The cost of keeping that data keeps going down. Look at HDD size vs storage space 5,10,20 years ago and then guess how much space Google is probably going to have in 5,10, and 20 years from now. In 10 years all the data they have now should fit on a single rack and in 20 years it will probably fit on a single disk. Yes, over time the value of all that data will keep droping but why dump it?
You can "fake" the "Ah-ha" moment by glossing over "many important details" but they don't really understand what's going on. When people describe something like how the shuttle returns from orbit it's the details which allow someone to understand what is going on and why it's working that way vs what they might think is a better idea.
Just look at how many people think you can build a few hundred mile long cable and use it to make a space elevator. It's the important details like ~32,000 miles long and the fact you can build it out of anything but it would need to be _ wide at geo sync to build it out of steel vs _ wide at geo sync with some "new/magic" stuff. (Assuming you want to lift _ load.)
People like to think about QM or string theory as if it "says" things but QM is just math that describes how some small things seem to operate. String Theory is in no way a unified theory, it's more a group of ways of looking at how QM works based on a wide range of assumptions. But, the assumption that you can explain what's going on to lay people is why you end up with so many crack pot's and so many people willing to accept what their saying.
The Hindenburg did not explode so no. Now could the tank rupture and burn well yes, but so can a gas tank. However due to how gas tanks are constructed and where they are located it's not an use compared to say being in the car as it hit's a brick wall at 75MPH or being in the car as someone is shooting at the tank. As to worrying about a ruptured hydrogen tank if you stop and think about it hydrogen is light so unlike a gas tank you not going to end up with a pool of the stuff if there is a hole in the tank, it's going to go up and dissipate vary quickly. (Think of a vary large balloon and how fast that would leave the area.)
PS: A 30/70 mix of air and hydrogen could explode, but so would a similar mix of gas and air, however the point is you build the thing so it's never going to have a 30/70 mix of hydrogen and air. (Hydrogen is most explosive at a 2hydrogen to 1 oxygen ratio, but air is only 21% oxygen so it's closer to 30% hydrogen / 70 air mix.) You can't get a 100% hydrogen tank to explode unless it's at high pressure or you start mixing in a lot of air.
Googles advantage with targeted adds is based around the high conversion rate when someone clicks on a Google add they are 2x as likely to buy something from that site as they are from yahoo. Thus people are willing to pay about 2x a much per click for Google adds vs any other type. Now if people really start using Microsoft's portal you might cut into MS's profit's but I don't expect that to be an issue. I use hotmail instead of gmail because I can't connect to gmail at work but I still use Google for search. For MS to cut into Google's profits they are going to have to compete in search AND provide an add service that is as profitable for other sites to use. (Addwords pay's a lot for little space and it fit's in with a lot of websites.) AND take over all the other Google websites that are supported by Addwords.
PS: Advertisers already have hundreds of options for advertising, as long as people are still looking at websites that are willing to use addwords MS is not goign to cut into Googles profits. In some ways advertising is a zero sum game, but Google is only a tiny fraction of overall advertising. If MS where doing 30billion / year in web adds it would do little to Google's bottom line.
Umm no.
How often is it AM? 1/day
What % of the time is it AM ~50%
So it uncomon for a clock to say AM? No why picking a random time you have a 50/50 shot at AM. Note: when I said how often I gave a the interval between events not a count of events over a time frame. So the count might be 365,243 over 1000 years but it's not important what makes it common is the % of the time it's AM.
Look up the definition of "rare air" and you see that it's not about the absolute count of particals of air but the relitive amount of air per unit space. Thus you define things like vacume not by how many per foot, but in terms of average count per unit space. Thus on average you might have.0001 per (m^-100)^2 but the size of unit space is not important. Your sugesting that an even that happens once every X years is rare over the course of a second but common over the course of a million years but you can't define things that way because you don't know which second your talking about. Thus it's still % chance per unit time. And to get the % chance you need the duration per event * average number of events per unit time / unit time.
