Absolutely. I play a lot of iCTF/iTDM/iFT and I'd rather rail against someone with a 20 ping than someone with 175 and high pl, because my reflexes are fast and when you shoot an lpb, he generally dies. HPB's sometimes aren't where their avatar is displayed, meaning you have to miss to hit them. Especially when they warp- then you have to guess.
The sad thing is, warping at least is 99% fixable. The big problems come when 1) players have their maxpackets+snaps+clpacketdup set too high, saturating their upload bandwidth, so the server doesn't receive the gameworld updates it expects, or 2) when players have very high packet loss and have a network card that implements packet caching, which confuses the Q3 engine by sending lost packets n+1 times when the server is expcting n=cl_packetdup. These are both problems which can be fixed with a little work or a $10 investment in hardware (or, sometimes, simply turning off packet caching in network card properties).
I have not yet found a n00b lagger whose lag was so bad that I couldn't make him stop warping with a little tweaking of network parameters, or in an extreme case, a new network card. Assuming his ping was under 400 or so, and he was willing to experiment (you would be surprised at how many laggers do it intentionally, esp at instagib servers). Not being hittable is a big advantage... especially when you play against good players, with >60% accuracy rates.
The real question is: when will professional gaming take off? You can do so much with the idea, make everything so much more interesting than basic professional sporting events, and with webcasting (a la Quakecon tourney) being so cheap and trivial to implement, it is really amazing that it hasn't taken off. I mean, hell, people pay to watch GOLF on television; why not Quake?
When it does happen (and I am sure it will) I wonder if it will go the direction of pro baseball, with big corporations buying franchises and selling tickets to imax style theaters, or pro bowling, with people who are extremely highly skilled going to big tournamounts and competing for cash, or maybe some completely new paradigm? So far it looks like it is headed the bowling/golf direction, but there is only one real data point (quakecon) and there have not been any true competitions for teamplay- oriented games yet...
Mozilla has an option to do this in a sub-window- "use download manager" or something (I'm at work and can't install mozilla here so I can't check the exact name). It would be nice to have this in a tab though (same with mozilla mail and news).
To continue your airplane/speedbump analogy (actually quite a good one) the way to determine how well an airplane will handle turbulence, simplified grotesquely of course, is to compare the ratio of wing area to the weight of the plane. Think of wings as a sort of inverse shock absorber- the bigger the wings, the more load is transferred from the atmospheric turbulence to the aircraft structure. The weight of the aircraft acts as a damper on this force (higher m means less a for a given f). This is why airplanes like the F-105 make great attack aircraft- they are stable as a rock when flying fast down low. They are quite heavy and have tiny stubs for wings. They also have huge drag coefficients when flying slow because they have to fly at a very high angle of attack.
Planes like the F-106, on the other hand, are only useful at high altitudes because they will literally shake the pilot to death flying low and fast. However, they have lots of wing area, which makes them more maneuverable and much more efficient.
Hypersonic aircraft will be huge- on the order of 1.5 to 2 million pounds- and will have wing areas comperable to modern civil transport aircraft. Whereas modern aircraft have wing loadings on the order of 70-160 lb/ft^2, hypersonic vehicles will be on the order of 15-30.
Al this is moot anyway because, as an earlier poster pointed out, turbulence is primarily a concern at altitudes much different than what a scramjet powered pane will likely cruise at, and also because the dynamic pressure at mach 8 is on the order of 100,000 psi - high enough that tiny differences in thrust caused by impurities in the fuel will have more effect than atmospheric pressure gradients.
Finally, pressure gradients in the atmosphere follow a normal statistical distribution. the faster you go, i.e. the more linear distance you cover per second, the larger the sample of pressures becomes and therefore the lower the expected standard deviation. All other things considered, you will see less effective turbulence the faster you go.
The wingspan of the velair was only 22.7m, the sakuzo 24.5m, and the musculair 22m. These both took off from a flat runway, with no launching ramp or platform. If your goal isn't sustained powered flight, you don't need the extrememly high efficiencies afforded by high aspect ratio wings (27-35) and can get by with lower AR.
