Would rushing into the burning building really be so bad if you knew that your reward would be a new body? Assuming that sentient machines could transfer from one piece of hardware to another, you could make a backup, then send the replaceable body into the inferno. If there is no fear of death because the body is regarded as a simple vessel for the sentient being, robots would make GREAT firefighters and rescue workers.
I figured this out when trying to learn the art of singing and playing guitar simultaneously, an art that even some great musicians have not mastered -- Mark Knopfler, for example. Ultimately it works like this:
Drill one part of the performance (whether it's the vocal or the instrument is left to individual discretion) until you can do it on autopilot, THEN try doing both at once. Even then there is a high likelihood of tripping over oneself until one action is fully automatic.
Incidentally, I find it much more difficult to attempt to play bass and sing than to play guitar and sing. I think this is because it's easier to do "CHORD (strum strum strum) CHORD (strum strum strum)" on autopilot than individual notes and rhythms.
The fact that the brain will, fairly swiftly, being interpreting electrical pulses on the tongue as visual input blows my insufficiently capacious mind.
I don't really see why. Put a (clean) marble in your mouth without looking at it, and you will probably visualize its spherical shape even though you have obtained all your high-resolution sensation through your tongue. Stumble around in the dark and grab something off your table. Even though you can't see it, chances are that as soon as you pick it up you'll still "see" it.
Granted, you have a lifetime of visual experience to draw upon, much of which is stored alongside tactile memories of the same event. In such a case it may be more a triggering of memories than of visualization. It still proves the point that our brains can take data from the eyes and from touch, and realize that they are two different angles on the same object.
Ideally it would be best to perform this function somewhere that causes less obstruction to other functions. I heard about a similar (though much larger, and mechanical) grid that was placed on a patient's back, on the basis that there were few everyday functions that would be interfered with. The main problem was the low density of touch receptors in the back. We've evolved to have maximum concentrations of receptors where we need them, so technology can usurp them for some other purpose, but it can't get around the fact that they now can't perform that other purpose.
The obvious way to do it in the long run would be to route the data through the one high bandwidth path that blind people aren't using -- the optic nerves. At that point we would basically have artificial eyes. Once the link works, the rest can be done in software.
Also it seems to me that sometimes the whole camera system can be bypassed. Why make a computer throw images onto a monitor, point a camera at that monitor, and downsample it for the tongue interface? Couldn't the computer just send the image directly to the user's visual processor?
First of all that's 70 minutes of runtime. Standby wouldn't be nearly as draining.
I have to wonder though -- presumably one reads a magazine in reasonable lighting. Couldn't the ad be solar powered, with only a small battery to make sure it wakes up when it needs to?
My ability to spell hasn't been impacted (I have never been a fan of spell checkers), but my ability to write by hand certainly has. My handwriting looks the same as it always has -- it's legible enough. However, I do it more slowly due to a lack of practice, and I get tired MUCH more easily. It used to be that I could write by hand for an hour or more. Now I have to put down the pen and shake some blood back into my hand every couple of minutes.
More importantly, when I need to take notes, I show up with a netbook, not a pad and pen. I'm going to end up typing it up anyhow, and I don't write anywhere near 80 words per minute, so why not skip that step and type it up in the first place?
If you were wondering about cursive script -- I abandoned that long before I became heavily reliant on typing.
Pick your poison. There are dozens of reasons someone couldn't move easily. Unless you don't have family.
It could just as easily have been your friend who has the state-specific license, rather than his wife. You don't even have to have family to be stuck in one place.
Pluto is a Kuiper belt object anyhow. Objects that small in the vicinity of gas giants can get tossed into all sorts of orbits -- inclined, retrograde, highly elliptical -- but it would take quite a slingshot effect to get a large rocky planet or a gas giant going "the wrong way".
One way I can imagine a smaller object getting that way is if it never really reverses direction, the inclination just keeps increasing until it actually crosses perpendicular to the plane of the planets. Eventually it could get back into a fairly normal inclination but going backward because it has wrapped around. Again I can't see this working with a large planet -- once inclined, it would probably just stay that way since whatever large mass flung it out in the first place is now too far away to continue tilting it.