There exists groups of organisms at various stages of specification where they:
A: Can have viable offspring but those offspring are less likely to mate than either of their parents in the environments.TRUE)
B: Can have viable offspring but duo to some trait chose to not mate with each other. (TRUE)
C: Can not have non viable offspring but can sill mate. (TRUE)
E: Are currently unable to mate due to physical separation but could still mate if introduced to each other.(TRUE)
F: Are physically similar but genetically separate. (TRUE)
Or how about a simpler one: Over time (living) pathogens become less deadly to their host organisms over time unless they gain some benifit from killing their host. (TRUE)
That is part of it, but they started down that path because the could cash some high traffic websites and reduce their need for outside bandwith. Say you connect to www.google.com and look at their home page well if your ISP has a coppy of that img file on hand they can serv that up to you without needing to connect to google at all. After a while they setup the network so it had a lot more downstream bandwith than upstream becuase that's what their customers "wanted" but right now they can't handel as much upstream bandwith as downstream.
A fertilized human egg, on the other hand, if allowed to survive...No the egg can be stored for years and fed and it will not turn into a person. It takes specal active care from a womb or womb like enviernment to get that cell to endup as a human. If you just give it food, water and space will will not become a human. If you give the cell all of the above and the right signals you can turn it into a person and with slightly more and slightly diffrent signals you can turn the finger cell into a human. Yes the egg starts off in a slightly diffrent situation but the both take specific external signals to turn into a person. what you need to understand is the egg and the finger are basicly the same thing they have the same DNA, the same cell structures ect but the finger has some specific reversible changes to make that cell think of it's self as a finger cell and not an egg cell.
Taken another step forward at what point would you stop calling the dirt "dirt" and start calling it a human? When it's a single cell, never as it was not "of mother born", or when it starts to look human?
There are other factors that make human life have value other than simply being a life form. Many cells in the human body are still alive for weeks after a person dies so clearly "Human Life" means more than simply a single human cell or group of such cells. We kill a lot of wheat but nody cares about that. Thus, simple life like an egg or a few cells at the end of somones fingers are not the same thing as human life, so why would killing a single cell be considered the same a killing a human? If your going to sugjest that it's potentaly a human well so is the cells on the end of a dead guys fingers we could clone them and turn each and every one of them to a human but that does not mean we need to.
It's still an early stage startup so a lot of the specifics are up in the air. As of right now I am setting up a system with it's own custom DRM that works with several video formats, a fast secure scalable backed, and a simple integrated player that works on Windows and OS X. I am more interested in getting the cost of distribution down than working with content suppliers right now. IMO focusing on a single market this early is a bad idea, if you make the right technology and you can sell it to independent films AND Hollywood AND Bollywood AND blogers ect.
For now I want to focus on selling / renting high quality video on line, but as the costs goes down I plan on being flexible enough to try out other approaches. At some point I will add video blogs. And yes I know most blogs suck, but if it's cheep enough we can run adds for any content or let them pay for the cost of distributing their own video's. Yes, you get a lot of junk blogs, but you also get people like Paul Gram, father of the modern spam filter, to provide interesting content such as "What you can't say" http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html. Heck, once things are set up we might setup an interface for school plays, (It's a hassle and lot's of people get riped off on these right now, so it's a good market to get into) but the goal is to have a good interface and then add on these features in a natural fashion rather than focusing on one and getting stuck.
PS: Yes, the goal is to make a tun of money, but the way to do it is to make a service that people like to use. If you have any ideas or want more info please email "J KIRBY JOBS" at H O T M A I L (.com). AKA jki_______mail.com
LOL get over your self. If something happens for one month out of every 60,000 years it's rare in the same way that something that happens for 1/600,000th of a second every second is rare. When you call something rare your not just talking about how often something happens, but what % of the time it happens. Sure twice a day the time is 12:12.121212121212 but vary rarely that time. It's even less common for that to happen on the 12th of the month and even uncommon for that to happen on the 12th day of the 12th month. So just because it's going to happen ~70 times over your lifetime does not make it less rare than your 10th birthday. You might only have one birthday but you spend 24 hours on that birthday vs. some tiny fraction of a second so picking a random time in your life it's much more likely that if falls on your birthday than at 12:12.121212121212 (AM OR PM) on the 12th day of the 12th month.
Try rereading what I said and see if you can find out where I said that "base station" did not also imply cell phones.
"Base stations (or BSc) are low-power multi-channel two-way radios which are in a fixed location. They are typically used by low-power single-channel, two-way radios such as mobile phones, portable phones and wireless routers." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_station
So we can go one set further and say "Base stations imply the part of the guts of wireless routers."