The reason planes like the gossamer condor use long wingspans is that lift coefficient is highly dependent on aspect ratio. Aspect ratio is defined as the wingspan^2/wing area.
You could build a bi/triplane with a similar aspect ratio and a 30 ft wingspan. You could also increase the effective aspect ratio by adding winglets, among other things.
I am sure that I could design an airplane capable of succeeding in these circumstances, if I had a few more weeks and a bit of funding. However, notice the game isn't to fly- it is to not fly and do it spectacularly. My insurance doesn't cover that.
Is that your web page? If so, you left out the events that took place in Friday, Job, and a number of short stories. Good summary though. Hopefully the good Rev. S. has been born in our current timeline, so we don't all die Real Soon Now.:)
Out of curiousity, what do you use for your generic GUI's? I'm doing an interface to a suite of old hypersonics codes written in Fortran IV and am looking for ideas.
And when the ocean circulation changes there is nothing humans can do about it.
I have to disagree here. There has to be something we can do about it- it may be expensive, it may require a hell of a lot of research and maybe some geo-engineering with 100 megaton bombs or other "long levers", but imho it seems silly to think that we can be currently unconsciously changing the world's climate on one hand (greenhouse effect) and yet be completely unable to consciously change it back.
I know you are trying to be funny, but some people took you seriously, so I will clarify: The X-43 in that picture is designed to be dropped from beneath the wing of a b-52. The X-43A, which tried to fly last june and failed, is only 12 feet long. It is fitted to the front of a pegasus rocket, carried to altitude, and dropped. Once it falls free of the aircraft the pegasus ignites, pushing the vehicle to a speed at which the scramjet engine can work; there the pegasus releases and the airbreathing engines take over.
The X-43B is much larger, for sure, and is not powered by a pegasus, but it is still going to be dropped from either a B-52H or an L-1011. Probably the B-52H which Nasa just acquired from the USAF.
Now, when you start talking about single stage to orbit vehicles with combined cycle engines designed to carry freight cheaply,you will be talking about aircraft 200 feet long weighing upwards of 1.5 million pounds. Anything less and the incredible inefficiencies of fixed structure cause your useful cargo load to be negative (I could write a whole lot more about this, and may, later, but it is going-home-time now:) If you really care, there are plenty of references on the net).
Anyway I'm not judging him, one way or the other; I don't really give a damn if he kills himself or not- in fact I don't think he will, anymore, since he changed his design (his original design, which used thrust for stabilization, was a unstable flying death trap. The only question about his original design was whether or not it would kill him by tumbling into the ground or tearing itself apart in flight).
But I do care if he does something stupid that will give the bastards at the FAA etc more reason to restrict private aviation efforts. For that reason it is in my best interests to make sure he doesn't kill anyone or cause egregious damage to someone's sheep, or something.
Besides, I asked an honest question out of intellectual curiousity, and I feel pretty snubbed by his answer. IMHO the guy is an ass.
(and it is obvious you have no clue what the aiaa is by your last sentence).
What kind of testing have you done for your design(s)? Wind tunnel tests, computational fluid dynamics, flying scale models, etc? I've also noticed that your design has changed considerably since the first time you were featured on Slashdot, and as an aerospace engineer myself it would be interesting to know what your design criteria were and how you arrived at them.
RG: My design has changed because I do not profess to be an aeronautical engineer of any sort, and as I have proceeded, I have allowed myself to make the necessary changes resulting in a better design. A number of people have a called me on several design concerns, and I listened. As for wind tunnel tests and the like, no. The rocket is near perfect in its shape, and for what I require it to do (go up and down in a relatively stable manner), it is fine.
Very informative, thanks. But i am curious: how can you say it is near perfect if you haven't tested it? Hope you give more info than that in your talk to the AIAA...
To copy a cd at 8x all I had to do was put the original in the plextor reader and click the copy button. Since the ripper could read digital audio at ~14x, there was no need to buffer to a hard drive.
