Which is why I said that it doesn't have to be a LiPo. I know their drawbacks, I use them regularly. That said, Insulation and basic liquid cooling would be helpful in staving off overheating.
The use for a man-carried device would be limited anyway. It is doubtful a firefighter would want to carry ANY large battery pack into a raging inferno. The application would more likely be from an initial approach vector. IE: Start outside the fire and bore a pathway into it for a short distance, much like they do with an extinguisher and an axe now.
Well, considering that many Tea Party members are Libertarians, then I'd say yes, many of them are. The Tea Party movement is an ideologically diverse group made up of people from many walks of life. As a general rule Tea Party people aren't brought together by social issues, but by economic issues, none of which you mentioned. Incidentally, making Govt. smaller (a general Tea Party movement target) has the interesting side effect of preventing religious do-gooders from imposing their ideology too. Neat how that works, isn't it?
Face it. You don't know jack shit about the Tea Party movement other than what you've been spoon-fed by watching MSNBC, BBC, and their ilk. You wanna spray your ignorance around, that's fine. Just don't expect to be taken seriously by anyone with any intellectual prowess.
Because Regulations NEVER EVER EVER save us money. Period.
Oh, we will have a lower electric bill, but we will be spending so much more for each individual light bulb that we will still be spending more in the long run. (The spirals don't last even half as long as their proponents claim they do, which means you have to buy more than expected, breaking the cost curve) Then there are the hidden costs of the regulation like higher production costs and more rapid depletion of resources such as oil to make the plastic bulb bases, and gold for the electronics inside. Resources needed to make the new bulbs that would otherwise not be depleted that fast. Followed by the corresponding rise in prices for said resources, thus making the bulbs even MORE expensive and making other things which depend on those same resources more expensive.
Don't forget cleanup costs as the bulbs have toxic mercury in them. People WILL toss them in the trash just like the old bulbs, which means lots of mercury gong into landfills and then leaching into groundwater. Unless you are going to pile on even MORE regulation and enforcement, thus stealing even more freedom from people who then must put up with expensive cleanup and disposal procedures and intrusive enforcement.
I could go on, but you can see the issue here. When Nanny-State do-gooders try and perfect the world, evil happens. The free and open market is the only way. Any other way leads to oppression and ruin.
This is what the Tea Party (in part) is in opposition to. Big Govt. Nanny state do-gooders all out to force us to live our lives the way they think is best. (AKA: Tyranny of the Nannies) It's not that we want NO regulation, it's that we think regulation should act as a referee, keeping the market contest fair. (Note that "fair" does not mean "level playing field". It means everyone follows the law and nobody cheats.) NOT as a Mother telling people what bulbs to use or what cars to drive or where to live, etc. etc. etc.
Basically, Tea Party people want Freedom. Not freedom to be irresponsible children taken care of by an all-powerful Mother state (as leftists want). We demand the freedom to be responsible adults in charge of our own lives and decisions free to choose from the marketplace of products and ideas the way in which we shall live according to our own choices. It's the reason why so many Tea Partiers are Libertarians and Conservatives. And the reason why Leftists love to paint us as evil. We threaten their power base. No Big Govt, no power for leftists to tell us all what to do like the big annoying do-gooder nanny-types that they are.
Flames are ionised (i.e. charged) particles. If you have a strong enough electric field (which is really not the same as 'shooting electricity' as per the article) when the charged particles move through the electric field there will be a force on them perpendicular to their motion and to the field i.e. the flame will curve over into spiral.
If you could get this to happen on a large enough scale, the flame would suppress itself as instead of the flame moving away from the fuel it would hang around - stopping oxygen from reaching the fuel.
If this all sounds really unlikely, that's because it is. Here it a video showing an electric field affecting a small candle:
It looks like you need an electric field on the order of 10keV per 5cm to get this effect. So if you wanted to do it on a fire that was say 5 meters across you'd need an electric field in the order of 1MV which while obtainable is not exactly an easy thing to setup - particularly when there's a fire going on.
And yet, according to TFA, the researchers were able to extinguish a foot-high flame (presumably fed via compressed gas of some sort) with only a 600 watts of electricity AND they suspect they could do it with much less.
In the new study, they connected a powerful electrical amplifier to a wand-like probe and used the device to shoot beams of electricity at an open flame more than a foot high. Almost instantly, the flame was snuffed out. Much to their fascination, it worked time and again.
The device consisted of a 600-watt amplifier, or about the same power as a high-end car stereo system. However, Cademartiri believes that a power source with only a tenth of this wattage could have similar flame-suppressing effect. That could be a boon to firefighters, since it would enable use of portable flame-tamer devices, which perhaps could be hand-carried or fit into a backpack.
