Thermal noise random number generators do not depend on temperature (unless cooled to liquid nitrogen temperatures). Normal room temperature provides quite enough random fluctuations for good generators.
Energy production for the WHOLE Earth requires only several tonnes of He3 per year. It requires a trivial amount of fuel to decelerate from the Moon orbit.
So what? US also can't find its own ass with two hands (see "Katrina, hurricane"). Maybe you should shutdown ALL scientific projects, dismiss all military and start thinking of the children?
There's a problem with that - you can't pump hot water more than several kilometers and large nuclear stations produce too much power to be distributed locally.
Such designs work with coal/gas/oil firing power plants, though.
Do you realize that we're talking about reactors operating at above thousand degrees Celsius? At that temperature steel melts and other materials become fragile. Probable, reactor vessel must be made from some kind of ceramics.
It's just not practical - there's no reason to use much more complex and dangerous designs to get 10% of extra efficiency. It might be necessary for space-based reactors on the Moon.
But on the Earth it's easier (and safer) just to build two common reactors.
Nope. You can't beat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_cycle in efficiency. The practical upper limit for nuclear power plants is about 50%. And we're already getting closer to this limit.
We can use some insane things like high temperature (thousands degrees) reactors with gas cooling to get another 10%-15% of efficiency, but it is just not practical.
So. Let me see: 1) UAC - everyone turns it off. 2) Bitlocker - won't help you against trojans and viruses. 3) Windows Defender - run-of-the-mill antivirus program, and not the best one. 4) Parental controls - again, useless against viruses. 5) Memory layout randomization - most of the viruses are perfectly normal executable files. But this does give some security protection. 6) DEP - works fine on XP SP2. 7) DRM - I won't even bother to say anything about it. 8) Application isolation - this actually might work against some browser exploits (I haven't seen it used anywhere else). BUT an attacker can still install sniffer in your browser and gain access to your credit cards and personal data. And you could do this on XP with RunAs service.
So we get only two small security additions, which I'm sure will be bypassed in time.
So... There are these great security enhancements?
The police officer calls you a criminal. You're offended, you tell the police officer that you're going to report HIS misbehavior. So he starts tracking you and so on.
Vista is not really more 'inherently safe', even more so if you turn off the UAC (which everyone turns off as soon as possible). Actually, XP is pretty secure if you don't do anything bonehead. I've been running XP without antivirus programs for about 4 years now without a single infection.
And Vista has a lot of downsides: it can't be used in a VM, you can't use unsigned drivers, etc.
Have you actually tried running Vista on 1Ghz+512Mb? I've tried.
It's noticeably slower. If you turn everything (like indexing) off - it's just about OK to use it. But not much better than XP.
Re:BadAstronomy has covered it already...
on
3 Ton Meteorite Stolen
·
· Score: 5, Informative
1. That's a well known-fact. Several expeditions conducted by USSR have not found any remains except for small spheres of molten glass and rock (consistent with aerial explosion).
The existence of L1 rocket in Russia was not a secret before USSR collapse. The main problem of USSR lunar program was very low budgets. The Apollo program had about 10 times more money.
And USSR completely lost interest in manned Moon programs after US astronauts landed on the Moon.
Current Internet backbone can't handle hundreds thousands of 30Mbit users maxing their connections simultaneously.
Do the math: the fastest backbone links now are about 10Gbit - it's just about 300 fully loaded 30Mbit links! Even a small town will require too much bandwidth.
Slashdot Mirror
Thermal noise random number generators do not depend on temperature (unless cooled to liquid nitrogen temperatures). Normal room temperature provides quite enough random fluctuations for good generators.
Energy production for the WHOLE Earth requires only several tonnes of He3 per year. It requires a trivial amount of fuel to decelerate from the Moon orbit.
And He3 is not radioactive.
So what? US also can't find its own ass with two hands (see "Katrina, hurricane"). Maybe you should shutdown ALL scientific projects, dismiss all military and start thinking of the children?
Microsoft should hire Con Kolivas to fix their Completely Unfair Scheduler :)
Actually, it was done: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,3914 7917,00.htm - US sabotages software for pipeline controllers in USSR.
Actually, a lot of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLE_for_process_contr ol is a widely used protocol.
You just need to have some spare space (say 20% of additional capacity) and dynamically remap areas from the 'working' part of the disk.
There's a problem with that - you can't pump hot water more than several kilometers and large nuclear stations produce too much power to be distributed locally.
Such designs work with coal/gas/oil firing power plants, though.