Now, obviously, if you are going to write at 32x you have to read at at least 32x. The drive that can read digital audio at 32x simply does not exist. Therefore. realistically, every software program I have used requires that you rip the whole cd to disk before writing. Most programs allow you to start burning before the whole disk is ripped- average buffer time is about a minute before the burn starts, as opposed to instantly with the "slower" drive which copies from cd to cdr instead of cd to hdd to cdr.
As far as closing the cd goes, I have no clue why it takes so long, but it just SITS there, grinding, lights blinking. The drive is a lacie 32810- maybe it is bad.
No, for several reasons. First off, look up CAV. 32x is a measure of the maximum transfer rate, which only occurs at the very edge of the disk. As you move in on the disk the data transfer rate decreases. The plextor scsi burner is a constant linear velocity drive, meaning that it burns at 8x all the way from the outside edge to the inner edge (by increasing the angular velocity of the drive).
Second, it takes the scsi drive about 3 seconds to close a cd, while it takes the IDE drive about 2 minutes. It also takes the IDE drive about a minute and a half to start burning, while the scsi drive starts almost immediately. Once it starts burning, for the time that it burns, it is really fast. However, the time that it takes to actually make a cd (real world speed) is about the same.
And yes, I am using DMA. All my hard drives are SCSI (raid array of 5 36GB cheetahs) and the source cd drive is a 40x UW plextor. Operating systems are XP Pro Corporate and Mandrake 8.2, using both feurio and Adaptec 5.whatever and any one of the half dozen CD burning gui's which came with the mandrake install.
I tried to replace my aging 8x SCSI CD-R recently, and ended up buying an IDE CD-RW, because all that was available in SCSI was outdated crap
I did the same thing. Unfortunately, I found that the 32x ide burner is only about 10% faster than my 3 year old 8x plextor... Not to mention the fact that I could play quake 3 and burn cd's at the same time with the scsi burner and with the IDE I am afraid to move the mouse (on a dual 1800+). too bad the plextor doesn't do cdtext because that was my main reason for upgrading.
What kind of testing have you done for your design(s)? Wind tunnel tests, computational fluid dynamics, flying scale models, etc? I've also noticed that your design has changed considerably since the first time you were featured on slashdot, and as an aerospace engineer myself it would be interesting to know what your design criteria were and how you arrived at them.
NFW... I've got a 1600SW and it rocks for FPS games. You do have to either set up the special resolution (carmack posted something on one of the sgi newsgroups about how to do it) or use a stretched FOV to make it pretty (I use 800x600 with 112 FOV). But it is gorgeous, with no blur at all. Totally unlike quake3 on a standard fpd, which is unplayable (competitively, at least) imho.
Were you using DVI? Was your video card up to the task?
You can also shift your crosshair to the center of one of the screens and use the other for peripheral vision to one side or the other. Not perfect, but I guess it could be useful.
i would personally like to build a laptop based on the 1600SW screen, specifically for gaming. I don't mind if it is "briefcase" sized, as long as it incorporates a good video card and fast proc. Does anyone know of any online resources that talk about, say, wiring up a couple of laptop batteries to simulate an ATX power supply?
The problem with this comes when I search for myfavoriteband*.mp3, download a dozen files, and get a bad one in the bunch. You don't play them all, storing half of them away "for later". Someone else dl's the bad one and blacklists you for it...
Isn't that the point though? You can't go to court suing Sony because they created a lot of damaged versions of their songs. How does this sound?
"I was trying to download an illegal copy of their copyrighted music and it was damaged!"
No, but it seems like an independent recording artist would have grounds for a nice lawsuit if he was using P2P as a distribution source. Esp. if there is collusion between multiple companies involved.
seriously, "joe schmoe" today is a whole lot different than "joe schmoe" will be in 5 years. People change; technology that today seems bleeding edge will tomorrow be an electric can opener. Not even noticed as "technology" by most people.
Also, as software evolves, "md5 lookups" will not be as difficult as they are now, and when the average person realizes that "md5 lookup" means the same thing as "click the box for trusted search" they will click the dang box (or it will be built in to the software so that there isn't even be a box to click). KaZaA etc suck right now; they are at the stage in software development as, say, ms works for DOS 1.0. Compare that to a modern word processing program and extrapolate a bit, and you'll have some idea of where p2p apps are headed.
this shit that we call "technology" really isnt that hard to get a basic grasp of. When my wife needs to know how to do this stuff in order to read the latest stephen king book, or my daughter needs to know it to listen to {boy band x} she will learn it.