I'm not saying your calculation is wrong, but it certainly diverges dramatically from the information supplied in TFA. (What little there is.) If the researcher is correct, then we are looking at a device potentially as low-powered as a 60 watt electric amplifier. That's small enough to be handheld. If you add some 12v LiPo batteries to supply short term power you are looking at a large but still manageable backpack-sized unit. (Note: it doesn't have to be LiPo, but they have the best weight to power density ratio of any easily commercially available battery, and can be made in any shape, in quantity.) Sounds VERY doable to me. Assuming the research pans out, of course.
i got OEM copies from microcenter, newegg and others sell them.. Windows 7 pro was the same as an OSX service pack for me.
dont see how its an issue for you.. unless..
Oh, your a paid troll.. gotcha..
Go Mac OSX!
Why was this marked "Troll"? Anon's probably right. I know that I can go to newegg.com and buy a cheap copy of Win7 Home Premium (likely the best choice for a home user who doesn't need media center functionality) for $99.00 US. (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116752) How in the heck is THAT too expensive?
Although Anon was wrong about the cost differentiation. OSx Snow Leopard is selling for $29.99 US on Apple.com right now. So that is cheaper, but I doubt it will run on an older mac.
I'd say just buy the OEM version, and do a full install on the mac. Just wipe the old OS and have done with it. Buy a windows sticker and put it on there if she really has to have one.
If you are buying an expensive mouse because you think it will make you a l337 gaming god, then no. It won't do jack for you.
If you are buying an expensive mouse because it has better ergonomics than your cheap mouse and you want to reduce wrist strain, or if it has more buttons and you need or want that extra functionality, or if it has greater accuracy in movement and you need more precision, then yes. It will help you.
A mouse is a tool, like any other. Buy the tool most appropriate to your needs and desires. Don't buy one expecting it to make you a better USER of the tool.
And yet one can easily take a short drive across the Canadian border (if one lives near it, as I do) and buy Cuban Cigars that are illegal to buy or own in the United States. Yeah, that embargo is really effective. The ONLY country that recognizes it is the United States. Every other country in the world trades with Cuba. Not even our staunchest allies join us in the Embargo.
The reason Cuba is a shithole is because THEY ARE A COMMUNIST DICTATORSHIP. Not because one country out of the entire globe doesn't trade with them. You are simply WRONG about, well.. EVERYTHING you have said about Cuba. I suspect that you are wrong about many other things as well, if you are enough of a useful idiot to believe the propaganda. As is your friend, who was likely taken around to all the Potemkin Villages just like that moron Michael Moore.
Anyone who believes the lie of Communism in today's day and age deserves to go live in Cuba.
It wasn't just the Jedi that were wrong. Both sides thought that their way was the exclusive and only way to deal with the Force, and really each side only understood an aspect of the force. Like old parable of the Blind Men and the Elephant, both the Jedi and the Sith of the Old Republic time were suffering from dogma myopia.
The Jedi believed that "The Vergence" of the Force would sweep away the last vestiges of the Sith and bring about true peace and the Ultimate Jedi Way. Sort of like a Jedi Buddha. The Sith (Through Darth Sidious) Thought that creating the "Ultimate Force Being" via use of the Sith life creating skill (thus impregnating Shmi Skywalker) would allow them to rule uncontested over the galaxy.
Anakin's true purpose was to sweep away BOTH of the old Dogmas. First by destroying the massive religious structure the Jedi had built up, and then by destroying the last leader of the Sith religion. Doing this cost him his wife, his friends, nearly his sanity and ultimately his life. (Not to mention millions of other lives throughout the galaxy) But in the process renewed not only the Force through his son Luke, but the entire Republic through his daughter Leia.
That's my understanding of it anyway. More serious SW fans may disagree though. I'm sure they'll be along to flame me forthwith.;)
Or alternately, you could split the difference. Reimage on the weekends WHILE you research the problem. Again, this is the advantage of VMs. You can take a snapshot of the failed system before over-writing it with the known good image, and then troubleshoot the problem during the week, running the broken system in an isolated virtual network. Once you have a proper fix, implement it during the next scheduled downtime and get your weekends back.
If it's something that happens more than once in a small enough time period, then of course one would immediately dig deeper. However, if it's a one-off problem or a repeated but reasonably rare issue then either restore from backup, or nuke the server and rebuild.
Most of the admins I know (myself included) will still dig on the issue afterward, even if we've have to restore or rebuild from image. But the first responsibility is to get the system back up and running, not spend hours on bug hunts.
Strictly speaking, the planets would not actually share a common orbit. At least, in order for the orbit to be stable, that is. What you would actually have are two counter-rotating elliptical orbits in precise resonance with one another. To picture this, imagine a two component Venn Diagram using ellipses instead of circles. The Sun would be in the precise center, with the outer edges of the ellipses being the planetary orbits.
This is the ONLY way that we could have an orbiting "companion" planet that is hidden from view all the time when viewed from Earth.