If you want to be clear in what you say don't just use terms like city (aka I went to the city) be specific and say something like I went to DC. Chances are better that you will confuse other idiots like yourself.
So when we are talking about a Cell phones networks you should be specific. Inside most major city's your covered by several "base stations" some, of which are part of the cell phone network. Of those that are part of the cell phone network there is a fair degree of redundancy in many places so that the loss of a single station should not destroy large parts of the grid. However the number of customers served by each tower is such that providing battery backup and redundant generator's for each of them is not significantly more expensive than providing them for the landline network.
Knowing something has self-similarity let's you design system to deal with it. EX:
The self-similarity issue with line noise is part of how low level TCP/IP works, basically most errors tend to clump together so while their might be 5000 errors in 1,000,000 bits of data most of those will be in a small number of packets so they only sending a small checksum which takes up less than 1% of the packet let's you drop those packets and get more total packets though then spending a lot of space sending complex error correction codes.. Basically if errors are truly random then trying to correct them has value, but if they clump together then complex error correcting codes is a waste of time. You might correct for 1/3 of the errors by using a Error correcting system that takes up 20% of you bandwith but you lost out on sending 20% of your pacets by doing that which is worse than sending a larger number of pact's which have a higher chance of as long as that chance is less than 20%.
On the other hand other systems like collections of HDD work best when you can recover from random independent total failures vs. worrying about the extremely rare errors in the data it's self. You might get 1TB off a data and have one bit wrong but at some point your not going to be able to get any errors so it's escalating probability of drastic failure vs. a network connection which is self similar and prone to lot's if intermittent failures but you can expect to get the data though at some point.
Cold = 80f ~= 300k
Hot = 100f ~= 310k which is way hotter than you want to run your CPU's
Max efficiency:3.2% which means your probably wasting your time trying to do anything with that heat unless your up north in which case you can use it to help heat the building. As the Carnot cycle efficiency also works the other way so it takes at least that much energy to generate that much heat.
While I agree with you to some extent I think the "Mensa" crowd implies those people who like to make a big deal about being smart. As such they tend to try and watch "Intellectual" movies where talking about the IQ 140+ group would be more diverse.
PS: This is filtered though my father who having passed the test and showed up to a Mensa meeting said the people their where just the type of people you would expect to be active in a high IQ group. And at IQ ~158 he was wall within their acceptable range. I mean Mensa is only talking about the top 2% IQ ~ 133 or SAT 1300 which means they are more selected by simply wanting to join than being particularly smart.
Cellphones don't have "base stations" they have cell towers, but those serve about as many customers as a standard CO so it's no harder to keep them running when the power goes out than it would a landline CO. Infact it's cheaper to handle storms / earthquakes/fires ect with a cell tower as you only have the tower and possibly a small number of hopefully redundant fiber lines to worry about vs. thousands of phone poles / lots of underground cable.
PS: "base stations" implies the wireless handset's hooked up to a POTS (plane old telephone line) where "cell towers" is the term used with cellphones to avoid the obvious confusion between the otherwise similar phones.
I think films will soon let people express their visual ideas much like blogs let people express their thoughts. However, I hope we end up with a system where independent films can thrive without forcing people to stick with the standard approach used today. In 20 years your cellphone could probably film a few hours worth of 4k*4k video but it's going to take a more complex distribution system to nourish such talent.
PS: I am starting up a small digital distribution backbone company and would be more than happy to distribute films at full DVD quality movie at ~1.25$ a copy + whatever the producer want as their cut. To protect us from risk we would probably charge a 1k fee to verify the movie is really yours and get it into our system. But it would be a lot easier for people to operate independently if they only need ~10k viewers (anywhere in the US/on earth) at 2.25$ a pop to break even on a vary low budget film. I expect such a system could let people make more risky films where they don't have to try and fill a theater over a few days to break even. My views might be a little off but I am trying to do something to keep "Doom" style crap from being the most watched movies out their.
Yeah, it has stopped working for the human race some time ago. Smartest, healthiest people are not reproducing at a greater rate than the rest of the population. What about it?
This is a misunderstanding of what Natural Selection means. Having an IQ over 50 is a major factor in survival but having an IQ over 180 is less important. Raw intelligence is such a tiny factor that once you hit an IQ in the 80's it's less important than not having any major genetic diseases. Most of these "Rare" conditions are "Rare" because of natural selection. It's still working but it does not care about the things that you find important. Looking "HOT" as a young teen is probably more valuable genetically than intelligence. You might not like that fact, but it's all about having kids that have kids that have kids.. It's not about not wealth, fame, or power.
