add this: Converting your car to electricity eliminates a point-source of pollution. If you moved all of your transportation's emissions back to the power plant, we can deal with them better. (The pollution controls at the power plant are better than the ones on your car: they don't get bumped around, have more consistent operating conditions, etc.)
Now if EVERYONE did this, we might get enough concentration that we could actually DO something with it. Problem is, our pollution's too diffuse to be exploited.
Consider: district heating. "Neighborhood" generators can be a way to exploit the waste heat.
Carbon sequestration: this still remains a sham-dance IMHO, but maybe we can pull it off when we've got enough stack-emissions in one place. Sure not putting an Einstein-Szilard fridge on your car's tailpipe to catch the CO2.
So mod the parent up. It's as simple as this: convert the energy as few times as possible (how did that gas get into your tank?) and concentrate the pollution where you can hopefully get some value from it.
I apologize for my lack of clarity, see Xenocrates. I bought the new one because the mobile internet access tools are worth it. I've decided that having seamless email, some web, and relatively updated maps are indeed worth it. As to the other poster "never" having lost an AT&T call: Bullshit. Unprovable, and clearly this thread's existence posits that the opposite might be true. (It is certainly true, but I'll stick to the more conservative case.)
I'm an idiot, I admit it: I've had BOTH versions of the iPhone. They're the same, folks, no better, no worse. If you're tinfoil hat's a little too snug (or you're holding it with either left or right hand) it tends to drop calls.
Really: the emperor's latest fashion is made of the same material. The instrument is no better as a phone, no faster as a PDA, no cleaner as a browser. It is still a very poorly designed phone, a not-TOO-bad PDA (esp. for Mac users) and a darned superior portable internet device.
Cellphone-to-cellphone reliability and call quality are illusions, get used to it. It's not how well the bear dances, it's that the bear dances AT ALL. Next, we'll rant about the fallacy of packet-switched vs. circuit-switched, at least as regards telephony.
from 3 Days of the Condor (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Three_Days_of_the_Condor)
Higgins: No. It's simple economics. Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. And maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?
Turner: Ask them.
Higgins: Not now -- then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!
Agreed: You want to do it right, you need to model the operations of Israeli airport/airline security.
The impressive thing was the flight INTO IL: Transferring in the EU, over an hour before boarding, 2 cars pulled up to the plane and unloaded non-uniformed armed security who inspected, then surrounded the plane, and remained in sight of each other at all times. This was long before we saw the security crew for us appear and setup their podia to perform the aforementioned interviews. The interview was very little, but eye contact was absolutely constant after the document review. Plus an old-fashioned second xray of the carry ons. It was very smooth, thorough and no doubt expensive.
Ben Gurion, for the flight out, was as-described, minus the wait: At 5am on a Saturday, it's rather quiet.
Interesting at TLV: the security interviews (2 plus bag searches for those without special letters) were all conducted by young women. The entire crew was 90% women, and no one looked older than mid 30's. Couldn't figure out if those observations were the results of scheduling, or a choice for strategic reasons.
My take on all of this is there is absolutely no substitute for an attentive person simply interviewing. US Customs has known this for years, it cannot be outsourced, it takes time to train these folks, a minor amount of time for us, and seems to be working. All reasons why Security Theater has no reason to fear: inertia will keep us on the current path well past every threshold of ridiculosity we could ever possibly imagine.
Sorry to go so far OT, but the parent poster is wildly misleading about the process of removing the fuel pump. "...removing the in tank fuel pump (not too hard on many cars)..."
The in-tank fuel pump is attached to a "manhole" opening on the top of the tank. Since the tank is mounted under the car this means removal requires first removing the gas tank, a nontrivial task. In the US market, the overwhelming majority require removal of the tank in order to service the in-tank fuel pump.
The only exceptions I know of were 2 European manufacturers' products, all from the early 80's through early 90's. There may be others, but I do not have 1st hand knowledge of them.
Hey, if I'm gonna take off on a tangent, I'm gonna take it well past the limits of sanity.
Someone with some points, mod the parent up!! The link to the article in Foreign Affairs is brilliant.
There will not be a war, it's all nuanced.