Of course, having two resonant and opposing elliptical orbits creates a VERY large area that needs to be free of any gravitational perturbation. I don't know if such a planet could exist in our Solar System without interference from Mars.
Umm, FUD = Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. I would imagine that having THAT break is a good thing.
I think you mean to say that they make POS (Pieces of Shit) or possibly just junk. In that case, you would be dead-on correct. While a certain amount of loss-of-durability is to be expected with the extreme size reduction in devices, when you see full-size laptops and computers being made with thinner and thinner plastic and weak cheap metal and low-grade parts you know that something else is going on.
Hopefully we can get back to the level of quality of the equipment we used to see back in the '80's. Many of those electronics are still fully functional 20 years later, while their more modern counterparts are already toast. (I still have a fully functional Sony Walkman from my HS years. The cool yellow waterproof version too!)
Nah; the democratic aspect isn't relevant. The root problem is that we have a government that has the power to control our economy; they will inevitably use that power, and it will be used to enrich and entrench themselves. Our politicians are corrupt, and we should recognize that fact, and only give them power over the narrowest of domains. Corporations bride our leaders to give them favors and punish their competition because our leaders have the ability to dispense favors and penalties at will. That power should be removed from them.
Well said. The first place to start would be to remove the Federal Government's ability to collect and levy income taxes by abolishing both the IRS and the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. Also:
- Adopt a new amendment that states that the government may not spend more than 10% of the previous year's GDP in each annual budget, and outlaw deficit spending except in times of formally declared war.
- Eliminate Social Security entirely (paying out for those already retired by 2010 but no others) and restrict Medicare and Medicaid payments to only the developmentally disabled (Autism, Downs, etc.).
- Slash and burn as many federal agencies as possible, keeping the U.S. Marshall's office for internal law enforcement and a much reduced CIA for our external interests. Most of the others should go, perhaps keeping the FAA and FCC, but reducing them to an "Enforcement Only" level.
- Outlaw any regulation or spending except that first approved by a 2/3rds majority of Congress
- Outlaw "Czars" and all non-Congress approved high-office positions save the President's Cabinet.
- Pass a limit on pensions for all federal positions. No more serving one term and being paid for life.
- Pass a Term Limits amendment for ALL elected federal positions of no more than two terms. No more Congressional "Lifers".
Lastly, pass an Amendment that automatically sunsets all federal taxes of all kinds yearly. This is to force each Congress to review and update the tax code every single year. (Keep the politicians busy doing real work and they won't have time to dream up ways to enslave us.)
Once we have a handle on the spending beast, and have dis-empowered it by removing it's ability to dip into our wallets, and by removing life-term politicians then power will naturally migrate away from the federal government. What's the point in buying a politician if he can't manipulate the market for you?
Minimalist strategy not enough.
on
Why Nokia Is Toast
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
While I agree that in general, the minimalist strategy works well for Apple, I'm not sure that Nokia could pull it off. Let's look at what Apple used to build the iPhone brand before there even was an iPhone.
1.) OSX. Apple's penultimate desktop operating system, gain billions of fans for it's tight design and nearly flawless execution. When Apple merged it into the x86 platform it removed much of the pricing barrier that was keeping people off of Apple and wooed many more customers.
2.) iTunes - At the height of the digital music revolution, Apple introduces the ultimate music software to go with it's ultimate desktop OS.
3.) iPod - Right along with iTunes, completes the musical vertical integration pyramid, design is revised several times, paving the way for the iPhone's form-factor.
All of the above led directly into the iPhone. Looking back at it it's almost obvious that this is where they were going, although none of us could see it at the time.
Now, what to Microsoft and Nokia have? Well, Microsoft has a desktop OS, but has said little to nothing about integration. No solid music apps beyond Windows Media Player, and that's just a mess. Nokia? Well, they have plenty of phones, but no design ethos or personality. Basically, both MS and Nokia have the same "scattershot" approach to business. They try to take a little from every area, resulting in generally mediocre products with a few bright spots. Not a winning strategy.
right now, of the non-Apple and Google players, I think that HP is positioned best with RIM a close second. If HP can seriously deliver both on the consumer and business ends, they will knock RIM out (particularly if they can deliver the kind of centrally-controlled enterprise handset encryption that RIM specializes in). Regardless, the Nokia-MS merger isn't likely to make much of a difference, even IF they take the advice offered in TFA. They just don't have the right pieces in place or the right corporate attitude.
Well, considering that it was largely the newly minted Tea Party caucus that sunk these three provisions, I'm thinking that a petition from a fringe leftist group probably didn't have much to do with it.
However, if it makes you feel better, you are free to pretend whatever you like.
Wouldn't it be fantastic if people stopped believing the "40k" myth and understood that many if not most tenured teachers in suburban K-12 schools make close to or over 6 figure salaries?
Yeah, the urban and very rural K-12 teachers do poorly. The suburban teachers (IE: most non-university teachers in the U.S.) make WAY more. But the urban and rural salaries bring the average down enough that the unions can forever claim that teachers are underpaid.