If software companies were held liable for damage done by their defective software, they would be encouraged to either fix problems in that software immediately or issue a product recall. Imagine the repercussions of a monthly recall of Internet Explorer or XP... and $50 million lawsuits over default installations that leave outlook subceptible to viruses.
There is no such thing as "provably safe". There is only "provably unsafe", and "not yet proven unsafe".
Of course, you'll have a much easier time proving mozilla is unsafe than you will proving IE is unsafe, since you can look at the code and find holes. Since it hasn't been done, I'm forced to assume it is safer than IE. Go ahead, prove me wrong, I'll give you a cookie.
why shouldn't there be a high end pc games market? Porsche doesn't have to use geo metro engines so that geo metro owners don't feel left out.
Interesting thought. Why aren't there any truly high-end supercards out there? I'm talking custom built 8x AGP Pro + 2 PCI slot cards with 3 DVI outputs that perform game functions like a Wildcat 5110 does Maya...
Probably wouldn't sell many of them at $2-5000 a pop, but they'd be there for geek bragging rights at least. Plus I could pick one up on Ebay a year or so after it comes out for a pittance:)
(I'm not the AC asshole who posted above. I'm replying to you instead of him because he is an AC and because I'm curious as to how you managed the trick of knocking someone down.)
So, anyway, while there is no such thing as negative absolute pressure, negative gage pressure is what you were talking about (atmospheric pressure on a "standard day" is 14.7 psi absolute, 0 gage). What I am curious about is how you effected this negative pressure? Vacuum pump inside the room? Seals under the door?
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely. I play a lot of iCTF/iTDM/iFT and I'd rather rail against someone with a 20 ping than someone with 175 and high pl, because my reflexes are fast and when you shoot an lpb, he generally dies. HPB's sometimes aren't where their avatar is displayed, meaning you have to miss to hit them. Especially when they warp- then you have to guess.
The sad thing is, warping at least is 99% fixable. The big problems come when 1) players have their maxpackets+snaps+clpacketdup set too high, saturating their upload bandwidth, so the server doesn't receive the gameworld updates it expects, or 2) when players have very high packet loss and have a network card that implements packet caching, which confuses the Q3 engine by sending lost packets n+1 times when the server is expcting n=cl_packetdup. These are both problems which can be fixed with a little work or a $10 investment in hardware (or, sometimes, simply turning off packet caching in network card properties).
I have not yet found a n00b lagger whose lag was so bad that I couldn't make him stop warping with a little tweaking of network parameters, or in an extreme case, a new network card. Assuming his ping was under 400 or so, and he was willing to experiment (you would be surprised at how many laggers do it intentionally, esp at instagib servers). Not being hittable is a big advantage... especially when you play against good players, with >60% accuracy rates.
The real question is: when will professional gaming take off? You can do so much with the idea, make everything so much more interesting than basic professional sporting events, and with webcasting (a la Quakecon tourney) being so cheap and trivial to implement, it is really amazing that it hasn't taken off. I mean, hell, people pay to watch GOLF on television; why not Quake?
When it does happen (and I am sure it will) I wonder if it will go the direction of pro baseball, with big corporations buying franchises and selling tickets to imax style theaters, or pro bowling, with people who are extremely highly skilled going to big tournamounts and competing for cash, or maybe some completely new paradigm? So far it looks like it is headed the bowling/golf direction, but there is only one real data point (quakecon) and there have not been any true competitions for teamplay- oriented games yet...
blatant Q3A tourney plug
Mozilla has an option to do this in a sub-window- "use download manager" or something (I'm at work and can't install mozilla here so I can't check the exact name). It would be nice to have this in a tab though (same with mozilla mail and news).
