Yah. Because you get asked for your papers on a daily basis.
Last time I checked, the government didn't need to ask you for your papers. They just look up the information They want in their databases. You won't get caught on an airplane without your papers. You simply won't get past the checkout counter. Hell, you're lucky you can still get on a bus without being screened. Once you get your shiny new national ID smart card, you'll probably have to swipe it for any kind of long distance travel. I bet They'll find a way to tie it into you bank account too, as a convenience, so that you can use it to buy goods, instead of having to carry around all that heavy, awkward, anonymous cash.
Actually it decreases with the inverse of the square of the distance (for a point source), but yeah, that was my first thought too - energy is stored in the field.
You would have to use more energy to get the stored energy out of your theoretical zed-p-m. In fact, more than is stored in it. You need a differential across the boundary of your trap to cause energy to migrate into it. As energy migrates, the differential decreases, and the migration slows, until the net migration stops.
Consider an energy trap which did not follow this rule, but rather continued to collect energy forever, such that the total energy does not converge to any finite limit (i.e. you can get any amount of energy you want if you leave the thing out long enough). If you left it out forever, then it would suck all the energy out of the universe, which is equivalent to saying that the universe would be in your box.
You are correct. I just put a temperature sensor on the radiator, and it is 27C with the fan blowing on it, while the current ambient is 25C.
I had only put my hand on it to feel the temperature when I made the previous statement. I should have used the sensor, so yeah, my measurement technique was shit.
As for the Reserator, it works just fine. I like it because it has no fans, and is therefore quiet. I also like that it doesn't look like an automobile part. It has surface area to radiate enough heat to keep my system below 60C on that 30C day' without that external fan.
I run Gentoo, actually. I started with slackware in 96, moved to mandrake for a year, in 2001, for the package management tools, and moved to gentoo in 2003, because I like the idea of optimizing the builds for my architecture, and keeping up with the toolchain updates. Granted, it kind of sucks for setting up multiple, concurrent, cross compiling environments, but I never could get a good package managed setup for that on any of the distro's I have used.
Gentoo is my favorite, but I would have to recommend slackware to anyone looking to get into running linux.
I've never used Ubuntu. What did you not like about it?
I've been water cooling for a couple of years now, and it has been my experience that connecting all your blocks in a chain has no detrimental effect on their cooling ability.
Once the temperatures reach steady state, the difference in temperature between any two points in the loop is less than 2 degrees C. In doesn't really matter how much water is circulating or how fast (these do matter though, in determining how fast the steady state can change when a cooled component suddenly changes its temperature). What really matters is the surface area of your radiator, and the airflow over it's fins.
Under full load, on a 30C day, the Reserator is very warm to the touch. I can drop the temperature to below room temperature by putting a fan behind it. Whatever temperature the radiator is at is the temperature the blocks are at (at steady state conditions).
If you want to cool more components, you don't have to fill up your case with parallel cooling loops. Instead, add them in series and add another radiator is series also. You only ever need one input hose and one output hose piercing the case. The Reserators work really well for this, since you only need a pump in one of them. The other(s) are just extra surface area.
Re:3.25" floppies
on
Quake is 10
·
· Score: 4, Funny
A little off topic, but your post reminded me of something I saw at the local Chevy dealership recently.
Out on the front lawn of this dealership, there is a big-ass SUV with lettering an the side that reads:
Isn't there semething in the MS EULA that prohibits the licensee from using MS dev tools to create a product that competes with MS Office products? I know your project wasn't a commercial product - just saying...
I'm not saying that the disclaimers are a problem. On the contrary, I beleive that these disclaimers are necessary to protect software development.
The point I was trying to make is that if a user wants a guarantee on the functionality of a piece of software, then the user should certify that functionality. They can do this themselves, if they have the expertise, or they can contract the certification out. They could even get the original writer of the software to certify it, but I personally wouldn't trust a commercial vendor to certify its own product.
As for good software vanishing, well, yeah, I mean if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself, I guess. At least with Free software, you have the right to improve it to meet your requirements. You don't always have that right with proprietary software.
Software is a tool, not necessarily a solution. Its up to you to determine if its the right tool for your solution.
If they want to increase their market share, the movie companies should take that share away from other media, for example, the print media. To that end, I propose that they set up book burning kiosks in video stores world wide.
Whether or not a software vendor should be held liable for bugs in their software depends on what they promised to the customer. They should be held liable for no more and no less than that. It's the same as with a vendor of any product, not just software products.
If you go to solutions provider X, and hand them a list of your requirements, and they agree to provide a solution that satisfies those requirements, and you both sign a contract that embodies that agreement, then of course they should be held liable if they fail to meet their burden under the terms of the contract.
If you buy a box of software from Vendor Y that says that its purpose is to enable you to write letters to your grandma, that is an implicit contract, since you are exchanging your money for the product's functionality. Depending on where you live, you might have legal recourse, if the product fails to live up to its stated purpose.
The obvious escape from this, which all software vendors take, is to not state that the software enables you to do anything specific, and to explicitly disclaim fitness of use, for any purpose, in the software EULA. They can then say that the name "Grandma Writer(tm)" was merely meant to convey that the product is so easy to use, that even your grandma could use it, and not that it is guaranteed to facilitate communications between you and your grandma.