Let's not forget that China's overwhelming concern for centuries has been how to keep things in order. Esp. now, if 10^9 peasants decide to act, there aren't enough bullets in the world to "restore order." So all external moves must have an internal component that the US is unfamiliar with. Without the opiate of mass media and "popular culture" China has a serious challenge to keep the homeboys happy.
But seriously: mod piemcfly's comment UP.
Having set up several, and helped a company to standardize their installation of many, I gotta tell you that with rare exceptions* in-room internet access is the most dangerous network imagineable.
The "lowest bidder" effect will apply all through the chain of decisions with the end result of that little wire (or wifi) linking you to every possible attack vector known to man. Even in the hotels with firewalls (mostly to save address-space costs with the ISP, not for your safety) the inside will almost always feature some knucklehead with something on their laptop.
And all the above refers to the innocent sources. The malicious types, well, they have free reign for the most part.
For What It's Worth.
*the exceptions would be those hotels that employ some rudiments of network security, usually segregating sections of the hotel. Only one that I know of had per-room VLANs, which was certainly a good start.
You're right, at this time our skills in subtractive production far, far exceed our abilities in additive.
However, in the long run--say another few decades--CNC (subtractive) tools will be dinosaurs. They are, ultimatly, just an interim technology. When you can't put the atoms you want where you want them, then you start with a block and carve away the excess. The result of years of sophistication is the ability to carve with such precision, speed, and complexity that it's pretty impressive.
But when you can put whatever atom in whatever orientation/relationship to others, then throw the vertical mill and lathe out. Want that one-piece turbine-rotor coated in diamond?
As impressive as they are, the major vendors must all be spending a decent amount of man-hours watching every single developement in this area. All real long lead-time effort, but the only "buggy whip" insurance they have right now.
I know I'm woefully late in posting this. Perhaps some archeologist will find it.
"Any sufficiently advanced genius will be indistinguishable from Arthur C. Clarke"
More importantly, Thank you Sir Arthur.
Um, sorry: Caribou, S'bucks et al are NOT really in the coffee business. Coffee's the apparent center, I'll agree, but the real foundations of the business are very different. S'bucks--at one time--said they wanted to form the basis of a new civil forum. A place to share with other people. Oh yeah, and have some coffee.
Look, movie theaters stopped being in the "movie business" when Hollywood took 100% of the door. (70's in major markets, ubiquitous by mid 80's) That's when they became "Quik E Marts with moving pictures on the back wall." McDonalds, I'm told, is not principally in the burger biz: they own/control so much primo real estate that their worth is not in meat served but in land owned.
Your store is trying to make a place for meeting, and hoping to capitalize on that by selling coffee and sundries to those who chose to meet there. So it's the place first, then the coffee. Wifi's part of the decor, do it right, sell more coffee.
Put another way: if WiFi were a cost in excess of return, your bosses would be enforcing that "one card per purchase" rule with an iron fist. So like you said, it's not worth the hassle: give it away upon request. That's a high enough bar for the boardroom, it should be for you too.
And relax about the schlubs in the seats. If turnover were an issue, your bosses' bonuses would depend on solving the problem. (Imagine: A norovirus policy, wherein the whole place needs to be bleached every 90 minutes. Turnover problem solved.)
I thought the next logical question was "Where's the lemon-juicer?"
In an interesting "life imitates art" crusing Wisconsin's stretches of I-90/94 you may notice some cell towers bearing a strong resemblence to one Crow T. Robot.
See www.defensetech.org, search for FCS, and prepare for a long, long read.
after that, it's just fun.
I agree with all the others. Forget "Rescue Bear" turn this thing into infantry.
Then, in typical American style, when one is battle-damaged, we'll send 12 people into harm's way to rescue it.
Like Diebold voting machines?
2phar (137027) It's not like the CC company isn't falling over itself to try and sell every possible data about you to all comers anyway.
2phar's found the hole in my logic: The profit of selling our privacy, which we happily singed away like lemmings. I think in reverse of my previous post, I'd say now that exchange of data is far worse than inertialess, it is in fact profitmaking.
Thanks, I am now going to live in a cave.