To continue your airplane/speedbump analogy (actually quite a good one) the way to determine how well an airplane will handle turbulence, simplified grotesquely of course, is to compare the ratio of wing area to the weight of the plane. Think of wings as a sort of inverse shock absorber- the bigger the wings, the more load is transferred from the atmospheric turbulence to the aircraft structure. The weight of the aircraft acts as a damper on this force (higher m means less a for a given f). This is why airplanes like the F-105 make great attack aircraft- they are stable as a rock when flying fast down low. They are quite heavy and have tiny stubs for wings. They also have huge drag coefficients when flying slow because they have to fly at a very high angle of attack.
Planes like the F-106, on the other hand, are only useful at high altitudes because they will literally shake the pilot to death flying low and fast. However, they have lots of wing area, which makes them more maneuverable and much more efficient.
Hypersonic aircraft will be huge- on the order of 1.5 to 2 million pounds- and will have wing areas comperable to modern civil transport aircraft. Whereas modern aircraft have wing loadings on the order of 70-160 lb/ft^2, hypersonic vehicles will be on the order of 15-30.
Al this is moot anyway because, as an earlier poster pointed out, turbulence is primarily a concern at altitudes much different than what a scramjet powered pane will likely cruise at, and also because the dynamic pressure at mach 8 is on the order of 100,000 psi - high enough that tiny differences in thrust caused by impurities in the fuel will have more effect than atmospheric pressure gradients.
Finally, pressure gradients in the atmosphere follow a normal statistical distribution. the faster you go, i.e. the more linear distance you cover per second, the larger the sample of pressures becomes and therefore the lower the expected standard deviation. All other things considered, you will see less effective turbulence the faster you go.
The wingspan of the velair was only 22.7m, the sakuzo 24.5m, and the musculair 22m. These both took off from a flat runway, with no launching ramp or platform. If your goal isn't sustained powered flight, you don't need the extrememly high efficiencies afforded by high aspect ratio wings (27-35) and can get by with lower AR.
Well
The reason planes like the gossamer condor use long wingspans is that lift coefficient is highly dependent on aspect ratio. Aspect ratio is defined as the wingspan^2/wing area.
You could build a bi/triplane with a similar aspect ratio and a 30 ft wingspan. You could also increase the effective aspect ratio by adding winglets, among other things.
I am sure that I could design an airplane capable of succeeding in these circumstances, if I had a few more weeks and a bit of funding. However, notice the game isn't to fly- it is to not fly and do it spectacularly. My insurance doesn't cover that.
Is that your web page? If so, you left out the events that took place in Friday, Job, and a number of short stories. Good summary though. Hopefully the good Rev. S. has been born in our current timeline, so we don't all die Real Soon Now. :)
Neh
Out of curiousity, what do you use for your generic GUI's? I'm doing an interface to a suite of old hypersonics codes written in Fortran IV and am looking for ideas.
And when the ocean circulation changes there is nothing humans can do about it.
I have to disagree here. There has to be something we can do about it- it may be expensive, it may require a hell of a lot of research and maybe some geo-engineering with 100 megaton bombs or other "long levers", but imho it seems silly to think that we can be currently unconsciously changing the world's climate on one hand (greenhouse effect) and yet be completely unable to consciously change it back.
I know you are trying to be funny, but some people took you seriously, so I will clarify: The X-43 in that picture is designed to be dropped from beneath the wing of a b-52. The X-43A, which tried to fly last june and failed, is only 12 feet long. It is fitted to the front of a pegasus rocket, carried to altitude, and dropped. Once it falls free of the aircraft the pegasus ignites, pushing the vehicle to a speed at which the scramjet engine can work; there the pegasus releases and the airbreathing engines take over.
:) If you really care, there are plenty of references on the net).
The X-43B is much larger, for sure, and is not powered by a pegasus, but it is still going to be dropped from either a B-52H or an L-1011. Probably the B-52H which Nasa just acquired from the USAF.
Now, when you start talking about single stage to orbit vehicles with combined cycle engines designed to carry freight cheaply,you will be talking about aircraft 200 feet long weighing upwards of 1.5 million pounds. Anything less and the incredible inefficiencies of fixed structure cause your useful cargo load to be negative (I could write a whole lot more about this, and may, later, but it is going-home-time now
Neh
aero geek
I quoted what was relevant to my comment.