I wouldn't be all that amazed if it turns out the planet was a wanderer that got captured, and it isn't native to that solar system.
This depends what kind of business it is. If they're providing hardware and/or services to the geek crowd, it matters a lot. If they're selling shoes and their credit card information database gets stolen, it will probably have little (if any) lasting impact because even if people hear about it, they won't understand it and thus won't remember it. If they do remember, they'll pay cash the next time they go there, but they'll still go.
Einstein didn't invent the light speed limit, it existed whether we were aware of it or not. Heisenberg didn't invent the uncertainty principle from whole cloth, but because it accurately described and predicted observations. The fundamental limits imposed upon us have never changed, we have just become aware of them. Being unaware of limitations is a good way to run straight into them.
My fellow employees are doing a good job of screwing themselves right into the ground.
We got the order that we were not to put in OT without approval (which WILL be granted if it's an emergency). This was right after the EA suit, and Activision is in the same building complex as we are, so not surprisingly HR had to cover its ass.
The problem is, people are still doing undeclared OT, and it's still very much expected my Leadership. I don't do it. I am in my seat at 7 and gone at 12, back at 1 and gone at 4. People are grumbling that I'm not pulling my weight, just because I don't spend my whole life there. Nobody has confronted me personally but they're bitching to our manager, and I'm just waiting for the call into the office about it. I don't plan to budge. If they think they can replace me, they can go right ahead. They've tried before when they thought I was going to skip (and I was, but the other offer was with AIG... and I don't think I have to explain any further). I gave them plenty of warning so I could bring someone up to speed. They assigned someone already in the company to the position, and she kept going out of her way to dodge my training sessions and eventually threatened to quit if they didn't give her back her old position. So I have them over a barrel in a way, but that doesn't prevent the busy worker bees from finding fault with my position.
I have made it perfectly clear they can't have it both ways. They can't have my time AND their money. I'm almost hoping they decide I'm next on the chopping block. I'll go back to temping and probably get picked up permanently the first or second time out, but I know my position now. OT only if paid, no arm-twisting to do otherwise.
I had a special way of passing time in GTA2, and it went something like this:
Find a grassy area with lots of pedestrian traffic passing, near one of the paint-and-weapon shops. Acquire something powerful like a bus or a fire truck -- you're going to need it later. Park it out of the way.
Steal a car, equip it with a bomb, and drive it up onto the grassy area. Wait till the peds come back, arm the bomb, and run like hell. Watch bodies fly every which way! Quickly steal another car (or have one waiting) and get it painted to dump your wanted level, then equip it with a bomb. Use the bus or fire truck to shove the bombed car into the street, and blow up another crowd of people with a new car bomb. The people WILL come back, never mind that cars keep blowing up. They're totally oblivious to what happened 30 seconds ago. Repeat till it gets old -- which for me took about 30 minutes.
I would also dump a bunch of oil in and around an intersection, jack cars and pack them insanely tight with one bomb-equipped car in the middle, and set it off to see how many I could get to go up at one time. The oil just made it easier to jack a lot of cars in a short span of time.
If they want to use it for gaming, it's going to need to send aftertouch signals, indicating changes in pressure while the key is held. Otherwise how will it know when you go from a walk to a run without releasing the button, or want to go from burst fire to full auto?
It's not that hard folks, MIDI keyboards have been able to do this for decades.
A lens like this is going to be really useful as an optical element in camera lenses. Instead of having to rotate a barrel to move one or more elements back and forth, the adjustable element can stay in one place and change shape internally. This means quieter and faster focusing, lower power consumption, and quite possibly a larger focusing range. Since almost all lenses focus at infinity, this means adding range on the close end.
It also may mean shorter designs are possible than is currently the case, or that wider zoom ranges could be packed into the current barrels. Since I don't hear too many people complaining about the size of lens barrels on point-and-shoots (since they fold up really nicely), it's most likely going to be enhanced capabilities that wins the marketing war. However, this would mean that current capabilities like 4x optical zooms could be fitted into ultra-compact cameras.
