Ummm... resistance to mandatory identity papers comes much more strongly from the right than from the left. It isn't a partisan thing, there are figures in both parties on both sides of the issue but I've seen more anti-ID fire and brimstone from the right. Remember, a national health card was one of the reasons that the right put the brakes on Clinton's healthcare reform measures in '93. The same impulse is alive and well today.
Actually you can run fuel cells on gasoline and the byproducts are much less noxious than when you burn it. It also might end up being more efficient since you don't have to lubricate a lot of moving parts along the way (no drive shaft, universal, pistons, etc).
The entire point of President Bush's push on fuel cells is that the Middle East isn't cheap or easy. We end up having to compromise our principles and let ourselves overlook a lot of bloody repression to secure that oil and the money we pay for seems to fund more than sheikhs playing with toys.
The more fuel cell uses there are, the quicker we'll get to that happy day when we can tell all the Al Queda funders to go pound sand.
GM is angling to sell its fuel cell cars to the 3rd world on the explicit promise that it'll give them electricity too. Ride around in it during the day and power up your home lights with it at night.
This is going to find applications in rural or out in the field settings. A jug of methanol good for 10 charges is a lot cheaper than the equivalent in lithium/ion battery spares. Both will get you through a week in the woods but why spend the extra money?
You can carry around a bunch of $2 refill packs and not need to be attached to a generator out in the middle of nowhere. Now there's convenience. You can also recharge your power source in a minute or two.
This is important for other uses like a prospective Segway using these things. Right now you run out of juice, it's time to get tethered to a wall socket but with this you just fill it up and go further.
Ethanol is also much more expensive as it is much more heavily taxed and regulated. You can get a little ethanol in your methanol bottle and nobody really cares but reverse it and it's a very big deal. That having been said, there's no reason why ethanol wouldn't work fine. The beauty of fuel cells is that they are multi-fuel beasties. They don't care where the hydrogen comes from. The reformer might care but the two molecules are so close that the same reformer might work for both.
There will be an increase in risk for those people who use their laptop around large open flames. Hopefully these people will know to stick to regular batteries.
Some people forget that there are drunks all over the world who don't care. Methanol poisoning is a real medical problem that crops up in inner city hospitals all the time.
The problem he was having was dll hell. The fix he instituted was using Mac OS X bundles which have all the code self-contained inside a double click to launch the app directory.
Pair this article with a technical description of bundles and why they're nifty and you have a useful 1-2 punch.
I think it much more likely that he meant he's reinstalled Windows in all its variations many times over the past years.
There is a difference between running a complex program on Mac OS X and on Windows. Windows throws DLL files in various places along with registry entries. Apple has bundles which are double click to open the app inside directories. Apple bundles use.plist files (created in xml) instead of registry entries and the.plist files are in the bundle. What is also in the bundle is the executable code and the application strings for as many languages as you like.
Most apps can just be dragged around between disks and continue to function just fine because all their components are moved with a single icon drag and their location stays the same relative to the base location of the bundle directory.
All in all, it's an elegant solution and eliminates a lot of DLL hell.
The reason that they don't sell these is twofold. First is that they don't want to have to explain how badly they've hoaxed the world by trying to sell a 1 Ghz chip in a market used to 3Ghz chips and the metric that clock speed=performance. I would suspect that they've tried to make them but the chip just wouldn't perform well enough to be released.
The 1.8Ghz that IBM originally announced was going to be relatively competitive with the P4. Now that they've speeded it up to 2.5Ghz, I expect that Intel's got a real challenge on its hands no matter which chip it uses for comparison.
It's just the idea of PPC being ahead once again in the Mhz wars would be novel and fun.
But is abuse of patent and copyright to retard the progress of the arts and sciences theft in IP law? The people gave up the general right to copy in exchange that art and the sciences would advance more quickly. That's the genesis of the copyright and patent clause. With twisted legislation like the DMCA and UCITA actually retarding progress, when will the IP holders pay for their theft?
Well, perhaps you're just not in the demographic for that service. Other people are. If you have a better idea and think that you can get record labels to sign up for it, be my guest. Until then, why don't you actually look at the service when it's released and let the people who will enjoy it, enjoy it without your bitch and moan session to pull them down.
