I don't know the answer to this, but looking at some LIGO charts (http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/advLIGO/images/refdes03.gif) they seem to be looking at 10-100Hz (roughly).
Are there interesting or even expected sources in the frequency band investigated in this paper?
I want my search engine to search the web for my query. Do not try to figure out what sort of legitimate use I have for my query, give me the results! Maybe I'm a copyright infringer trying to steal music, and maybe I'm a gun happy lawyer trying to sue the pants of the site owners.
I'm a big apple fan and have "bought in" to their ecosystem, but your statements about legacy support by apple are flat wrong. Apple is both a hardware and software company, so I'll discuss both:
Software:
If I buy some software application developed for the current MacOS version, it will probably run on the newest version of MacOS 5 years down the line, _probably_. 10 years down the line, I might be so lucky, 15 years and almost certainly not.
Given that you can still run DOS and Windows 3.1 applications in the current version of Windows, I've pretty much got a guarantee of at least 20+ years of backwards compatibility with Microsoft.
Hardware:
My modern iMac is being currently forced into obsolescence by Apple with new features (AirPlay) being not supported. Generally speaking, you can expect an Apple computer to have partial ability to keep up with the newest OS upgrades for about 4 years. After 5 years, you will probably not be able to upgrade it at all (not because of issues with processing power, but forced obsolescence).
In short, there are many reasons to buy Apple products: design, user interface, ecosystem, the it-just-works thing. Legacy support is not one of those.
You are making a ton of points, many well considered, a couple less so.
1) F-35 and F-22 are wastes of money.
I'd rate this mostly valid. The way those programs turned out in terms of waste is definitely a problem, however being able to decisively have air superiority is a need. While a Russian or Chinese war will not happen, proxy wars will, and we need to be sure that our fighters can dominate or at least compete. The generation prior to F22/F35 don't. Supporting a next-gen fighter is a good thing, supporting a political boondoggle is not.
2) Our current enemies don't have fighters that can best our current fighters.
I'd rate this invalid. We don't know who our next adversary will be, nor do we know from where they will equip. We need to be able to beat anything a country other than us can produce to be able to ensure the ability to take air superiority as a given
3) We have too many carriers (adversaries have a couple and bad ones at that)
I'd rate this invalid. The carriers are less about tactical ability and need and much more about projecting power and influence. Sending a carrier strike group to the persian gulf or near north korea, enables the secretary of state to put muscle behind words, and that is well worth the cost, boondoggle or not.
4) War between nuclear weaponized countries is mutual suicide.
Yup. And so long as one side is not feeling suicidal, it won't happen. And (hopefully) if it does, it won't involve nukes.
5) Our current military is acting like the cold war is still ongoing.
Somewhat. Petraeus and associates started a paradigm shift about how we approach combat, this has not yet truly taken hold in terms of acquisitions, so in some sense, we are still buying weapons for wars we will never fight, but it is changing. Look at efforts towards littoral combat and multi-purpose ships.
6) Cut our Navy in half and spam enemies off the field.
Nope. This works for _current_ enemies and _current_ technology, and even then, not so much (see USS Cole, or your example of being spammed by sea skimmer missiles). The Navy needs to be smarter and maybe that means fewer ships, but it certainly does not mean cutting it in half just because we can.
7) The military contractor situation is a bloated mess and needs a good housecleaning.
Absolutely.
8) We need to stop wasting money on boondoggles like we are.
Yes, absolutely correct, but the devil is in how to figure out what those are _before_ they get funded.
Yes, using whitespace well is good. The problems start when a cognitive radio malfunctions and interferes with licensed and in use spectrum.
The crux of sharing spectrum (as any down to earth shared whitespace proponent will tell you) has to do with the rules the cognitive radios use. Liken these to rules of the road or right of way. Traffic on the roads and freeways works (for the most part) because of a common understanding of the rules that govern right of way. These rules are determined by the government (in some cases better than others, try figuring out when you can do a u-turn in a given city).
The point is that while in theory, sharing unused white space is great, the devil is in how you share it. Without rules and guidelines defining this sharing of whitespace will simply be a property grab.
Think radios positioned to transmit constantly when they don't have actual network traffic. Think about radios that start bombing unused whitespace to claim it for a telco as soon as it goes out of use. Defining the rules of the road is a good thing. The EU may do a bad job of this, but it still needs to be done before that grand idea of free spectrum can even begin to have a hope of being realized.
Granted you did point out a legitimate bias as the lean is that all capture of license plates is bad (something I'm admittedly on the fence about).