Better yet, wouldn't it be great that, instead of a government near-monopoly on education, that we had actual competition in schools with a fully privatized system and NO school taxes? Then maybe we could have proper competition between the schools. The ones that teach crappy junk-science of all stripes would do poorly with proper a-political science ruling the classroom.
Its not that parents in America don't want their kids educated. Its that the process is ruled by the politics of the day and of the region rather than the market. You introduce politics by socializing something, and the quality turns to shit. Happens every time, every where. Count on it.
Except that most steam engines didn't refill by "scoop". They refilled from the TOP via a water tower. They would come to a stop under the tower, the engineer would open the input cap on the hot-well or make-up tank, and a large pipe on a swing-arm would be positioned over the opening. A lever was pulled and gravity would drain the water down into the tank.
The reason that more steam engines weren't condensing is because air-condensers are notoriously inefficient. You simply couldn't make them large enough to condense the water fast enough to supply a large engine. Eventually you would start getting steam back into the hot-well, and it would cause all sorts of problems. It was simply easier and more efficient to set up water-refilling stations all along the track that were refilled from local sources or via "water trains" that were sent along to the drier outposts.
As a Steam enthusiast I can add that while your statements are technically correct, in a more practical sense they are not. What do I mean? Allow me to explain;
While Steam engines, being external combustion engines, can technically burn just about anything, in order to make burning low grade fuels such as soft and green woods, dung bricks and garbage useful, you need a very large and well aerated grate in a boiler designed to handle those kinds of fuels. More specifically, you need a very large boiler with a gigantic grate and an easily cleaned and serviced heating surface. You can see an examples of low grade fuel burning boilers over here: www.tinytechindia.com The boiler pictured is the smallest they make with 54sq feet of grate area. That's about as large as the back of your average small pickup truck.
Most steam boilers, particularly the more modern designs (such as the one in TFA) have very tightly packed and not easily serviced tube arrangements. This means that one must avoid "sooting" the tubes with low grade fuels that don't burn cleanly as soot and creosote buildup on the tubes causes loss of efficiency and can cause tube failure. Thus one must use cleaner burning fuels such as high-density hardwoods, low sulfur coal, steam atomized oil, propane or Nat Gas. In an automobile application one is pretty much restricted to the liquid fuels, so you are back to using hydrocarbon fuels for heating.
Sadly, even the most efficient steam engine cannot compare in efficiency to even the LEAST efficient gas or diesel engine. The absolute best one could expect to get from a conventional steam engine plant is about 15% efficiency, with most ones in existence (primarily small Hobby sized ones in boats) running at around 7% efficiency. A specialized high-tech plant like this one probably runs at a real-world efficiency of about 25%. That's not bad, but nothing compared to the 50% efficiency of an 80 year old V8 from a 1940's Ford. I'm sorry, but Steam power won't make a true comeback until hydrocarbon options are simply too expensive to use anymore, or we have a global socio-economic collapse requiring a "rebuilding" period.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE steam. But I'm also realistic about it's capabilities and applicability. Maybe this engine design is good enough to get over that hump. I guess we'll see.
I think it raises an even more important point than you have touched on:
The inherent genocidal madness of the modern "environmentalist" movement.
Think about it; This article actually tries to put a POSITIVE SPIN on GENOCIDE. I see this all the time from "greenies", who basically view all of humanity as somehow "unnatural" and a pox upon Mother Earth. They view humans as utterly expendable and particularly those humans who happen to disagree with their eco-religion. See the "No Pressure" videos created by the eco-militant 10:10 group as a fairly recent example. It's a twisted and evil worldview and any sane reason-based person should reject it utterly.
Or, at the very least, demand that they avoid hypocrisy and off themselves first as an example to the rest of us.
Please note that Trappy's plane is an EPO foam flying wing less than 4 feet long and weighing less than a pound, all equipment included.
I don't know if Trappy uses one, but many FPV flyers use "failsafe" systems that can perform a variety of functions should the craft lose signal to the base station. Among these is a "return to home" feature which usually entails a short climb or dive to a predetermined altitude, and then a heading back towards the base station using a gps-on-a-chip module. Alternately, the plane will simply fly a pattern for as long as possible.
In the event of a crash, the plane is made of foam, and won't cause anyone serious harm. In most crashes the plane breaks apart on impact, distributing the force of the crash over a wide area.
So even if the plane were to crash directly into a densely packed crowd of pedestrians, the worst injury would be a bump on the head from the person hit by the camera. That's it.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is why I said that it doesn't have to be a LiPo. I know their drawbacks, I use them regularly. That said, Insulation and basic liquid cooling would be helpful in staving off overheating.