Or you might see chinese menu packs where you pay 0.99 for hit stuff and 0.50 for stuff that doesn't make it onto the radio. There's no reason that pricing has to be flat across an artists entire inventory of songs.
Since electronic distribution makes changes easy to make, I can see a lot of experimentation done in terms of pricing. I can even see a lot more artists not going through record companies at all because they can make more money recording for on-line services like Apple's.
The hard part is licensing content from the record companies. Everything else is adjustable.
Is $0.99 not selling? Let's drop to $0.75. How hard would that be for them? Would it even take an hour?
Is xyz quality format not sufficient? Let's swap to abc quality. How hard would it be to resample the library? It might take a month.
The point is that all the technical issues are easily resolved after the intro. It's the legal licensing that's the major issue and Apple seems to have figured out a way past that.
The RIAA won't be able to come after you because they're getting paid and they have a contract that protects you, just like when you buy a CD at Tower Records you have a sales agreement which means you don't have to pay anybody else. It's included in the price of the CD.
Well occassionally Windows gamers want to play network games with their friends who have Macs and Linux boxes. Are these loyal MS users just out of luck until they can browbeat their friends into going on the same platform?
The main problem with them not releasing is that the code will naturally diverge until it really isn't linux anymore. The secondary problem is that all those linux machines are essentially low grade military targets out there. They're going to want to release a certain amount of fixes just to harden up the civilian side. Don't you remember the NSA did pretty much the same thing?
They don't have to release what they don't distribute. so Linux open sourcers will likely be a generation behind what the military kicks up. they'll just release the right advances at the right time so code divergence doesn't get too bad. They'll periodically resync to take advantage of the free coders while keeping a bunch of stuff unreleased to avoid the scenario you outlined.
Slashdot Mirror
This article in National Review the US' premier mainstream journal of the right wing blasts the entire head shop episode.
Hey, maybe those right-wingers aren't such fascists after all?
Ummm... resistance to mandatory identity papers comes much more strongly from the right than from the left. It isn't a partisan thing, there are figures in both parties on both sides of the issue but I've seen more anti-ID fire and brimstone from the right. Remember, a national health card was one of the reasons that the right put the brakes on Clinton's healthcare reform measures in '93. The same impulse is alive and well today.
Actually you can run fuel cells on gasoline and the byproducts are much less noxious than when you burn it. It also might end up being more efficient since you don't have to lubricate a lot of moving parts along the way (no drive shaft, universal, pistons, etc).
The entire point of President Bush's push on fuel cells is that the Middle East isn't cheap or easy. We end up having to compromise our principles and let ourselves overlook a lot of bloody repression to secure that oil and the money we pay for seems to fund more than sheikhs playing with toys.
The more fuel cell uses there are, the quicker we'll get to that happy day when we can tell all the Al Queda funders to go pound sand.
GM is angling to sell its fuel cell cars to the 3rd world on the explicit promise that it'll give them electricity too. Ride around in it during the day and power up your home lights with it at night.
This is going to find applications in rural or out in the field settings. A jug of methanol good for 10 charges is a lot cheaper than the equivalent in lithium/ion battery spares. Both will get you through a week in the woods but why spend the extra money?
Jet fuel is also known by another name, kerosene. You could do it with a different reformer but the question remains, why?
Actually, that's CO2 emissions, not CO. At worst, you might feel a little light headed but in no way poisoned.
You can carry around a bunch of $2 refill packs and not need to be attached to a generator out in the middle of nowhere. Now there's convenience. You can also recharge your power source in a minute or two.
This is important for other uses like a prospective Segway using these things. Right now you run out of juice, it's time to get tethered to a wall socket but with this you just fill it up and go further.
Ethanol is also much more expensive as it is much more heavily taxed and regulated. You can get a little ethanol in your methanol bottle and nobody really cares but reverse it and it's a very big deal. That having been said, there's no reason why ethanol wouldn't work fine. The beauty of fuel cells is that they are multi-fuel beasties. They don't care where the hydrogen comes from. The reformer might care but the two molecules are so close that the same reformer might work for both.
I bet you it voids the warranty though.
There will be an increase in risk for those people who use their laptop around large open flames. Hopefully these people will know to stick to regular batteries.