Anyway I'm not judging him, one way or the other; I don't really give a damn if he kills himself or not- in fact I don't think he will, anymore, since he changed his design (his original design, which used thrust for stabilization, was a unstable flying death trap. The only question about his original design was whether or not it would kill him by tumbling into the ground or tearing itself apart in flight).
But I do care if he does something stupid that will give the bastards at the FAA etc more reason to restrict private aviation efforts. For that reason it is in my best interests to make sure he doesn't kill anyone or cause egregious damage to someone's sheep, or something.
Besides, I asked an honest question out of intellectual curiousity, and I feel pretty snubbed by his answer. IMHO the guy is an ass.
(and it is obvious you have no clue what the aiaa is by your last sentence).
2) operational testing?
by Nehemiah S
What kind of testing have you done for your design(s)? Wind tunnel tests, computational fluid dynamics, flying scale models, etc? I've also noticed that your design has changed considerably since the first time you were featured on Slashdot, and as an aerospace engineer myself it would be interesting to know what your design criteria were and how you arrived at them.
RG: My design has changed because I do not profess to be an aeronautical engineer of any sort, and as I have proceeded, I have allowed myself to make the necessary changes resulting in a better design. A number of people have a called me on several design concerns, and I listened. As for wind tunnel tests and the like, no. The rocket is near perfect in its shape, and for what I require it to do (go up and down in a relatively stable manner), it is fine.
Very informative, thanks. But i am curious: how can you say it is near perfect if you haven't tested it? Hope you give more info than that in your talk to the AIAA...
Good luck.
neh
Well, I imagine you could adapt a jaz drive to do something like this. Most games I have fit in 2 gigs of drive space, and they are reasonably fast.
Sigh.
To copy a cd at 8x all I had to do was put the original in the plextor reader and click the copy button. Since the ripper could read digital audio at ~14x, there was no need to buffer to a hard drive.
Now, obviously, if you are going to write at 32x you have to read at at least 32x. The drive that can read digital audio at 32x simply does not exist. Therefore. realistically, every software program I have used requires that you rip the whole cd to disk before writing. Most programs allow you to start burning before the whole disk is ripped- average buffer time is about a minute before the burn starts, as opposed to instantly with the "slower" drive which copies from cd to cdr instead of cd to hdd to cdr.
As far as closing the cd goes, I have no clue why it takes so long, but it just SITS there, grinding, lights blinking. The drive is a lacie 32810- maybe it is bad.
Glad yours works good for you.
No, for several reasons. First off, look up CAV. 32x is a measure of the maximum transfer rate, which only occurs at the very edge of the disk. As you move in on the disk the data transfer rate decreases. The plextor scsi burner is a constant linear velocity drive, meaning that it burns at 8x all the way from the outside edge to the inner edge (by increasing the angular velocity of the drive).
Second, it takes the scsi drive about 3 seconds to close a cd, while it takes the IDE drive about 2 minutes. It also takes the IDE drive about a minute and a half to start burning, while the scsi drive starts almost immediately. Once it starts burning, for the time that it burns, it is really fast. However, the time that it takes to actually make a cd (real world speed) is about the same.
And yes, I am using DMA. All my hard drives are SCSI (raid array of 5 36GB cheetahs) and the source cd drive is a 40x UW plextor. Operating systems are XP Pro Corporate and Mandrake 8.2, using both feurio and Adaptec 5.whatever and any one of the half dozen CD burning gui's which came with the mandrake install.
I tried to replace my aging 8x SCSI CD-R recently, and ended up buying an IDE CD-RW, because all that was available in SCSI was outdated crap
I did the same thing. Unfortunately, I found that the 32x ide burner is only about 10% faster than my 3 year old 8x plextor... Not to mention the fact that I could play quake 3 and burn cd's at the same time with the scsi burner and with the IDE I am afraid to move the mouse (on a dual 1800+). too bad the plextor doesn't do cdtext because that was my main reason for upgrading.