When smart people start breading like rabbits it might make a difference but for now Natural Selection is mostly just keeping crap DNA out of the population at large. While looking at the Darwin awards shows you that Natural Selection is weeding some dumb people, it seems more important to weed out people who would commit suicide or overdose on drugs vs. being slightly less productive.
Difference with landlines is the power comes from the CO (obviously you knew that). You can put a huge generator at the CO and everyone is set since phone is at +5Vdc and only gets up to +30Vdc while it's ringing IIRC. So it's a lot easier for them I guess...
Not really you only get copper for ~10 miles around CO (which is shorter than that because the line does not take a straight path to you.) to the home each CO needs it's own power source. Copper towers and Cell CO's phones both cover about the same area on average outside of large city. As to your cell phone; most cell phones last about a week from full charge with minimal usage and longer if you turn them off when not in use. Which might not seem that useful but as long as people can leave messages you only have to turn them on ever few hours to stay connected. So if the power goes out for a few days you might be limited to a few 5 or so hours of cell phone use but that seems like plenty to me.
To clarify I am not talking in terms of the user I am speaking about the tools. The "best" spyware removal tools are ~90% effective on windows, I think they can do better in a Unix environment.
That is part of the problem, but IE is the root cause of a lot of spyware. When simply going to a website will infect your machine then there is going to be a lot more infections running around. After I switched to firefox I have been spyware free. But I also avoid Outlook, sit behind a NAT and avoid running "cute" programs. With MS just about everything is a security hole. I mean can open office files carry a virus? The secret to keeping a system spyware free is not running un-trusted code and not using programs like bonsai buddy that are somewhat openly spyware. As to removing spyware it's a lot harder to hid on a UNIX system than it is on windows.
Hmm, if your monitoring traffic at the switch levels you can specify which ports you want to monitor. You don't need to turn it all on. You need the capability to monitor any communication but that does not let you monitor every communication. Think of it this way you have a 1GB switch that has a 3GB back plate now if it's setup with one monitoring port and the back plate is sending 2GB of data your stuck with 1/2 the data even though you could monitor any port does not mean you can monitor every port.
Think of it this way you can write a Java based IM application in a day that uses any port. Now even if you just XOR the data with FFF... they are going to have find out how to decode your traffic. Even if they have a copy of every transmission over the network the only way to know what your saying is for them to understand what protocol you're using. So wiretapping VOIP might be a hot topic but it's useless until they can tap your connection to your ISP. At which point the VOIP issue is null because they can decode that traffic with ease.
I think they are afraid of someone wrapping VOIP traffic with a decent level of encryption and are trying to setup the wiretap law to prevent this or get the encryption back door they have been drooling about for so long. They don't need to say, "you can't encrypt data" as long as they can get a low on the books that say's "we need to be able to wiretap the traffic" it means the same thing.
You have to understand the amount of experience / education someone has tends to correlate with there overall usefulness. I am more useful now than I was 3 years ago because I learned something and I was slightly more useful after collage than before.
Now some people are not going to become competent just because they do something for 20 years and others are going to grow bored after a while and not really care but overall on average relevant experience and education tend to help people do their jobs. Which is why people tend to get paid more when they have more experience doing it (up to a point)
Thus when looking at large groups of people when I group them by years of exp I will probably find that more exp = more pay. Now I know a lot of H1B's and most of them have far less experience than the average US coder but more education. I think H1B's average about 5-10 years less real world experience than the non H1B coders in my company so I would expect the H1B's to be paid less because of that.
PS: I know we look for cheep H1B's, but there is a basic cost to the H1B program which adds to the cost of hiring them. There is also language and cultural issues that add to the overall cost, but if you want a clear picture we should be looking at more than just the job title. My guess is that experienced H1B's get paid close to but less than the non-H1B people after considering the costs of the H1B program. (You also need to ignore jobs that require security clearances, which H1B's are ineligible for and tend to pay more.)
Slashdot Mirror
The cost of keeping that data keeps going down. Look at HDD size vs storage space 5,10,20 years ago and then guess how much space Google is probably going to have in 5,10, and 20 years from now. In 10 years all the data they have now should fit on a single rack and in 20 years it will probably fit on a single disk. Yes, over time the value of all that data will keep droping but why dump it?
