Irrelevant. Have you ever actually heard it pronounced with a soft "g"? I mean by people who actually use the words, not by some ignorant movie director.
You'd have to be on something pretty strong to mistake a nickel-plated ass-heavy solid metal ball for a fruit. I don't do that kind of stuff before breakfast.
From what I understand, the most harmful effect of a dirty bomb is likely to be a devaluation of real estate. It wouldn't take much plutonium to make a large area uninhabitable for a long long time. Not exactly as dangerous as a nuke, or even a conventional bomb, but still quite unpleasant.
AFAIK, Pu is only poisonous because it's radioactive. It metabolizes like Ca, i.e. it goes to the bone, and the alpha-rays and neutrons then do the trick on your bone marrow - slowly but surely.
30 kilos of weapons-grade is enough to make no more than 2 crude bombs, so the whole world is not really in danger. Just a couple of large cities.
If it wasn't weapons-grade, you could make one hell of a dirty bomb out of it, but not really anything that makes a big boom with a pretty mushroom cloud on top.
Phone lines also ring horribly, especially on long-haul calls and a digital hybrid doesn't always work right, and sometimes you hear the echo. But most of the time you don't. Cancelling out the room echo is only slightly different from cancelling out the line echo.
And you don't necessarily need to ping the room. If you have enough computing power, you can compute self-correlation of the audio stream and find the echos in it without pinging. You'd really want that in a car, otherwise you'd have to keep pinging rather often.
I've never played with a digital speakerphone other then the one in my cell phone, and the one in my cell handles changes in the accoustic envoronment very well. And it doesn't seem to ping, or emit any extra sounds that could be construed as a ping.
The actual testing of this method has been conducted with some 25" and 27" TVs out of a trash heap, not computer monitors. If you have to use monitors, pick an older one, with a curved glass. The flat ones aren't half as fun in the snow.
The biggest danger, the monitor being long since having been powered, is not electricity, but the glass shards from the imploding tube. This is the reason for throwing the mallet out the window, as opposed to using it in a normal manner, which would have been, you will agree, lots more fun.
The next biggest danger is the screen breaking as you are riding on it, and embedding some sharp glass fragments in your arse. Which is the reason for lining it with doormats.
It's also the reason I'm typing this standing up.
The third biggest danger is underestimating just how fast this sled can actually go.
Again: DON'T TRY THIS - at home or not. If you choose to try this, you might have fun, but you WILL get hurt.
For this to work, the light leaving the screen must not be polarized.
Why? As long the input polarizer of the shutter glasses is aligned with the polarization of the light coming out of the monitor, the glasses would work just fine.
Of course, for stereo you need a high refresh rate coupled with low feedthrough from one frame to the next, and LCD monitors can't do that. But polarization should not be an issue.
Is it true that DVI is limited to 60hz, and so that even if LCD refresh times improve, DVI always will be limited?
LCD refresh rates won't "improve", so you can stop worrying about that.
The reason that they won't improve is that 60Hz refresh is plenty enough for an LCD monitor, even with fast motion video on it. The CRTs need a faster refresh rate because they flicker, i.e. each pixel's brightness gradually falls off from refresh to refresh. LCDs don't flicker, i.e. a pixel stays at the same exact brightness the whole time between refreshes, so the refresh rate is limited by the desired frame rate, not flicker, and you really don't need faster frame rate than 60Hz.
How do my fellow Slashdotters recycle their old CRTs?
Out the window, then drop a mallet on it (literally, out the same window), repeatedly, until the screen with the metal frame around it is the only part remaining, and the rest is pulverized. The screen will be the only part remaining, because it's a half-inch thick glass, as opposed to the wimpy glass in the back part of the tube, and the cheap plastic that the rest of the thing is made out of. Then take the screen, line it with a doormat, and ride it off snowy hill. Glass has a really small friction coefficient against snow.
Do you realize how easy this is to fix? Just cancel the stereo out of the mike feed before processing for commands. It's called echo cancelling, and it's a common part of any telephone system.