I've bought three things at Radio Shack in the last 5 years -- (1&2) two digital cameras on the same day, they were Xmas gifts and Radio Shack had them the cheapest! Jacked up SD card price, and they were pushing a bundle that included a printer that used ridiculously expensive ink. I declined and bought a Brother somewhere else. (3) a WiFi repeater that didn't work for shit. That went back the next day.
To the credit of the employees, they didn't seem to mind taking a return. They just checked the box to make sure everything was there, and did a chargeback. I did have to wait, but that's more understaffing (management problem) than an issue with the employees. I have found one way to speed through the line at Radio Shack is to stare longingly at anything expensive. That will get some assistance REAL quick. They'll practically drag you to the register if you say "yes" when they walk up and ask if you are ready to complete your purchase. They think they're closing the deal on whatever you were staring at, when all you actually want is what's in your hands, or maybe their display case.:)
I have completely given up on them as a source for anything small and more challenging than a 1/8"-to-RCA cable. I'm actually all right with them charging $7 for a cable that Parts Express has for $2.50, that's why they're the 7-11 of gadgetry. JUST HAVE IT WHEN I NEED IT.
I was not trying to say the submitter should use a laser printer. I was only saying that it is not true that a label sheet can only be fed once. If a printer will take a label sheet at all, it will take it twice (once from each end). There are plenty of other reasons to run a dedicated label printer, but I wanted to shoot down this particular one.
People cite braille on drive-up ATMs as political correctness gone crazy or the ludicrousness of government regulation, but the real reason that there is braille on drive-up ATMs is that it's not cost-effective to make two sets of ATM machines, one with braille and one without, especially since the braille has absolutely no effect on the way the machine functions. A second, braille-free model would just be for cosmetic reasons.
Beyond that, there is always the possibility of a car rolling up with a blind passenger in the BACK, who may wish to operate the ATM unassisted. It must be bad enough never getting to drive... though that seems to be another barrier falling.
I have heard that Ray Charles liked to ride a motorcycle by following someone else and just listening to where they went and what noises their bike was making. (Needless to say, this requires a cooperative lead rider.) Then Mythbusters did the "blind drunk" driving test and found that a blind person can follow directions and drive passably. Maybe this is not so far-fetched. Still, if we can make a machine smart enough to instruct a person how to drive, why can't we just let the machine drive?
You're assuming that he's labeling letters rather than labeling something like test tubes on a one-by-one basis (ie, a sheet of labels would be wasted)
In my experience, a sheet of labels can be run through a printer multiple times IF: (1) it gets pulled from the end, not from the side (2) you try to use the labels at the bottom first for best traction on subsequent passes, OR you flip it over and run it from the other end the next time (Avery sheets are symmetrical) (3) your printer doesn't have a faint bleed in it somewhere, as this will add up on multiple passes. (This might be acceptable anyhow, if the bleed is a color and the desired print is black.)
The straighter the paper path, the more you can re-use the same sheet. Also, this minimizes the chances of a label peeling off inside the printer. Thus, if your printer has a door where a duplexer can be attached (but you don't have one attached), it might help to open that door instead of making the sheet curl back around to the output tray.
Even the most demanding printer will let me run a sheet twice, once from each end. Surprisingly, I have found HP LaserJets (both monochrome and color) to be quite good about accepting the same label sheet over and over, even with the majority of the labels gone. It's the expensive heavy-duty printers that are liable to start eating labels. There seems to be a correlation to the ability to print envelopes. If it can, it should be perfectly happy running label sheets with bare spots.
You can run each set of pickups as a separate channel -- you should get at least two channels that way. You can even split humbuckers (if you can get them open) and use them as two slightly different sets of pickups. You could have one channel "clean" another with distortion, and a third with whatever comes out of your stomp boxes. You could install a theremin on your guitar and drive a separate channel off of that. It seems to me there are PLENTY of ways to drive three channels from one guitar.