You can "fake" the "Ah-ha" moment by glossing over "many important details" but they don't really understand what's going on. When people describe something like how the shuttle returns from orbit it's the details which allow someone to understand what is going on and why it's working that way vs what they might think is a better idea.
Just look at how many people think you can build a few hundred mile long cable and use it to make a space elevator. It's the important details like ~32,000 miles long and the fact you can build it out of anything but it would need to be _ wide at geo sync to build it out of steel vs _ wide at geo sync with some "new/magic" stuff. (Assuming you want to lift _ load.)
People like to think about QM or string theory as if it "says" things but QM is just math that describes how some small things seem to operate. String Theory is in no way a unified theory, it's more a group of ways of looking at how QM works based on a wide range of assumptions. But, the assumption that you can explain what's going on to lay people is why you end up with so many crack pot's and so many people willing to accept what their saying.
The Hindenburg did not explode so no. Now could the tank rupture and burn well yes, but so can a gas tank. However due to how gas tanks are constructed and where they are located it's not an use compared to say being in the car as it hit's a brick wall at 75MPH or being in the car as someone is shooting at the tank. As to worrying about a ruptured hydrogen tank if you stop and think about it hydrogen is light so unlike a gas tank you not going to end up with a pool of the stuff if there is a hole in the tank, it's going to go up and dissipate vary quickly. (Think of a vary large balloon and how fast that would leave the area.)
PS: A 30/70 mix of air and hydrogen could explode, but so would a similar mix of gas and air, however the point is you build the thing so it's never going to have a 30/70 mix of hydrogen and air. (Hydrogen is most explosive at a 2hydrogen to 1 oxygen ratio, but air is only 21% oxygen so it's closer to 30% hydrogen / 70 air mix.) You can't get a 100% hydrogen tank to explode unless it's at high pressure or you start mixing in a lot of air.
"as they are from yahoo" = "as they would be when geting their from a Yahoo add."
Googles advantage with targeted adds is based around the high conversion rate when someone clicks on a Google add they are 2x as likely to buy something from that site as they are from yahoo. Thus people are willing to pay about 2x a much per click for Google adds vs any other type. Now if people really start using Microsoft's portal you might cut into MS's profit's but I don't expect that to be an issue. I use hotmail instead of gmail because I can't connect to gmail at work but I still use Google for search. For MS to cut into Google's profits they are going to have to compete in search AND provide an add service that is as profitable for other sites to use. (Addwords pay's a lot for little space and it fit's in with a lot of websites.) AND take over all the other Google websites that are supported by Addwords.
PS: Advertisers already have hundreds of options for advertising, as long as people are still looking at websites that are willing to use addwords MS is not goign to cut into Googles profits. In some ways advertising is a zero sum game, but Google is only a tiny fraction of overall advertising. If MS where doing 30billion / year in web adds it would do little to Google's bottom line.
Umm no.
.0001 per (m^-100)^2 but the size of unit space is not important. Your sugesting that an even that happens once every X years is rare over the course of a second but common over the course of a million years but you can't define things that way because you don't know which second your talking about. Thus it's still % chance per unit time. And to get the % chance you need the duration per event * average number of events per unit time / unit time.
How often is it AM? 1/day
What % of the time is it AM ~50%
So it uncomon for a clock to say AM? No why picking a random time you have a 50/50 shot at AM. Note: when I said how often I gave a the interval between events not a count of events over a time frame. So the count might be 365,243 over 1000 years but it's not important what makes it common is the % of the time it's AM.
Look up the definition of "rare air" and you see that it's not about the absolute count of particals of air but the relitive amount of air per unit space. Thus you define things like vacume not by how many per foot, but in terms of average count per unit space. Thus on average you might have
Ok;
:
There exists groups of organisms at various stages of specification where they
A: Can have viable offspring but those offspring are less likely to mate than either of their parents in the environments.TRUE)
B: Can have viable offspring but duo to some trait chose to not mate with each other. (TRUE)
C: Can not have non viable offspring but can sill mate. (TRUE)
E: Are currently unable to mate due to physical separation but could still mate if introduced to each other.(TRUE)
F: Are physically similar but genetically separate. (TRUE)
Or how about a simpler one: Over time (living) pathogens become less deadly to their host organisms over time unless they gain some benifit from killing their host. (TRUE)
That is part of it, but they started down that path because the could cash some high traffic websites and reduce their need for outside bandwith. Say you connect to www.google.com and look at their home page well if your ISP has a coppy of that img file on hand they can serv that up to you without needing to connect to google at all. After a while they setup the network so it had a lot more downstream bandwith than upstream becuase that's what their customers "wanted" but right now they can't handel as much upstream bandwith as downstream.