Do you realize ads subsidize and offset a lot of costs for the consumer?
Yeah, like Google and television. And not much else. Now, since we are paying for cable in any event, I doubt the cable company would have trouble surviving without the ad revenue. And as far as Google is concerned, there were search engines before anyone ever thought about running an internet company based on ad revenue. They got their money elsewhere. Also, Google is the only successful internet business with an ad-based revenue model. Dotcom is long dead, remember?
Oh, and don't forget, it's the consumer who ends up paying for the ad campaign, which more than offsets the offsets to the costs of the consumer that you are talking about.
If you ask me, all advertising should be made illegal. Starting with spam, of course. I doubt the economy would ever even notice. Of course, the parasites in the advertising industry will have to go find real jobs!
OK, enough trolling, time to go read "Das Kapital".
Have you even used Google in the last two years? Notice the stuff on the right...
Actually, people who use Google don't notice the stuff on the right. Your mind just turns it off. You have to make a consious effort to actually look at the page instead of reading the results like usual to notice the stuff on the right.
Perhaps the "nipples" have something to do with blind/visually impaired people finding their way around the buttons...
More likely they have something to do with you finding your way around the buttons w/o having to take the gadget out of your pocket. Just like the nipples on the "home" keys of the keyboard.
You are confused. Atheism is a form of religion, as it is believing that there is no god, which is no better than believing that there is god. Thus, my dear, the logical conclusion is "people who believe in stupid shit should be sterilized", and this includes both atheists and religious people alike, but not agnostics.
Slashdot Mirror
goatse?
Irrelevant. Have you ever actually heard it pronounced with a soft "g"? I mean by people who actually use the words, not by some ignorant movie director.
Ask her, she must know.
You'd have to be on something pretty strong to mistake a nickel-plated ass-heavy solid metal ball for a fruit. I don't do that kind of stuff before breakfast.
From what I understand, the most harmful effect of a dirty bomb is likely to be a devaluation of real estate. It wouldn't take much plutonium to make a large area uninhabitable for a long long time. Not exactly as dangerous as a nuke, or even a conventional bomb, but still quite unpleasant.
From a conversation between a BestBuy service rep and a customer:
"My computer has a 40 jigabyte hard drive".
AFAIK, Pu is only poisonous because it's radioactive. It metabolizes like Ca, i.e. it goes to the bone, and the alpha-rays and neutrons then do the trick on your bone marrow - slowly but surely.
Jigawatts, if I'm not mistaking
A nuclear weapon only uses about a grapefruit sized piece of fissionable material.
True. Now try to guess how much a grapefruit-sized piece of plutonium would weigh.
30 kilos of weapons-grade is enough to make no more than 2 crude bombs, so the whole world is not really in danger. Just a couple of large cities.
If it wasn't weapons-grade, you could make one hell of a dirty bomb out of it, but not really anything that makes a big boom with a pretty mushroom cloud on top.
Lookie here
Well, actually, one-time pads are known secure as in mathematically proven to be secure.
You're right, my bad.
Bush is not a hick
... chimp ...
Talks like a hick...
Walks like a hick...
Looks like a
Must be Mr. Bush.
Sorry, I still can't get over the election results
1. There is no such thing as a "known secure cryptosystem". "Thought to be secure" is not the same thing, as people have proven many times over.
2. PGP is not a cryptosystem - it's an application program. "Cryptosystem" means algorithm. It's the same thing as "cipher", essentially.
BUSH SUCKS DICK
Sorry, couldn't resist
Phone lines also ring horribly, especially on long-haul calls and a digital hybrid doesn't always work right, and sometimes you hear the echo. But most of the time you don't. Cancelling out the room echo is only slightly different from cancelling out the line echo.
And you don't necessarily need to ping the room. If you have enough computing power, you can compute self-correlation of the audio stream and find the echos in it without pinging. You'd really want that in a car, otherwise you'd have to keep pinging rather often.
I've never played with a digital speakerphone other then the one in my cell phone, and the one in my cell handles changes in the accoustic envoronment very well. And it doesn't seem to ping, or emit any extra sounds that could be construed as a ping.