Have you wondered if that soda can over there is empty or full?
A funny story that might not have happened if transparent cans (or plastic bottles) had been in use:
We were just shooting the breeze in front of the Arts building one day, and one of my friends set down his open can of Pepsi directly in the shade of a trash can. Nobody paid much attention to the bees in said trash can. He picked up the can about 10 minutes later and took a swig, and immediately spit out a mouthful of bees. Somehow he managed not to get stung.
That said, I don't really see how transparent aluminum would be cost-effective for something as mundane as a can, when transparent bottles are already cheap and effective. Even if plastics prove to be too unstable for food-grade storage, we always have glass.
In the same way the Russians still use thermionic valves for aircraft and spacecraft, and indeed high-end audiophiles use them for sound systems
Not even all that high end, just vintage. Nobody would call a receiver from the 1970's (or early 80's for Sansui) "high end" by today's standards, but the Marantz 4300/4400 and Sansui QX series are still highly desirable quadraphonic amplifiers. Fully restored units are available for around $1,000, not surprisingly using Russian tubes. Guitarists are also delighted that the Russians continue to build and export tubes. There was a time when there were serious concerns what was going to happen to all those vintage amplifiers when the tubes ran out. Hobbyists can only fill a small demand.
Near as I can tell, people fall in love with the fast cars when they're young and can't afford it, then buy them when they get money (and are usually older).
This is generally a good thing. It is best for all concerned that people get some driving experience under their belts before they get the keys to a car that can allow them to get in trouble much more quickly. Young drivers have a disproportionately high accident rate no matter what they're driving. Might as well try to make their fuck-ups less lethal, while preserving the expensive cars as a nice side effect.
This is why I always lie about date of birth on website applications. I chose July 20, 1969 because it is easy to remember. Although it might seem suspicious to use the date of the Apollo 11 moon landing, the fact is that some fair number of people were born that day, as with any other day. It's close enough to the right date that I'm not really misleading anyone about my age to a degree that makes a difference. A year and change just doesn't matter all that much once you get past your early 20's.
This of course meant I got a bunch of automated greetings on Monday, but all that did was serve to remind me why I did it in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Would rushing into the burning building really be so bad if you knew that your reward would be a new body? Assuming that sentient machines could transfer from one piece of hardware to another, you could make a backup, then send the replaceable body into the inferno. If there is no fear of death because the body is regarded as a simple vessel for the sentient being, robots would make GREAT firefighters and rescue workers.
Mal-2
I would, but he's currently in the clutches of an evil futon.
Mal-2
tl;dr ;)
Mal-2
I figured this out when trying to learn the art of singing and playing guitar simultaneously, an art that even some great musicians have not mastered -- Mark Knopfler, for example. Ultimately it works like this:
Drill one part of the performance (whether it's the vocal or the instrument is left to individual discretion) until you can do it on autopilot, THEN try doing both at once. Even then there is a high likelihood of tripping over oneself until one action is fully automatic.
Incidentally, I find it much more difficult to attempt to play bass and sing than to play guitar and sing. I think this is because it's easier to do "CHORD (strum strum strum) CHORD (strum strum strum)" on autopilot than individual notes and rhythms.
Mal-2
I don't really see why. Put a (clean) marble in your mouth without looking at it, and you will probably visualize its spherical shape even though you have obtained all your high-resolution sensation through your tongue. Stumble around in the dark and grab something off your table. Even though you can't see it, chances are that as soon as you pick it up you'll still "see" it.
Granted, you have a lifetime of visual experience to draw upon, much of which is stored alongside tactile memories of the same event. In such a case it may be more a triggering of memories than of visualization. It still proves the point that our brains can take data from the eyes and from touch, and realize that they are two different angles on the same object.