A fertilized human egg, on the other hand, if allowed to survive...No the egg can be stored for years and fed and it will not turn into a person. It takes specal active care from a womb or womb like enviernment to get that cell to endup as a human. If you just give it food, water and space will will not become a human. If you give the cell all of the above and the right signals you can turn it into a person and with slightly more and slightly diffrent signals you can turn the finger cell into a human. Yes the egg starts off in a slightly diffrent situation but the both take specific external signals to turn into a person. what you need to understand is the egg and the finger are basicly the same thing they have the same DNA, the same cell structures ect but the finger has some specific reversible changes to make that cell think of it's self as a finger cell and not an egg cell.
Taken another step forward at what point would you stop calling the dirt "dirt" and start calling it a human? When it's a single cell, never as it was not "of mother born", or when it starts to look human?
There are other factors that make human life have value other than simply being a life form. Many cells in the human body are still alive for weeks after a person dies so clearly "Human Life" means more than simply a single human cell or group of such cells. We kill a lot of wheat but nody cares about that. Thus, simple life like an egg or a few cells at the end of somones fingers are not the same thing as human life, so why would killing a single cell be considered the same a killing a human? If your going to sugjest that it's potentaly a human well so is the cells on the end of a dead guys fingers we could clone them and turn each and every one of them to a human but that does not mean we need to.
It's still an early stage startup so a lot of the specifics are up in the air. As of right now I am setting up a system with it's own custom DRM that works with several video formats, a fast secure scalable backed, and a simple integrated player that works on Windows and OS X. I am more interested in getting the cost of distribution down than working with content suppliers right now. IMO focusing on a single market this early is a bad idea, if you make the right technology and you can sell it to independent films AND Hollywood AND Bollywood AND blogers ect.
For now I want to focus on selling / renting high quality video on line, but as the costs goes down I plan on being flexible enough to try out other approaches. At some point I will add video blogs. And yes I know most blogs suck, but if it's cheep enough we can run adds for any content or let them pay for the cost of distributing their own video's. Yes, you get a lot of junk blogs, but you also get people like Paul Gram, father of the modern spam filter, to provide interesting content such as "What you can't say" http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html. Heck, once things are set up we might setup an interface for school plays, (It's a hassle and lot's of people get riped off on these right now, so it's a good market to get into) but the goal is to have a good interface and then add on these features in a natural fashion rather than focusing on one and getting stuck.
PS: Yes, the goal is to make a tun of money, but the way to do it is to make a service that people like to use. If you have any ideas or want more info please email "J KIRBY JOBS" at H O T M A I L (.com). AKA jki_______mail.com
LOL get over your self. If something happens for one month out of every 60,000 years it's rare in the same way that something that happens for 1/600,000th of a second every second is rare. When you call something rare your not just talking about how often something happens, but what % of the time it happens. Sure twice a day the time is 12:12.121212121212 but vary rarely that time. It's even less common for that to happen on the 12th of the month and even uncommon for that to happen on the 12th day of the 12th month. So just because it's going to happen ~70 times over your lifetime does not make it less rare than your 10th birthday. You might only have one birthday but you spend 24 hours on that birthday vs. some tiny fraction of a second so picking a random time in your life it's much more likely that if falls on your birthday than at 12:12.121212121212 (AM OR PM) on the 12th day of the 12th month.
Try rereading what I said and see if you can find out where I said that "base station" did not also imply cell phones.
"Base stations (or BSc) are low-power multi-channel two-way radios which are in a fixed location. They are typically used by low-power single-channel, two-way radios such as mobile phones, portable phones and wireless routers." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_station
So we can go one set further and say "Base stations imply the part of the guts of wireless routers."
If you want to be clear in what you say don't just use terms like city (aka I went to the city) be specific and say something like I went to DC. Chances are better that you will confuse other idiots like yourself.