(There's a nice one in Cheyenne Mountain they're not really using anymore...)
blanks (108019) wrote: "Every purchase with your CC is tracked."
Perhaps I'm naive, but it was my belief that the big retailers do not touch the CC info, they use a 3rd party to approve the transaction. So the only info they get are transaction and approval codes, and the last 4 dgits of your CC.
That means that the big retailer doesn't know anymore about you than they did before. (Unless you use a legit loyalty card, then all bets are off.)
Now at a tiny retailer, esp. if the form is manually filled out, you're vulnerable to a scam. (I doubt Ed's Pizza is tracking your purchases through it's world-wide chain of 2 stores.)
So the only place that knows everything about the transaction (ID, amount, place and time) would be the approval and credit card companies. And I think perhaps we're just a bit too worried here, because they hate each other and unfunded mandates from the government. I think greed and stupidity will prevent inertia-less data sharing for quite a while.
Come on, we're all smart people here, we can each of us figure out how this COULD work. The question is, are we smart enough to realize how it DOESN'T work?
Do not confuse anonymity with privacy, though it's easy to do. The only way I can think of to do this while protecting privacy is that the viewer must have no idea where/when he's watching, and no control over what he sees. You can still see faces (violating anonymuty) but with no idea where/when they were, you cannot violate the viewed-subject's privacy.
/. forgotten to ask "who's watching the watchers?" Forget the CCTV feeds, we need cameras in the police stations' monitoring rooms to watch what the cops are watching!
And has everyone on
Now THAT, I'm all for.
Does this conjure visions of the N-1 for anybody else?
I am violating the rule "You argue with idiots, you become one" but... The evidence of my tolerance for your worldview is exhibited by my attempts to broaden yours, the proof of your intolerance is in your work to limit ours.
...that doesn't make him a women.
>Lol. So if you call yourself the president you are the president? Nonsense. You do not become a women by pretending to be one.
1) "President" is an office. Gender is a quality decided by the observer with the methods permitted by both parties and available in the situation. DNA testing is invasive, therefore for special circumstances. For the purposes of getting along, it should be considered diplomatic on your part to grant certain assumptions of the other person in the situation.
2) This person literally risked her life to accomplish this feat, it therefore rises above mere pretense, though that makes little difference in my opinion. It does, however, deserve more respect in yours.
>
Sadly, you are semantically correct.
> Why dont you shut the fuck up and show some of
that tolerance you don't have - hypocrite.
My hypocrisy is limited only to this forum, and IRL I will not merely tolerate your opinion, but I will defend to the death your right to believe and express them.
I apologize for my loss of control earlier, I allowed my utter disdain for your opinion to color my commentary.
>> Wrong. One of the Wachowski's is a woman, and her name is Linda.
> No. They are both men,regardless of what he calls himself. Gender is not in the mind.
No. You are who you present.
You may be biologically correct (Linda has a reasonably normal X & Y chromosome pair) and surely her evident secondary sex characterstics (her phenotype) are artificial, but for the sake of tolerance, wisdom, and simply getting along with the six or so billion people on this planet, you must take someone's presentation as granted.
Just STFU and accept people for what they're doing, not what you think they "are."
Had this in tradeshows for years. If you cannot control both Layers 2 & 3, forget it.
You need to AT LEAST be able to login to the switches/routers to read MAC tables at the instant there's a problem. ARP would be nice too. You need make no changes, but read-only in non-negotiable. Otherwise give up the job.
Once you have that, you can perfect the steps to find out what's happening when it's happening. THEN you may use whatever eloquently violent steps others are suggesting.
A b/w mgmt appliance would also be a smart investment, they can provide unusual evidence that's remarkably useful. (We'd look at the top talkers, when TCP sessions >800/5 min, we'd know we're lookin' at a naughty person.)
If your responsible for an improvement of the situation, and you're not given the tools, then resignation is the only course. Sticking it out with your hands tied is pointless torture: you'll never get a break, and the torturer will get tired.
3. We must expand from Earth to escape {...}
All six billion of us suddenly escape? That would be a neat trick.
If you'd like, you can stay behind to save the cat.