For me the real problem is the logging and storing. For each of the legitimate use cases you outlined, there should be no need to store license plates for anyone to whom those use cases do not apply.
For instance, let's just look at the stolen vehicle use case. As soon as the license plate number is processed (i.e. the image processing software has done it's job and associated an actual number to the image), a query is made against stolen vehicles. If the license plate is not for a stolen vehicle, the image and logs are deleted. You may argue that 12-24 hours of activity are needed, so I could see a data log that is that long being legitimate since it might take a day or so to notice that your car is missing.
A similar process could be applied to each use case you outlined. I would be interested in use cases you can identify that make a year's worth of logs sound legit.
Of course, a primary difference is, one deliberately starts a campfire.
One also deliberately fires a gun.
There, as with firearms, there was no intent to start a fire in the first place.
There was no intent with the campfire to start a wildfire. In both cases, a deliberate and irresponsible act (that is safe in normal wetter conditions) starts an unintended wildfire.
A better comparison would be to wildfires caused by vehicles (hot exhaust parked over dry grass, no spark arrestor, etc.)?
This is a fair comparison only if the driver of the vehicle was intentionally driving around without a spark arrestor or other deliberate *and* irresponsible act. As an example, a police officer who starts a wildfire while shooting his weapon in the course of his duties would be the fairer comparison to your accidental car exhaust fire (although if the grass was that susceptible, I would expect public wilderness areas to be closed to vehicular traffic).
Except that this cost to the merchant is already priced into the goods that you purchase, so we pay for the points and such ourselves via marginally increased prices. By paying in cash, you are simply paying for a benefit that you don't get to receive (and yes, you are increasing the merchant's profit slightly as well).
So while paying cash is a nice way to help a small business out, if everyone moved away from cards, prices of goods would drop slightly and the profit of the small merchant would be the same as it is today (even though they would not be having to pay those pesky fees anymore).
I think alot of you are forgetting what driving without ABS is like. Well maybe not, but my experience on the highway on wet roads combined with following distance of the cars around me backs that up. I'd take a car with ABS acting funny every so often (that I can throw into neutral, via clutch or other) over pure analogue brakes any time.
You should not try to apply logic or common sense to government regulations. This is the disconnect.
As an example, google around for US policy about employees simply viewing wikileaks.
However, some diskettes have shown surface defects in areas with compressed archives (zip).
There are many diskettes. Some of those have defects in areas with compressed archives. There is nothing to suggest that of the many diskettes there are any with defects in areas other than compressed archives.
You failed to parse correctly, the some you quoted is saying that of all the disks some have errors. Not as you suggest which is that of the disks with errors, some have errors in zip archives. The AC was right.
So I have to be honest, I was just as happy with my google voice account (maybe more so, but time will tell) when I could not use it on my iphone. Now you might be asking why, and maybe my use case is not common, but google voice fills a nice roll in my life.
1) Random people at bars get google voice #
2) Companies that require a phone number get google voice #
Pretty much my google voice number is like my spam e-mail account. If you got this number, well good luck getting a return call. The ability to make calls from this number is nice if I ever do return a phone call from some random girl at a bar or some company that really wants to talk to me about why I downloaded their white paper.
The only other use case that I can see myself taking advantage of is the free SMS, although to be honest, it's more of a pain to let all of my contacts know who is texting them than it is to pay the $5 a month for my SMS plan.
This is true, if you include the system bus, you have 5 nodes which each have to be connected to the other 4 and you get K5.
I was simply responding to the statement that:
There's no way to connect each of 4 cores to the other three without the connections intersecting, at least if the connections are made on anything topologicically the same as a convex subset of the plane (that is, no planar graph exists).
If you read the link you posted you would see you have misquoted or misinterpreted the utility problem. Below is a diagram showing how to connect 4 nodes to each of the other 3 without intersection in one plane. Posted as code because I can't seem to get it to work otherwise.
Not quite. An hdlist is required for each separate source directory used. In this case they correspond to the RPMS, contrib and jpackage directories, not 3 CD's. Hopefully when my mirror finishes its sync, all will be well.
Angular momentum must be conserved. As an object starting out at the top of this elevator descends, its tangental veolcity would increase by a factor equal to the outer radius over the earth's radius.
A back of the envelope calculation leads to the conclusion that the object would be going 26179 km/h faster than stationary objects on the surface of the earth when it finally made it all the way down. This is assuming that the cord leaving the earth is in geo-synch. orbit along its entire length (a necessary assumption).
In fact, I suspect that the change in obrital frequency on descent would be sufficient to cause anything to burn up while dragging the cable around the earth (a cable that could loop around the equator about 2.5 times).