The use for a man-carried device would be limited anyway. It is doubtful a firefighter would want to carry ANY large battery pack into a raging inferno. The application would more likely be from an initial approach vector. IE: Start outside the fire and bore a pathway into it for a short distance, much like they do with an extinguisher and an axe now.
Well, considering that many Tea Party members are Libertarians, then I'd say yes, many of them are. The Tea Party movement is an ideologically diverse group made up of people from many walks of life. As a general rule Tea Party people aren't brought together by social issues, but by economic issues, none of which you mentioned. Incidentally, making Govt. smaller (a general Tea Party movement target) has the interesting side effect of preventing religious do-gooders from imposing their ideology too. Neat how that works, isn't it?
Face it. You don't know jack shit about the Tea Party movement other than what you've been spoon-fed by watching MSNBC, BBC, and their ilk. You wanna spray your ignorance around, that's fine. Just don't expect to be taken seriously by anyone with any intellectual prowess.
Presumably, gainfully employed miners making a wage with real money.
Now go read the linked article before you try to be too smart by half.
Sometimes the interests of a group should supersede the rights of some of its members.
AKA: "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Gee, thanks Spock.
Nice to see you getting your political philosophy from Star Trek. Tell me; In your world, Who Mines the Dilithium?
Because Regulations NEVER EVER EVER save us money. Period.
Oh, we will have a lower electric bill, but we will be spending so much more for each individual light bulb that we will still be spending more in the long run. (The spirals don't last even half as long as their proponents claim they do, which means you have to buy more than expected, breaking the cost curve) Then there are the hidden costs of the regulation like higher production costs and more rapid depletion of resources such as oil to make the plastic bulb bases, and gold for the electronics inside. Resources needed to make the new bulbs that would otherwise not be depleted that fast. Followed by the corresponding rise in prices for said resources, thus making the bulbs even MORE expensive and making other things which depend on those same resources more expensive.
Don't forget cleanup costs as the bulbs have toxic mercury in them. People WILL toss them in the trash just like the old bulbs, which means lots of mercury gong into landfills and then leaching into groundwater. Unless you are going to pile on even MORE regulation and enforcement, thus stealing even more freedom from people who then must put up with expensive cleanup and disposal procedures and intrusive enforcement.
I could go on, but you can see the issue here. When Nanny-State do-gooders try and perfect the world, evil happens. The free and open market is the only way. Any other way leads to oppression and ruin.
This is what the Tea Party (in part) is in opposition to. Big Govt. Nanny state do-gooders all out to force us to live our lives the way they think is best. (AKA: Tyranny of the Nannies) It's not that we want NO regulation, it's that we think regulation should act as a referee, keeping the market contest fair. (Note that "fair" does not mean "level playing field". It means everyone follows the law and nobody cheats.) NOT as a Mother telling people what bulbs to use or what cars to drive or where to live, etc. etc. etc.
Basically, Tea Party people want Freedom. Not freedom to be irresponsible children taken care of by an all-powerful Mother state (as leftists want). We demand the freedom to be responsible adults in charge of our own lives and decisions free to choose from the marketplace of products and ideas the way in which we shall live according to our own choices. It's the reason why so many Tea Partiers are Libertarians and Conservatives. And the reason why Leftists love to paint us as evil. We threaten their power base. No Big Govt, no power for leftists to tell us all what to do like the big annoying do-gooder nanny-types that they are.
Second Newsflash: Arizona is landlocked.
You may very well be correct. But then, that is what research is for, isn't it?
Flames are ionised (i.e. charged) particles. If you have a strong enough electric field (which is really not the same as 'shooting electricity' as per the article) when the charged particles move through the electric field there will be a force on them perpendicular to their motion and to the field i.e. the flame will curve over into spiral.
If you could get this to happen on a large enough scale, the flame would suppress itself as instead of the flame moving away from the fuel it would hang around - stopping oxygen from reaching the fuel.
If this all sounds really unlikely, that's because it is. Here it a video showing an electric field affecting a small candle:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fKGeV4NrrA&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
It looks like you need an electric field on the order of 10keV per 5cm to get this effect. So if you wanted to do it on a fire that was say 5 meters across you'd need an electric field in the order of 1MV which while obtainable is not exactly an easy thing to setup - particularly when there's a fire going on.
And yet, according to TFA, the researchers were able to extinguish a foot-high flame (presumably fed via compressed gas of some sort) with only a 600 watts of electricity AND they suspect they could do it with much less.
In the new study, they connected a powerful electrical amplifier to a wand-like probe and used the device to shoot beams of electricity at an open flame more than a foot high. Almost instantly, the flame was snuffed out. Much to their fascination, it worked time and again.
The device consisted of a 600-watt amplifier, or about the same power as a high-end car stereo system. However, Cademartiri believes that a power source with only a tenth of this wattage could have similar flame-suppressing effect. That could be a boon to firefighters, since it would enable use of portable flame-tamer devices, which perhaps could be hand-carried or fit into a backpack.