Ideally it would be best to perform this function somewhere that causes less obstruction to other functions. I heard about a similar (though much larger, and mechanical) grid that was placed on a patient's back, on the basis that there were few everyday functions that would be interfered with. The main problem was the low density of touch receptors in the back. We've evolved to have maximum concentrations of receptors where we need them, so technology can usurp them for some other purpose, but it can't get around the fact that they now can't perform that other purpose.
The obvious way to do it in the long run would be to route the data through the one high bandwidth path that blind people aren't using -- the optic nerves. At that point we would basically have artificial eyes. Once the link works, the rest can be done in software.
Also it seems to me that sometimes the whole camera system can be bypassed. Why make a computer throw images onto a monitor, point a camera at that monitor, and downsample it for the tongue interface? Couldn't the computer just send the image directly to the user's visual processor?
First of all that's 70 minutes of runtime. Standby wouldn't be nearly as draining.
I have to wonder though -- presumably one reads a magazine in reasonable lighting. Couldn't the ad be solar powered, with only a small battery to make sure it wakes up when it needs to?
Mal-2
My ability to spell hasn't been impacted (I have never been a fan of spell checkers), but my ability to write by hand certainly has. My handwriting looks the same as it always has -- it's legible enough. However, I do it more slowly due to a lack of practice, and I get tired MUCH more easily. It used to be that I could write by hand for an hour or more. Now I have to put down the pen and shake some blood back into my hand every couple of minutes.
More importantly, when I need to take notes, I show up with a netbook, not a pad and pen. I'm going to end up typing it up anyhow, and I don't write anywhere near 80 words per minute, so why not skip that step and type it up in the first place?
If you were wondering about cursive script -- I abandoned that long before I became heavily reliant on typing.
Mal-2
It could just as easily have been your friend who has the state-specific license, rather than his wife. You don't even have to have family to be stuck in one place.
Mal-2
Pluto is a Kuiper belt object anyhow. Objects that small in the vicinity of gas giants can get tossed into all sorts of orbits -- inclined, retrograde, highly elliptical -- but it would take quite a slingshot effect to get a large rocky planet or a gas giant going "the wrong way".
One way I can imagine a smaller object getting that way is if it never really reverses direction, the inclination just keeps increasing until it actually crosses perpendicular to the plane of the planets. Eventually it could get back into a fairly normal inclination but going backward because it has wrapped around. Again I can't see this working with a large planet -- once inclined, it would probably just stay that way since whatever large mass flung it out in the first place is now too far away to continue tilting it.
I wouldn't be all that amazed if it turns out the planet was a wanderer that got captured, and it isn't native to that solar system.
Mal-2
This depends what kind of business it is. If they're providing hardware and/or services to the geek crowd, it matters a lot. If they're selling shoes and their credit card information database gets stolen, it will probably have little (if any) lasting impact because even if people hear about it, they won't understand it and thus won't remember it. If they do remember, they'll pay cash the next time they go there, but they'll still go.
Mal-2
Einstein didn't invent the light speed limit, it existed whether we were aware of it or not. Heisenberg didn't invent the uncertainty principle from whole cloth, but because it accurately described and predicted observations. The fundamental limits imposed upon us have never changed, we have just become aware of them. Being unaware of limitations is a good way to run straight into them.
Mal-2
My fellow employees are doing a good job of screwing themselves right into the ground.
We got the order that we were not to put in OT without approval (which WILL be granted if it's an emergency). This was right after the EA suit, and Activision is in the same building complex as we are, so not surprisingly HR had to cover its ass.
The problem is, people are still doing undeclared OT, and it's still very much expected my Leadership. I don't do it. I am in my seat at 7 and gone at 12, back at 1 and gone at 4. People are grumbling that I'm not pulling my weight, just because I don't spend my whole life there. Nobody has confronted me personally but they're bitching to our manager, and I'm just waiting for the call into the office about it. I don't plan to budge. If they think they can replace me, they can go right ahead. They've tried before when they thought I was going to skip (and I was, but the other offer was with AIG... and I don't think I have to explain any further). I gave them plenty of warning so I could bring someone up to speed. They assigned someone already in the company to the position, and she kept going out of her way to dodge my training sessions and eventually threatened to quit if they didn't give her back her old position. So I have them over a barrel in a way, but that doesn't prevent the busy worker bees from finding fault with my position.