So when we are talking about a Cell phones networks you should be specific. Inside most major city's your covered by several "base stations" some, of which are part of the cell phone network. Of those that are part of the cell phone network there is a fair degree of redundancy in many places so that the loss of a single station should not destroy large parts of the grid. However the number of customers served by each tower is such that providing battery backup and redundant generator's for each of them is not significantly more expensive than providing them for the landline network.
Knowing something has self-similarity let's you design system to deal with it. EX:
The self-similarity issue with line noise is part of how low level TCP/IP works, basically most errors tend to clump together so while their might be 5000 errors in 1,000,000 bits of data most of those will be in a small number of packets so they only sending a small checksum which takes up less than 1% of the packet let's you drop those packets and get more total packets though then spending a lot of space sending complex error correction codes.. Basically if errors are truly random then trying to correct them has value, but if they clump together then complex error correcting codes is a waste of time. You might correct for 1/3 of the errors by using a Error correcting system that takes up 20% of you bandwith but you lost out on sending 20% of your pacets by doing that which is worse than sending a larger number of pact's which have a higher chance of as long as that chance is less than 20%.
On the other hand other systems like collections of HDD work best when you can recover from random independent total failures vs. worrying about the extremely rare errors in the data it's self. You might get 1TB off a data and have one bit wrong but at some point your not going to be able to get any errors so it's escalating probability of drastic failure vs. a network connection which is self similar and prone to lot's if intermittent failures but you can expect to get the data though at some point.
Please read up on the Carnot cycle http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/ carnot.html
:3.2% which means your probably wasting your time trying to do anything with that heat unless your up north in which case you can use it to help heat the building. As the Carnot cycle efficiency also works the other way so it takes at least that much energy to generate that much heat.
Cold = 80f ~= 300k
Hot = 100f ~= 310k which is way hotter than you want to run your CPU's
Max efficiency
While I agree with you to some extent I think the "Mensa" crowd implies those people who like to make a big deal about being smart. As such they tend to try and watch "Intellectual" movies where talking about the IQ 140+ group would be more diverse.
PS: This is filtered though my father who having passed the test and showed up to a Mensa meeting said the people their where just the type of people you would expect to be active in a high IQ group. And at IQ ~158 he was wall within their acceptable range. I mean Mensa is only talking about the top 2% IQ ~ 133 or SAT 1300 which means they are more selected by simply wanting to join than being particularly smart.
Cellphones don't have "base stations" they have cell towers, but those serve about as many customers as a standard CO so it's no harder to keep them running when the power goes out than it would a landline CO. Infact it's cheaper to handle storms / earthquakes/fires ect with a cell tower as you only have the tower and possibly a small number of hopefully redundant fiber lines to worry about vs. thousands of phone poles / lots of underground cable.
PS: "base stations" implies the wireless handset's hooked up to a POTS (plane old telephone line) where "cell towers" is the term used with cellphones to avoid the obvious confusion between the otherwise similar phones.
I think films will soon let people express their visual ideas much like blogs let people express their thoughts. However, I hope we end up with a system where independent films can thrive without forcing people to stick with the standard approach used today. In 20 years your cellphone could probably film a few hours worth of 4k*4k video but it's going to take a more complex distribution system to nourish such talent.
PS: I am starting up a small digital distribution backbone company and would be more than happy to distribute films at full DVD quality movie at ~1.25$ a copy + whatever the producer want as their cut. To protect us from risk we would probably charge a 1k fee to verify the movie is really yours and get it into our system. But it would be a lot easier for people to operate independently if they only need ~10k viewers (anywhere in the US/on earth) at 2.25$ a pop to break even on a vary low budget film. I expect such a system could let people make more risky films where they don't have to try and fill a theater over a few days to break even. My views might be a little off but I am trying to do something to keep "Doom" style crap from being the most watched movies out their.
Ever hear of Natural Selection?
Yeah, it has stopped working for the human race some time ago. Smartest, healthiest people are not reproducing at a greater rate than the rest of the population. What about it?
This is a misunderstanding of what Natural Selection means. Having an IQ over 50 is a major factor in survival but having an IQ over 180 is less important. Raw intelligence is such a tiny factor that once you hit an IQ in the 80's it's less important than not having any major genetic diseases. Most of these "Rare" conditions are "Rare" because of natural selection. It's still working but it does not care about the things that you find important. Looking "HOT" as a young teen is probably more valuable genetically than intelligence. You might not like that fact, but it's all about having kids that have kids that have kids.. It's not about not wealth, fame, or power.