Some people forget that there are drunks all over the world who don't care. Methanol poisoning is a real medical problem that crops up in inner city hospitals all the time.
In that case, how long will the iBook run on it?
The problem he was having was dll hell. The fix he instituted was using Mac OS X bundles which have all the code self-contained inside a double click to launch the app directory.
Pair this article with a technical description of bundles and why they're nifty and you have a useful 1-2 punch.
Pray tell, what Windows OS offers the equivalent to Mac OS X bundles?
I think it much more likely that he meant he's reinstalled Windows in all its variations many times over the past years.
.plist files (created in xml) instead of registry entries and the .plist files are in the bundle. What is also in the bundle is the executable code and the application strings for as many languages as you like.
There is a difference between running a complex program on Mac OS X and on Windows. Windows throws DLL files in various places along with registry entries. Apple has bundles which are double click to open the app inside directories. Apple bundles use
Most apps can just be dragged around between disks and continue to function just fine because all their components are moved with a single icon drag and their location stays the same relative to the base location of the bundle directory.
All in all, it's an elegant solution and eliminates a lot of DLL hell.
The reason that they don't sell these is twofold. First is that they don't want to have to explain how badly they've hoaxed the world by trying to sell a 1 Ghz chip in a market used to 3Ghz chips and the metric that clock speed=performance. I would suspect that they've tried to make them but the chip just wouldn't perform well enough to be released.
The 1.8Ghz that IBM originally announced was going to be relatively competitive with the P4. Now that they've speeded it up to 2.5Ghz, I expect that Intel's got a real challenge on its hands no matter which chip it uses for comparison.
It's just the idea of PPC being ahead once again in the Mhz wars would be novel and fun.
You can get an iTunes plugin here. There, now get off your knees and stop begging and pleading.
But is abuse of patent and copyright to retard the progress of the arts and sciences theft in IP law? The people gave up the general right to copy in exchange that art and the sciences would advance more quickly. That's the genesis of the copyright and patent clause. With twisted legislation like the DMCA and UCITA actually retarding progress, when will the IP holders pay for their theft?
In this case, Apple's the retailer. I'm sure they're not selling music for free either.
Well, perhaps you're just not in the demographic for that service. Other people are. If you have a better idea and think that you can get record labels to sign up for it, be my guest. Until then, why don't you actually look at the service when it's released and let the people who will enjoy it, enjoy it without your bitch and moan session to pull them down.
Or you might see chinese menu packs where you pay 0.99 for hit stuff and 0.50 for stuff that doesn't make it onto the radio. There's no reason that pricing has to be flat across an artists entire inventory of songs.
Since electronic distribution makes changes easy to make, I can see a lot of experimentation done in terms of pricing. I can even see a lot more artists not going through record companies at all because they can make more money recording for on-line services like Apple's.
The hard part is licensing content from the record companies. Everything else is adjustable.
Is $0.99 not selling? Let's drop to $0.75. How hard would that be for them? Would it even take an hour?
Is xyz quality format not sufficient? Let's swap to abc quality. How hard would it be to resample the library? It might take a month.
The point is that all the technical issues are easily resolved after the intro. It's the legal licensing that's the major issue and Apple seems to have figured out a way past that.
The RIAA won't be able to come after you because they're getting paid and they have a contract that protects you, just like when you buy a CD at Tower Records you have a sales agreement which means you don't have to pay anybody else. It's included in the price of the CD.
Well occassionally Windows gamers want to play network games with their friends who have Macs and Linux boxes. Are these loyal MS users just out of luck until they can browbeat their friends into going on the same platform?
The main problem with them not releasing is that the code will naturally diverge until it really isn't linux anymore. The secondary problem is that all those linux machines are essentially low grade military targets out there. They're going to want to release a certain amount of fixes just to harden up the civilian side. Don't you remember the NSA did pretty much the same thing?
They don't have to release what they don't distribute. so Linux open sourcers will likely be a generation behind what the military kicks up. they'll just release the right advances at the right time so code divergence doesn't get too bad. They'll periodically resync to take advantage of the free coders while keeping a bunch of stuff unreleased to avoid the scenario you outlined.