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know the answer to this, but looking at some LIGO charts (http://www.ligo.caltech.edu/advLIGO/images/refdes03.gif) they seem to be looking at 10-100Hz (roughly). Are there interesting or even expected sources in the frequency band investigated in this paper?
I want my search engine to search the web for my query. Do not try to figure out what sort of legitimate use I have for my query, give me the results! Maybe I'm a copyright infringer trying to steal music, and maybe I'm a gun happy lawyer trying to sue the pants of the site owners.
I'm a big apple fan and have "bought in" to their ecosystem, but your statements about legacy support by apple are flat wrong. Apple is both a hardware and software company, so I'll discuss both:
Software:
If I buy some software application developed for the current MacOS version, it will probably run on the newest version of MacOS 5 years down the line, _probably_. 10 years down the line, I might be so lucky, 15 years and almost certainly not.
Given that you can still run DOS and Windows 3.1 applications in the current version of Windows, I've pretty much got a guarantee of at least 20+ years of backwards compatibility with Microsoft.
Hardware:
My modern iMac is being currently forced into obsolescence by Apple with new features (AirPlay) being not supported. Generally speaking, you can expect an Apple computer to have partial ability to keep up with the newest OS upgrades for about 4 years. After 5 years, you will probably not be able to upgrade it at all (not because of issues with processing power, but forced obsolescence).
In short, there are many reasons to buy Apple products: design, user interface, ecosystem, the it-just-works thing. Legacy support is not one of those.
1) F-35 and F-22 are wastes of money.
I'd rate this mostly valid. The way those programs turned out in terms of waste is definitely a problem, however being able to decisively have air superiority is a need. While a Russian or Chinese war will not happen, proxy wars will, and we need to be sure that our fighters can dominate or at least compete. The generation prior to F22/F35 don't. Supporting a next-gen fighter is a good thing, supporting a political boondoggle is not.
2) Our current enemies don't have fighters that can best our current fighters.
I'd rate this invalid. We don't know who our next adversary will be, nor do we know from where they will equip. We need to be able to beat anything a country other than us can produce to be able to ensure the ability to take air superiority as a given
3) We have too many carriers (adversaries have a couple and bad ones at that)
I'd rate this invalid. The carriers are less about tactical ability and need and much more about projecting power and influence. Sending a carrier strike group to the persian gulf or near north korea, enables the secretary of state to put muscle behind words, and that is well worth the cost, boondoggle or not.
4) War between nuclear weaponized countries is mutual suicide.
Yup. And so long as one side is not feeling suicidal, it won't happen. And (hopefully) if it does, it won't involve nukes.
5) Our current military is acting like the cold war is still ongoing.
Somewhat. Petraeus and associates started a paradigm shift about how we approach combat, this has not yet truly taken hold in terms of acquisitions, so in some sense, we are still buying weapons for wars we will never fight, but it is changing. Look at efforts towards littoral combat and multi-purpose ships.
6) Cut our Navy in half and spam enemies off the field.
Nope. This works for _current_ enemies and _current_ technology, and even then, not so much (see USS Cole, or your example of being spammed by sea skimmer missiles). The Navy needs to be smarter and maybe that means fewer ships, but it certainly does not mean cutting it in half just because we can.
7) The military contractor situation is a bloated mess and needs a good housecleaning.
Absolutely.
8) We need to stop wasting money on boondoggles like we are.
Yes, absolutely correct, but the devil is in how to figure out what those are _before_ they get funded.
Yes, using whitespace well is good. The problems start when a cognitive radio malfunctions and interferes with licensed and in use spectrum.
The crux of sharing spectrum (as any down to earth shared whitespace proponent will tell you) has to do with the rules the cognitive radios use. Liken these to rules of the road or right of way. Traffic on the roads and freeways works (for the most part) because of a common understanding of the rules that govern right of way. These rules are determined by the government (in some cases better than others, try figuring out when you can do a u-turn in a given city).
The point is that while in theory, sharing unused white space is great, the devil is in how you share it. Without rules and guidelines defining this sharing of whitespace will simply be a property grab.
Think radios positioned to transmit constantly when they don't have actual network traffic. Think about radios that start bombing unused whitespace to claim it for a telco as soon as it goes out of use. Defining the rules of the road is a good thing. The EU may do a bad job of this, but it still needs to be done before that grand idea of free spectrum can even begin to have a hope of being realized.
Granted you did point out a legitimate bias as the lean is that all capture of license plates is bad (something I'm admittedly on the fence about).