I'm not saying your calculation is wrong, but it certainly diverges dramatically from the information supplied in TFA. (What little there is.) If the researcher is correct, then we are looking at a device potentially as low-powered as a 60 watt electric amplifier. That's small enough to be handheld. If you add some 12v LiPo batteries to supply short term power you are looking at a large but still manageable backpack-sized unit. (Note: it doesn't have to be LiPo, but they have the best weight to power density ratio of any easily commercially available battery, and can be made in any shape, in quantity.) Sounds VERY doable to me. Assuming the research pans out, of course.
forgot to log in. That was me.^
Who cares?
I do. I take ownership of my comments.
i got OEM copies from microcenter, newegg and others sell them.. Windows 7 pro was the same as an OSX service pack for me.
dont see how its an issue for you.. unless..
Oh, your a paid troll.. gotcha..
Go Mac OSX!
Why was this marked "Troll"? Anon's probably right. I know that I can go to newegg.com and buy a cheap copy of Win7 Home Premium (likely the best choice for a home user who doesn't need media center functionality) for $99.00 US. (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116752) How in the heck is THAT too expensive?
Although Anon was wrong about the cost differentiation. OSx Snow Leopard is selling for $29.99 US on Apple.com right now. So that is cheaper, but I doubt it will run on an older mac.
I'd say just buy the OEM version, and do a full install on the mac. Just wipe the old OS and have done with it. Buy a windows sticker and put it on there if she really has to have one.
On what you are buying it for.
If you are buying an expensive mouse because you think it will make you a l337 gaming god, then no. It won't do jack for you.
If you are buying an expensive mouse because it has better ergonomics than your cheap mouse and you want to reduce wrist strain, or if it has more buttons and you need or want that extra functionality, or if it has greater accuracy in movement and you need more precision, then yes. It will help you.
A mouse is a tool, like any other. Buy the tool most appropriate to your needs and desires. Don't buy one expecting it to make you a better USER of the tool.
forgot to log in. That was me.^
And yet one can easily take a short drive across the Canadian border (if one lives near it, as I do) and buy Cuban Cigars that are illegal to buy or own in the United States. Yeah, that embargo is really effective. The ONLY country that recognizes it is the United States. Every other country in the world trades with Cuba. Not even our staunchest allies join us in the Embargo.
The reason Cuba is a shithole is because THEY ARE A COMMUNIST DICTATORSHIP. Not because one country out of the entire globe doesn't trade with them. You are simply WRONG about, well.. EVERYTHING you have said about Cuba. I suspect that you are wrong about many other things as well, if you are enough of a useful idiot to believe the propaganda. As is your friend, who was likely taken around to all the Potemkin Villages just like that moron Michael Moore.
Anyone who believes the lie of Communism in today's day and age deserves to go live in Cuba.
It wasn't just the Jedi that were wrong. Both sides thought that their way was the exclusive and only way to deal with the Force, and really each side only understood an aspect of the force. Like old parable of the Blind Men and the Elephant, both the Jedi and the Sith of the Old Republic time were suffering from dogma myopia.
The Jedi believed that "The Vergence" of the Force would sweep away the last vestiges of the Sith and bring about true peace and the Ultimate Jedi Way. Sort of like a Jedi Buddha. The Sith (Through Darth Sidious) Thought that creating the "Ultimate Force Being" via use of the Sith life creating skill (thus impregnating Shmi Skywalker) would allow them to rule uncontested over the galaxy.
Anakin's true purpose was to sweep away BOTH of the old Dogmas. First by destroying the massive religious structure the Jedi had built up, and then by destroying the last leader of the Sith religion. Doing this cost him his wife, his friends, nearly his sanity and ultimately his life. (Not to mention millions of other lives throughout the galaxy) But in the process renewed not only the Force through his son Luke, but the entire Republic through his daughter Leia.
That's my understanding of it anyway. More serious SW fans may disagree though. I'm sure they'll be along to flame me forthwith. ;)
Or alternately, you could split the difference. Reimage on the weekends WHILE you research the problem. Again, this is the advantage of VMs. You can take a snapshot of the failed system before over-writing it with the known good image, and then troubleshoot the problem during the week, running the broken system in an isolated virtual network. Once you have a proper fix, implement it during the next scheduled downtime and get your weekends back.
If it's something that happens more than once in a small enough time period, then of course one would immediately dig deeper. However, if it's a one-off problem or a repeated but reasonably rare issue then either restore from backup, or nuke the server and rebuild.
Most of the admins I know (myself included) will still dig on the issue afterward, even if we've have to restore or rebuild from image. But the first responsibility is to get the system back up and running, not spend hours on bug hunts.
Strictly speaking, the planets would not actually share a common orbit. At least, in order for the orbit to be stable, that is. What you would actually have are two counter-rotating elliptical orbits in precise resonance with one another. To picture this, imagine a two component Venn Diagram using ellipses instead of circles. The Sun would be in the precise center, with the outer edges of the ellipses being the planetary orbits.