I have made it perfectly clear they can't have it both ways. They can't have my time AND their money. I'm almost hoping they decide I'm next on the chopping block. I'll go back to temping and probably get picked up permanently the first or second time out, but I know my position now. OT only if paid, no arm-twisting to do otherwise.
Mal-2
I had a special way of passing time in GTA2, and it went something like this:
Find a grassy area with lots of pedestrian traffic passing, near one of the paint-and-weapon shops. Acquire something powerful like a bus or a fire truck -- you're going to need it later. Park it out of the way.
Steal a car, equip it with a bomb, and drive it up onto the grassy area. Wait till the peds come back, arm the bomb, and run like hell. Watch bodies fly every which way! Quickly steal another car (or have one waiting) and get it painted to dump your wanted level, then equip it with a bomb. Use the bus or fire truck to shove the bombed car into the street, and blow up another crowd of people with a new car bomb. The people WILL come back, never mind that cars keep blowing up. They're totally oblivious to what happened 30 seconds ago. Repeat till it gets old -- which for me took about 30 minutes.
I would also dump a bunch of oil in and around an intersection, jack cars and pack them insanely tight with one bomb-equipped car in the middle, and set it off to see how many I could get to go up at one time. The oil just made it easier to jack a lot of cars in a short span of time.
Mal-2
If they want to use it for gaming, it's going to need to send aftertouch signals, indicating changes in pressure while the key is held. Otherwise how will it know when you go from a walk to a run without releasing the button, or want to go from burst fire to full auto?
It's not that hard folks, MIDI keyboards have been able to do this for decades.
Mal-2
A lens like this is going to be really useful as an optical element in camera lenses. Instead of having to rotate a barrel to move one or more elements back and forth, the adjustable element can stay in one place and change shape internally. This means quieter and faster focusing, lower power consumption, and quite possibly a larger focusing range. Since almost all lenses focus at infinity, this means adding range on the close end.
It also may mean shorter designs are possible than is currently the case, or that wider zoom ranges could be packed into the current barrels. Since I don't hear too many people complaining about the size of lens barrels on point-and-shoots (since they fold up really nicely), it's most likely going to be enhanced capabilities that wins the marketing war. However, this would mean that current capabilities like 4x optical zooms could be fitted into ultra-compact cameras.
Mal-2
I've bought three things at Radio Shack in the last 5 years -- (1&2) two digital cameras on the same day, they were Xmas gifts and Radio Shack had them the cheapest! Jacked up SD card price, and they were pushing a bundle that included a printer that used ridiculously expensive ink. I declined and bought a Brother somewhere else. (3) a WiFi repeater that didn't work for shit. That went back the next day.
To the credit of the employees, they didn't seem to mind taking a return. They just checked the box to make sure everything was there, and did a chargeback. I did have to wait, but that's more understaffing (management problem) than an issue with the employees. I have found one way to speed through the line at Radio Shack is to stare longingly at anything expensive. That will get some assistance REAL quick. They'll practically drag you to the register if you say "yes" when they walk up and ask if you are ready to complete your purchase. They think they're closing the deal on whatever you were staring at, when all you actually want is what's in your hands, or maybe their display case. :)
I have completely given up on them as a source for anything small and more challenging than a 1/8"-to-RCA cable. I'm actually all right with them charging $7 for a cable that Parts Express has for $2.50, that's why they're the 7-11 of gadgetry. JUST HAVE IT WHEN I NEED IT.
Mal-2
I was not trying to say the submitter should use a laser printer. I was only saying that it is not true that a label sheet can only be fed once. If a printer will take a label sheet at all, it will take it twice (once from each end). There are plenty of other reasons to run a dedicated label printer, but I wanted to shoot down this particular one.
Mal-2
Beyond that, there is always the possibility of a car rolling up with a blind passenger in the BACK, who may wish to operate the ATM unassisted. It must be bad enough never getting to drive... though that seems to be another barrier falling.