Do you realize that we're talking about reactors operating at above thousand degrees Celsius? At that temperature steel melts and other materials become fragile. Probable, reactor vessel must be made from some kind of ceramics.
It's just not practical - there's no reason to use much more complex and dangerous designs to get 10% of extra efficiency. It might be necessary for space-based reactors on the Moon.
But on the Earth it's easier (and safer) just to build two common reactors.
Nope. You can't beat http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_cycle in efficiency. The practical upper limit for nuclear power plants is about 50%. And we're already getting closer to this limit.
We can use some insane things like high temperature (thousands degrees) reactors with gas cooling to get another 10%-15% of efficiency, but it is just not practical.
Yep. And football captains should stop showing off their handsomeness and big muscles.
1) That's easy: if your kid passes tests - he's in the 'smart' class.
2) No discrimination.
Nope, we can't. Vista might be a little more secure, but this additional security is negligible. So for all practical means Vista is as bad as XP.
Actually "K" in KGB means "committee" - that's how departments were called in the USSR :)
So. Let me see:
1) UAC - everyone turns it off.
2) Bitlocker - won't help you against trojans and viruses.
3) Windows Defender - run-of-the-mill antivirus program, and not the best one.
4) Parental controls - again, useless against viruses.
5) Memory layout randomization - most of the viruses are perfectly normal executable files. But this does give some security protection.
6) DEP - works fine on XP SP2.
7) DRM - I won't even bother to say anything about it.
8) Application isolation - this actually might work against some browser exploits (I haven't seen it used anywhere else). BUT an attacker can still install sniffer in your browser and gain access to your credit cards and personal data. And you could do this on XP with RunAs service.
So we get only two small security additions, which I'm sure will be bypassed in time.
So... There are these great security enhancements?
Ok.
The police officer calls you a criminal. You're offended, you tell the police officer that you're going to report HIS misbehavior. So he starts tracking you and so on.
Vista is not really more 'inherently safe', even more so if you turn off the UAC (which everyone turns off as soon as possible). Actually, XP is pretty secure if you don't do anything bonehead. I've been running XP without antivirus programs for about 4 years now without a single infection.
And Vista has a lot of downsides: it can't be used in a VM, you can't use unsigned drivers, etc.
WTF??? That's _1GHz_. It's enough to run lot of games and do basically everything.
My brand-new notebook works at slower frequency in power-saving mode.
Have you actually tried running Vista on 1Ghz+512Mb? I've tried.
It's noticeably slower. If you turn everything (like indexing) off - it's just about OK to use it. But not much better than XP.
1. That's a well known-fact. Several expeditions conducted by USSR have not found any remains except for small spheres of molten glass and rock (consistent with aerial explosion).
% F3%F1%F1%EA%E8%E9+%EA%EE%F1%EC%E8%F7%E5%F1%EA%E8%E 9+%F4%E5%ED%EE%EC%E5%ED+%F4%EE%ED%E4
/ 2004/08/10/223900.html
2. Ok, Russian is my native language, so I searched for this 'foundation'. Here is the original news: http://www.radiomayak.ru/tvp.html?id=87757&cid=
This foundation is called 'Fond Tungusskogo Kosmicheskogo Fenomena' in Russian. So I've searched information about it in the most popular Russian search engine (it understands Russian morphology and works much better than Google): http://www.yandex.ru/yandsearch?text=%D2%F3%ED%E3
This is the report about the initial "discovery" of this stone: http://www.membrana.ru/articles/misinterpretation
One of the first entries: http://www.newslab.ru/news/174070/print - basically, this "foundation" was being kicked out of a museum.
After that, there was exactly ZERO publications in reliable magazines about this discovery. For me, this smells of pseudoscience.
In short, this news is bullshit. Not a single meteorite remain from Tunguska event has been found.
e ves-steal-giant-rock/
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2007/08/12/thi
Ummm... Nope, you have not.
Windows itself is not compiled with GCC. However, GNU/OSX seems a fair name.
The existence of L1 rocket in Russia was not a secret before USSR collapse. The main problem of USSR lunar program was very low budgets. The Apollo program had about 10 times more money.
And USSR completely lost interest in manned Moon programs after US astronauts landed on the Moon.
Current Internet backbone can't handle hundreds thousands of 30Mbit users maxing their connections simultaneously.
Do the math: the fastest backbone links now are about 10Gbit - it's just about 300 fully loaded 30Mbit links! Even a small town will require too much bandwidth.
Good idea. I'll do it.