This is the ONLY way that we could have an orbiting "companion" planet that is hidden from view all the time when viewed from Earth.
Of course, having two resonant and opposing elliptical orbits creates a VERY large area that needs to be free of any gravitational perturbation. I don't know if such a planet could exist in our Solar System without interference from Mars.
Umm, FUD = Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. I would imagine that having THAT break is a good thing.
I think you mean to say that they make POS (Pieces of Shit) or possibly just junk. In that case, you would be dead-on correct. While a certain amount of loss-of-durability is to be expected with the extreme size reduction in devices, when you see full-size laptops and computers being made with thinner and thinner plastic and weak cheap metal and low-grade parts you know that something else is going on.
Hopefully we can get back to the level of quality of the equipment we used to see back in the '80's. Many of those electronics are still fully functional 20 years later, while their more modern counterparts are already toast. (I still have a fully functional Sony Walkman from my HS years. The cool yellow waterproof version too!)
Nah; the democratic aspect isn't relevant. The root problem is that we have a government that has the power to control our economy; they will inevitably use that power, and it will be used to enrich and entrench themselves. Our politicians are corrupt, and we should recognize that fact, and only give them power over the narrowest of domains. Corporations bride our leaders to give them favors and punish their competition because our leaders have the ability to dispense favors and penalties at will. That power should be removed from them.
Well said. The first place to start would be to remove the Federal Government's ability to collect and levy income taxes by abolishing both the IRS and the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. Also:
- Adopt a new amendment that states that the government may not spend more than 10% of the previous year's GDP in each annual budget, and outlaw deficit spending except in times of formally declared war.
- Eliminate Social Security entirely (paying out for those already retired by 2010 but no others) and restrict Medicare and Medicaid payments to only the developmentally disabled (Autism, Downs, etc.).
- Slash and burn as many federal agencies as possible, keeping the U.S. Marshall's office for internal law enforcement and a much reduced CIA for our external interests. Most of the others should go, perhaps keeping the FAA and FCC, but reducing them to an "Enforcement Only" level.
- Outlaw any regulation or spending except that first approved by a 2/3rds majority of Congress
- Outlaw "Czars" and all non-Congress approved high-office positions save the President's Cabinet.
- Pass a limit on pensions for all federal positions. No more serving one term and being paid for life.
- Pass a Term Limits amendment for ALL elected federal positions of no more than two terms. No more Congressional "Lifers".
Lastly, pass an Amendment that automatically sunsets all federal taxes of all kinds yearly. This is to force each Congress to review and update the tax code every single year. (Keep the politicians busy doing real work and they won't have time to dream up ways to enslave us.)
Once we have a handle on the spending beast, and have dis-empowered it by removing it's ability to dip into our wallets, and by removing life-term politicians then power will naturally migrate away from the federal government. What's the point in buying a politician if he can't manipulate the market for you?
While I agree that in general, the minimalist strategy works well for Apple, I'm not sure that Nokia could pull it off. Let's look at what Apple used to build the iPhone brand before there even was an iPhone.
1.) OSX. Apple's penultimate desktop operating system, gain billions of fans for it's tight design and nearly flawless execution. When Apple merged it into the x86 platform it removed much of the pricing barrier that was keeping people off of Apple and wooed many more customers.
2.) iTunes - At the height of the digital music revolution, Apple introduces the ultimate music software to go with it's ultimate desktop OS.
3.) iPod - Right along with iTunes, completes the musical vertical integration pyramid, design is revised several times, paving the way for the iPhone's form-factor.
All of the above led directly into the iPhone. Looking back at it it's almost obvious that this is where they were going, although none of us could see it at the time.
Now, what to Microsoft and Nokia have? Well, Microsoft has a desktop OS, but has said little to nothing about integration. No solid music apps beyond Windows Media Player, and that's just a mess. Nokia? Well, they have plenty of phones, but no design ethos or personality. Basically, both MS and Nokia have the same "scattershot" approach to business. They try to take a little from every area, resulting in generally mediocre products with a few bright spots. Not a winning strategy.
right now, of the non-Apple and Google players, I think that HP is positioned best with RIM a close second. If HP can seriously deliver both on the consumer and business ends, they will knock RIM out (particularly if they can deliver the kind of centrally-controlled enterprise handset encryption that RIM specializes in). Regardless, the Nokia-MS merger isn't likely to make much of a difference, even IF they take the advice offered in TFA. They just don't have the right pieces in place or the right corporate attitude.
Well, considering that it was largely the newly minted Tea Party caucus that sunk these three provisions, I'm thinking that a petition from a fringe leftist group probably didn't have much to do with it.
However, if it makes you feel better, you are free to pretend whatever you like.