I have heard that Ray Charles liked to ride a motorcycle by following someone else and just listening to where they went and what noises their bike was making. (Needless to say, this requires a cooperative lead rider.) Then Mythbusters did the "blind drunk" driving test and found that a blind person can follow directions and drive passably. Maybe this is not so far-fetched. Still, if we can make a machine smart enough to instruct a person how to drive, why can't we just let the machine drive?
Mal-2
In my experience, a sheet of labels can be run through a printer multiple times IF:
(1) it gets pulled from the end, not from the side
(2) you try to use the labels at the bottom first for best traction on subsequent passes, OR you flip it over and run it from the other end the next time (Avery sheets are symmetrical)
(3) your printer doesn't have a faint bleed in it somewhere, as this will add up on multiple passes. (This might be acceptable anyhow, if the bleed is a color and the desired print is black.)
The straighter the paper path, the more you can re-use the same sheet. Also, this minimizes the chances of a label peeling off inside the printer. Thus, if your printer has a door where a duplexer can be attached (but you don't have one attached), it might help to open that door instead of making the sheet curl back around to the output tray.
Even the most demanding printer will let me run a sheet twice, once from each end. Surprisingly, I have found HP LaserJets (both monochrome and color) to be quite good about accepting the same label sheet over and over, even with the majority of the labels gone. It's the expensive heavy-duty printers that are liable to start eating labels. There seems to be a correlation to the ability to print envelopes. If it can, it should be perfectly happy running label sheets with bare spots.
Mal-2
Why waste a CD-R? Burn to an ISO image and rip that. Or use a CD-RW until it wears out.
Mal-2
You can run each set of pickups as a separate channel -- you should get at least two channels that way. You can even split humbuckers (if you can get them open) and use them as two slightly different sets of pickups. You could have one channel "clean" another with distortion, and a third with whatever comes out of your stomp boxes. You could install a theremin on your guitar and drive a separate channel off of that. It seems to me there are PLENTY of ways to drive three channels from one guitar.
Mal-2
A funny story that might not have happened if transparent cans (or plastic bottles) had been in use:
We were just shooting the breeze in front of the Arts building one day, and one of my friends set down his open can of Pepsi directly in the shade of a trash can. Nobody paid much attention to the bees in said trash can. He picked up the can about 10 minutes later and took a swig, and immediately spit out a mouthful of bees. Somehow he managed not to get stung.
That said, I don't really see how transparent aluminum would be cost-effective for something as mundane as a can, when transparent bottles are already cheap and effective. Even if plastics prove to be too unstable for food-grade storage, we always have glass.
Mal-2
Not even all that high end, just vintage. Nobody would call a receiver from the 1970's (or early 80's for Sansui) "high end" by today's standards, but the Marantz 4300/4400 and Sansui QX series are still highly desirable quadraphonic amplifiers. Fully restored units are available for around $1,000, not surprisingly using Russian tubes. Guitarists are also delighted that the Russians continue to build and export tubes. There was a time when there were serious concerns what was going to happen to all those vintage amplifiers when the tubes ran out. Hobbyists can only fill a small demand.
Mal-2
This is generally a good thing. It is best for all concerned that people get some driving experience under their belts before they get the keys to a car that can allow them to get in trouble much more quickly. Young drivers have a disproportionately high accident rate no matter what they're driving. Might as well try to make their fuck-ups less lethal, while preserving the expensive cars as a nice side effect.
Mal-2
This is why I always lie about date of birth on website applications. I chose July 20, 1969 because it is easy to remember. Although it might seem suspicious to use the date of the Apollo 11 moon landing, the fact is that some fair number of people were born that day, as with any other day. It's close enough to the right date that I'm not really misleading anyone about my age to a degree that makes a difference. A year and change just doesn't matter all that much once you get past your early 20's.
This of course meant I got a bunch of automated greetings on Monday, but all that did was serve to remind me why I did it in the first place.
Mal-2