For me the real problem is the logging and storing. For each of the legitimate use cases you outlined, there should be no need to store license plates for anyone to whom those use cases do not apply.
For instance, let's just look at the stolen vehicle use case. As soon as the license plate number is processed (i.e. the image processing software has done it's job and associated an actual number to the image), a query is made against stolen vehicles. If the license plate is not for a stolen vehicle, the image and logs are deleted. You may argue that 12-24 hours of activity are needed, so I could see a data log that is that long being legitimate since it might take a day or so to notice that your car is missing.
A similar process could be applied to each use case you outlined. I would be interested in use cases you can identify that make a year's worth of logs sound legit.
Of course, a primary difference is, one deliberately starts a campfire.
One also deliberately fires a gun.
There, as with firearms, there was no intent to start a fire in the first place.
There was no intent with the campfire to start a wildfire. In both cases, a deliberate and irresponsible act (that is safe in normal wetter conditions) starts an unintended wildfire.
A better comparison would be to wildfires caused by vehicles (hot exhaust parked over dry grass, no spark arrestor, etc.)?
This is a fair comparison only if the driver of the vehicle was intentionally driving around without a spark arrestor or other deliberate *and* irresponsible act. As an example, a police officer who starts a wildfire while shooting his weapon in the course of his duties would be the fairer comparison to your accidental car exhaust fire (although if the grass was that susceptible, I would expect public wilderness areas to be closed to vehicular traffic).
What? Something seriously missing from the summary!
Except that this cost to the merchant is already priced into the goods that you purchase, so we pay for the points and such ourselves via marginally increased prices. By paying in cash, you are simply paying for a benefit that you don't get to receive (and yes, you are increasing the merchant's profit slightly as well). So while paying cash is a nice way to help a small business out, if everyone moved away from cards, prices of goods would drop slightly and the profit of the small merchant would be the same as it is today (even though they would not be having to pay those pesky fees anymore).
I think alot of you are forgetting what driving without ABS is like. Well maybe not, but my experience on the highway on wet roads combined with following distance of the cars around me backs that up. I'd take a car with ABS acting funny every so often (that I can throw into neutral, via clutch or other) over pure analogue brakes any time.
Regular consumption of 'significant' amounts of water can lead to water intoxication: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication
You should not try to apply logic or common sense to government regulations. This is the disconnect. As an example, google around for US policy about employees simply viewing wikileaks.
However, some diskettes have shown surface defects in areas with compressed archives (zip).
There are many diskettes. Some of those have defects in areas with compressed archives. There is nothing to suggest that of the many diskettes there are any with defects in areas other than compressed archives.
You failed to parse correctly, the some you quoted is saying that of all the disks some have errors. Not as you suggest which is that of the disks with errors, some have errors in zip archives. The AC was right.
So I have to be honest, I was just as happy with my google voice account (maybe more so, but time will tell) when I could not use it on my iphone. Now you might be asking why, and maybe my use case is not common, but google voice fills a nice roll in my life. 1) Random people at bars get google voice # 2) Companies that require a phone number get google voice # Pretty much my google voice number is like my spam e-mail account. If you got this number, well good luck getting a return call. The ability to make calls from this number is nice if I ever do return a phone call from some random girl at a bar or some company that really wants to talk to me about why I downloaded their white paper. The only other use case that I can see myself taking advantage of is the free SMS, although to be honest, it's more of a pain to let all of my contacts know who is texting them than it is to pay the $5 a month for my SMS plan.
If you read the link you posted you would see you have misquoted or misinterpreted the utility problem. Below is a diagram showing how to connect 4 nodes to each of the other 3 without intersection in one plane. Posted as code because I can't seem to get it to work otherwise.
/| /
X---X
|\
| X |
\ |
X
Not quite. An hdlist is required for each separate source directory used. In this case they correspond to the RPMS, contrib and jpackage directories, not 3 CD's. Hopefully when my mirror finishes its sync, all will be well.
The physics are simple...
Angular momentum must be conserved. As an object starting out at the top of this elevator descends, its tangental veolcity would increase by a factor equal to the outer radius over the earth's radius.
A back of the envelope calculation leads to the conclusion that the object would be going 26179 km/h faster than stationary objects on the surface of the earth when it finally made it all the way down. This is assuming that the cord leaving the earth is in geo-synch. orbit along its entire length (a necessary assumption).
In fact, I suspect that the change in obrital frequency on descent would be sufficient to cause anything to burn up while dragging the cable around the earth (a cable that could loop around the equator about 2.5 times).