The actual testing of this method has been conducted with some 25" and 27" TVs out of a trash heap, not computer monitors. If you have to use monitors, pick an older one, with a curved glass. The flat ones aren't half as fun in the snow.
The biggest danger, the monitor being long since having been powered, is not electricity, but the glass shards from the imploding tube. This is the reason for throwing the mallet out the window, as opposed to using it in a normal manner, which would have been, you will agree, lots more fun.
The next biggest danger is the screen breaking as you are riding on it, and embedding some sharp glass fragments in your arse. Which is the reason for lining it with doormats.
It's also the reason I'm typing this standing up.
The third biggest danger is underestimating just how fast this sled can actually go.
Again: DON'T TRY THIS - at home or not. If you choose to try this, you might have fun, but you WILL get hurt.
For this to work, the light leaving the screen must not be polarized.
Why? As long the input polarizer of the shutter glasses is aligned with the polarization of the light coming out of the monitor, the glasses would work just fine.
Of course, for stereo you need a high refresh rate coupled with low feedthrough from one frame to the next, and LCD monitors can't do that. But polarization should not be an issue.
Is it true that DVI is limited to 60hz, and so that even if LCD refresh times improve, DVI always will be limited?
LCD refresh rates won't "improve", so you can stop worrying about that.
The reason that they won't improve is that 60Hz refresh is plenty enough for an LCD monitor, even with fast motion video on it. The CRTs need a faster refresh rate because they flicker, i.e. each pixel's brightness gradually falls off from refresh to refresh. LCDs don't flicker, i.e. a pixel stays at the same exact brightness the whole time between refreshes, so the refresh rate is limited by the desired frame rate, not flicker, and you really don't need faster frame rate than 60Hz.
How do my fellow Slashdotters recycle their old CRTs?
Out the window, then drop a mallet on it (literally, out the same window), repeatedly, until the screen with the metal frame around it is the only part remaining, and the rest is pulverized. The screen will be the only part remaining, because it's a half-inch thick glass, as opposed to the wimpy glass in the back part of the tube, and the cheap plastic that the rest of the thing is made out of. Then take the screen, line it with a doormat, and ride it off snowy hill. Glass has a really small friction coefficient against snow.
Don't try this at home:-)
Do you realize how easy this is to fix? Just cancel the stereo out of the mike feed before processing for commands. It's called echo cancelling, and it's a common part of any telephone system.
Do you realize ads subsidize and offset a lot of costs for the consumer?
Yeah, like Google and television. And not much else. Now, since we are paying for cable in any event, I doubt the cable company would have trouble surviving without the ad revenue. And as far as Google is concerned, there were search engines before anyone ever thought about running an internet company based on ad revenue. They got their money elsewhere. Also, Google is the only successful internet business with an ad-based revenue model. Dotcom is long dead, remember?
Oh, and don't forget, it's the consumer who ends up paying for the ad campaign, which more than offsets the offsets to the costs of the consumer that you are talking about.
If you ask me, all advertising should be made illegal. Starting with spam, of course. I doubt the economy would ever even notice. Of course, the parasites in the advertising industry will have to go find real jobs!
OK, enough trolling, time to go read "Das Kapital".
Then don't target them by collecting personal information. There are other ways.
Have you even used Google in the last two years? Notice the stuff on the right...
Actually, people who use Google don't notice the stuff on the right. Your mind just turns it off. You have to make a consious effort to actually look at the page instead of reading the results like usual to notice the stuff on the right.
Perhaps the "nipples" have something to do with blind/visually impaired people finding their way around the buttons...
More likely they have something to do with you finding your way around the buttons w/o having to take the gadget out of your pocket. Just like the nipples on the "home" keys of the keyboard.
...logical conclusion...
You are confused. Atheism is a form of religion, as it is believing that there is no god, which is no better than believing that there is god. Thus, my dear, the logical conclusion is "people who believe in stupid shit should be sterilized", and this includes both atheists and religious people alike, but not agnostics.