Wouldn't it be fantastic if people stopped believing the "40k" myth and understood that many if not most tenured teachers in suburban K-12 schools make close to or over 6 figure salaries?
Yeah, the urban and very rural K-12 teachers do poorly. The suburban teachers (IE: most non-university teachers in the U.S.) make WAY more. But the urban and rural salaries bring the average down enough that the unions can forever claim that teachers are underpaid.
Better yet, wouldn't it be great that, instead of a government near-monopoly on education, that we had actual competition in schools with a fully privatized system and NO school taxes? Then maybe we could have proper competition between the schools. The ones that teach crappy junk-science of all stripes would do poorly with proper a-political science ruling the classroom.
Its not that parents in America don't want their kids educated. Its that the process is ruled by the politics of the day and of the region rather than the market. You introduce politics by socializing something, and the quality turns to shit. Happens every time, every where. Count on it.
Except that most steam engines didn't refill by "scoop". They refilled from the TOP via a water tower. They would come to a stop under the tower, the engineer would open the input cap on the hot-well or make-up tank, and a large pipe on a swing-arm would be positioned over the opening. A lever was pulled and gravity would drain the water down into the tank.
The reason that more steam engines weren't condensing is because air-condensers are notoriously inefficient. You simply couldn't make them large enough to condense the water fast enough to supply a large engine. Eventually you would start getting steam back into the hot-well, and it would cause all sorts of problems. It was simply easier and more efficient to set up water-refilling stations all along the track that were refilled from local sources or via "water trains" that were sent along to the drier outposts.
As a Steam enthusiast I can add that while your statements are technically correct, in a more practical sense they are not. What do I mean? Allow me to explain;
While Steam engines, being external combustion engines, can technically burn just about anything, in order to make burning low grade fuels such as soft and green woods, dung bricks and garbage useful, you need a very large and well aerated grate in a boiler designed to handle those kinds of fuels. More specifically, you need a very large boiler with a gigantic grate and an easily cleaned and serviced heating surface. You can see an examples of low grade fuel burning boilers over here: www.tinytechindia.com The boiler pictured is the smallest they make with 54sq feet of grate area. That's about as large as the back of your average small pickup truck.
Most steam boilers, particularly the more modern designs (such as the one in TFA) have very tightly packed and not easily serviced tube arrangements. This means that one must avoid "sooting" the tubes with low grade fuels that don't burn cleanly as soot and creosote buildup on the tubes causes loss of efficiency and can cause tube failure. Thus one must use cleaner burning fuels such as high-density hardwoods, low sulfur coal, steam atomized oil, propane or Nat Gas. In an automobile application one is pretty much restricted to the liquid fuels, so you are back to using hydrocarbon fuels for heating.
Sadly, even the most efficient steam engine cannot compare in efficiency to even the LEAST efficient gas or diesel engine. The absolute best one could expect to get from a conventional steam engine plant is about 15% efficiency, with most ones in existence (primarily small Hobby sized ones in boats) running at around 7% efficiency. A specialized high-tech plant like this one probably runs at a real-world efficiency of about 25%. That's not bad, but nothing compared to the 50% efficiency of an 80 year old V8 from a 1940's Ford. I'm sorry, but Steam power won't make a true comeback until hydrocarbon options are simply too expensive to use anymore, or we have a global socio-economic collapse requiring a "rebuilding" period.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE steam. But I'm also realistic about it's capabilities and applicability. Maybe this engine design is good enough to get over that hump. I guess we'll see.
I think it raises an even more important point than you have touched on:
The inherent genocidal madness of the modern "environmentalist" movement.
Think about it; This article actually tries to put a POSITIVE SPIN on GENOCIDE. I see this all the time from "greenies", who basically view all of humanity as somehow "unnatural" and a pox upon Mother Earth. They view humans as utterly expendable and particularly those humans who happen to disagree with their eco-religion. See the "No Pressure" videos created by the eco-militant 10:10 group as a fairly recent example. It's a twisted and evil worldview and any sane reason-based person should reject it utterly.
Or, at the very least, demand that they avoid hypocrisy and off themselves first as an example to the rest of us.
Please note that Trappy's plane is an EPO foam flying wing less than 4 feet long and weighing less than a pound, all equipment included.
I don't know if Trappy uses one, but many FPV flyers use "failsafe" systems that can perform a variety of functions should the craft lose signal to the base station. Among these is a "return to home" feature which usually entails a short climb or dive to a predetermined altitude, and then a heading back towards the base station using a gps-on-a-chip module. Alternately, the plane will simply fly a pattern for as long as possible.
In the event of a crash, the plane is made of foam, and won't cause anyone serious harm. In most crashes the plane breaks apart on impact, distributing the force of the crash over a wide area.
So even if the plane were to crash directly into a densely packed crowd of pedestrians, the worst injury would be a bump on the head from the person hit by the camera. That's it.