What kind of testing have you done for your design(s)? Wind tunnel tests, computational fluid dynamics, flying scale models, etc? I've also noticed that your design has changed considerably since the first time you were featured on slashdot, and as an aerospace engineer myself it would be interesting to know what your design criteria were and how you arrived at them.
NFW... I've got a 1600SW and it rocks for FPS games. You do have to either set up the special resolution (carmack posted something on one of the sgi newsgroups about how to do it) or use a stretched FOV to make it pretty (I use 800x600 with 112 FOV). But it is gorgeous, with no blur at all. Totally unlike quake3 on a standard fpd, which is unplayable (competitively, at least) imho.
Were you using DVI? Was your video card up to the task?
You can also shift your crosshair to the center of one of the screens and use the other for peripheral vision to one side or the other. Not perfect, but I guess it could be useful.
i would personally like to build a laptop based on the 1600SW screen, specifically for gaming. I don't mind if it is "briefcase" sized, as long as it incorporates a good video card and fast proc. Does anyone know of any online resources that talk about, say, wiring up a couple of laptop batteries to simulate an ATX power supply?
The problem with this comes when I search for myfavoriteband*.mp3, download a dozen files, and get a bad one in the bunch. You don't play them all, storing half of them away "for later". Someone else dl's the bad one and blacklists you for it...
Isn't that the point though? You can't go to court suing Sony because they created a lot of damaged versions of their songs. How does this sound?
"I was trying to download an illegal copy of their copyrighted music and it was damaged!"
No, but it seems like an independent recording artist would have grounds for a nice lawsuit if he was using P2P as a distribution source. Esp. if there is collusion between multiple companies involved.
seriously, "joe schmoe" today is a whole lot different than "joe schmoe" will be in 5 years. People change; technology that today seems bleeding edge will tomorrow be an electric can opener. Not even noticed as "technology" by most people.
Also, as software evolves, "md5 lookups" will not be as difficult as they are now, and when the average person realizes that "md5 lookup" means the same thing as "click the box for trusted search" they will click the dang box (or it will be built in to the software so that there isn't even be a box to click). KaZaA etc suck right now; they are at the stage in software development as, say, ms works for DOS 1.0. Compare that to a modern word processing program and extrapolate a bit, and you'll have some idea of where p2p apps are headed.
this shit that we call "technology" really isnt that hard to get a basic grasp of. When my wife needs to know how to do this stuff in order to read the latest stephen king book, or my daughter needs to know it to listen to {boy band x} she will learn it.
I do believe you have hit upon the answer here.
If software companies were held liable for damage done by their defective software, they would be encouraged to either fix problems in that software immediately or issue a product recall. Imagine the repercussions of a monthly recall of Internet Explorer or XP... and $50 million lawsuits over default installations that leave outlook subceptible to viruses.
There is no such thing as "provably safe". There is only "provably unsafe", and "not yet proven unsafe".
Of course, you'll have a much easier time proving mozilla is unsafe than you will proving IE is unsafe, since you can look at the code and find holes. Since it hasn't been done, I'm forced to assume it is safer than IE. Go ahead, prove me wrong, I'll give you a cookie.
why shouldn't there be a high end pc games market? Porsche doesn't have to use geo metro engines so that geo metro owners don't feel left out.
:)
Interesting thought. Why aren't there any truly high-end supercards out there? I'm talking custom built 8x AGP Pro + 2 PCI slot cards with 3 DVI outputs that perform game functions like a Wildcat 5110 does Maya...
Probably wouldn't sell many of them at $2-5000 a pop, but they'd be there for geek bragging rights at least. Plus I could pick one up on Ebay a year or so after it comes out for a pittance
(I'm not the AC asshole who posted above. I'm replying to you instead of him because he is an AC and because I'm curious as to how you managed the trick of knocking someone down.)
So, anyway, while there is no such thing as negative absolute pressure, negative gage pressure is what you were talking about (atmospheric pressure on a "standard day" is 14.7 psi absolute, 0 gage). What I am curious about is how you effected this negative pressure? Vacuum pump inside the room? Seals under the door?