When smart people start breading like rabbits it might make a difference but for now Natural Selection is mostly just keeping crap DNA out of the population at large. While looking at the Darwin awards shows you that Natural Selection is weeding some dumb people, it seems more important to weed out people who would commit suicide or overdose on drugs vs. being slightly less productive.
Difference with landlines is the power comes from the CO (obviously you knew that). You can put a huge generator at the CO and everyone is set since phone is at +5Vdc and only gets up to +30Vdc while it's ringing IIRC. So it's a lot easier for them I guess...
Not really you only get copper for ~10 miles around CO (which is shorter than that because the line does not take a straight path to you.) to the home each CO needs it's own power source. Copper towers and Cell CO's phones both cover about the same area on average outside of large city. As to your cell phone; most cell phones last about a week from full charge with minimal usage and longer if you turn them off when not in use. Which might not seem that useful but as long as people can leave messages you only have to turn them on ever few hours to stay connected. So if the power goes out for a few days you might be limited to a few 5 or so hours of cell phone use but that seems like plenty to me.
"I disagree. Well, not really..."
To clarify I am not talking in terms of the user I am speaking about the tools. The "best" spyware removal tools are ~90% effective on windows, I think they can do better in a Unix environment.
That is part of the problem, but IE is the root cause of a lot of spyware. When simply going to a website will infect your machine then there is going to be a lot more infections running around. After I switched to firefox I have been spyware free. But I also avoid Outlook, sit behind a NAT and avoid running "cute" programs. With MS just about everything is a security hole. I mean can open office files carry a virus? The secret to keeping a system spyware free is not running un-trusted code and not using programs like bonsai buddy that are somewhat openly spyware. As to removing spyware it's a lot harder to hid on a UNIX system than it is on windows.
Hmm, if your monitoring traffic at the switch levels you can specify which ports you want to monitor. You don't need to turn it all on. You need the capability to monitor any communication but that does not let you monitor every communication. Think of it this way you have a 1GB switch that has a 3GB back plate now if it's setup with one monitoring port and the back plate is sending 2GB of data your stuck with 1/2 the data even though you could monitor any port does not mean you can monitor every port.
Think of it this way you can write a Java based IM application in a day that uses any port. Now even if you just XOR the data with FFF... they are going to have find out how to decode your traffic. Even if they have a copy of every transmission over the network the only way to know what your saying is for them to understand what protocol you're using. So wiretapping VOIP might be a hot topic but it's useless until they can tap your connection to your ISP. At which point the VOIP issue is null because they can decode that traffic with ease.
I think they are afraid of someone wrapping VOIP traffic with a decent level of encryption and are trying to setup the wiretap law to prevent this or get the encryption back door they have been drooling about for so long. They don't need to say, "you can't encrypt data" as long as they can get a low on the books that say's "we need to be able to wiretap the traffic" it means the same thing.
If they are tax exempt then they are receiving federal funds. If they are receiving federal funds they need to follow federal guidelines.
But let's ignore that cuz religion is de win!
You have to understand the amount of experience / education someone has tends to correlate with there overall usefulness. I am more useful now than I was 3 years ago because I learned something and I was slightly more useful after collage than before.
Now some people are not going to become competent just because they do something for 20 years and others are going to grow bored after a while and not really care but overall on average relevant experience and education tend to help people do their jobs. Which is why people tend to get paid more when they have more experience doing it (up to a point)
Thus when looking at large groups of people when I group them by years of exp I will probably find that more exp = more pay. Now I know a lot of H1B's and most of them have far less experience than the average US coder but more education. I think H1B's average about 5-10 years less real world experience than the non H1B coders in my company so I would expect the H1B's to be paid less because of that.
PS: I know we look for cheep H1B's, but there is a basic cost to the H1B program which adds to the cost of hiring them. There is also language and cultural issues that add to the overall cost, but if you want a clear picture we should be looking at more than just the job title. My guess is that experienced H1B's get paid close to but less than the non-H1B people after considering the costs of the H1B program. (You also need to ignore jobs that require security clearances, which H1B's are ineligible for and tend to pay more.)