So, for example, if you download gcc and your airplane crashes because gcc generated incorrect code for your embedded processor, then you're shit out of luck if you want to sue the core gcc dev team. The license agreement for gcc explicitly states that the software is not guaranteed for any purpose whatsoever, so use it at your own risk. By accepting the licence, you shoulder the responsibility for any damage that results from your use of the software.
In the case of the Vendor Y, the EULA is to cover the vendor's ass, so they can make some profit, instead of spending all their time and money in court. In the case of gcc, the license is to cover the developers' collective ass, so they can continue to develop gcc, instead of spending all their time and money in court.
Vendors: Do what you promised you were going to do. You have a contract with the user. Live up to it. But don't expect users to rush to buy your product if you don't actually promise that it will do anything.
Users: Vendors are responsible only for what they agree to be responsible for. If you need the software to do more than that, then renegotiate your contract, certify it yourself, or get a third party to certify it. The vendor is passing the buck, and it's up to you to either walk away, pass it on or accept the responsibility. You are the solutions provider here. You have to decide who's going to be first against the wall when the revolution comes.
Slashdot Mirror
Last time I checked, the government didn't need to ask you for your papers. They just look up the information They want in their databases. You won't get caught on an airplane without your papers. You simply won't get past the checkout counter. Hell, you're lucky you can still get on a bus without being screened. Once you get your shiny new national ID smart card, you'll probably have to swipe it for any kind of long distance travel. I bet They'll find a way to tie it into you bank account too, as a convenience, so that you can use it to buy goods, instead of having to carry around all that heavy, awkward, anonymous cash.
I bet they could keep filing appeals until the documentation they are supposed to provide is obsolete, and then just say "OK, here you go. Enjoy."
Space has some potential energy, relative to what?
Actually it decreases with the inverse of the square of the distance (for a point source), but yeah, that was my first thought too - energy is stored in the field.
Mod parent up please.
It has been proven that the whole fabric of the space-time continuum is not merely curved, but is in fact totally bent.
I caught it, but probably only because it is late Thursday night here.
Consider an energy trap which did not follow this rule, but rather continued to collect energy forever, such that the total energy does not converge to any finite limit (i.e. you can get any amount of energy you want if you leave the thing out long enough). If you left it out forever, then it would suck all the energy out of the universe, which is equivalent to saying that the universe would be in your box.
Man, I can't believe that ploy actually worked :).
a virtual planetarium? Everything in space has its own unique smell.
I had only put my hand on it to feel the temperature when I made the previous statement. I should have used the sensor, so yeah, my measurement technique was shit.
As for the Reserator, it works just fine. I like it because it has no fans, and is therefore quiet. I also like that it doesn't look like an automobile part. It has surface area to radiate enough heat to keep my system below 60C on that 30C day' without that external fan.
I run Gentoo, actually. I started with slackware in 96, moved to mandrake for a year, in 2001, for the package management tools, and moved to gentoo in 2003, because I like the idea of optimizing the builds for my architecture, and keeping up with the toolchain updates. Granted, it kind of sucks for setting up multiple, concurrent, cross compiling environments, but I never could get a good package managed setup for that on any of the distro's I have used.
Gentoo is my favorite, but I would have to recommend slackware to anyone looking to get into running linux.
I've never used Ubuntu. What did you not like about it?
My current loop is as follows:
Athlon MP2800+ -> Athlon MP2800+ -> AMD 762 Northbridge -> FireGL X1-128 -> Koolance 2 DIMM RAM cooler-> Reserator.
Once the temperatures reach steady state, the difference in temperature between any two points in the loop is less than 2 degrees C. In doesn't really matter how much water is circulating or how fast (these do matter though, in determining how fast the steady state can change when a cooled component suddenly changes its temperature). What really matters is the surface area of your radiator, and the airflow over it's fins.
Under full load, on a 30C day, the Reserator is very warm to the touch. I can drop the temperature to below room temperature by putting a fan behind it. Whatever temperature the radiator is at is the temperature the blocks are at (at steady state conditions).
If you want to cool more components, you don't have to fill up your case with parallel cooling loops. Instead, add them in series and add another radiator is series also. You only ever need one input hose and one output hose piercing the case. The Reserators work really well for this, since you only need a pump in one of them. The other(s) are just extra surface area.
Don't trim the side with the write-protect tab.
What was really cool about that hack was that you could rename any other game to "quake3.exe", and it would run 20 fps faster.
Scope means defining clearly and specifically what your benchmark measures and what it does not measure.
Repeatability means being able to run the benchmark many times under the same conditions and getting statistically consistent results.
Transparency means having the details of the mechanics of the benchmark, so that the results can be completely analyzed and understood.
WOW! 53Km/Gal!
That's great, but where am I supposed to buy a gallon of antimatter?
More likely that it suddenly realized that it was a Dell and committed siucide.
Isn't there semething in the MS EULA that prohibits the licensee from using MS dev tools to create a product that competes with MS Office products? I know your project wasn't a commercial product - just saying...
The point I was trying to make is that if a user wants a guarantee on the functionality of a piece of software, then the user should certify that functionality. They can do this themselves, if they have the expertise, or they can contract the certification out. They could even get the original writer of the software to certify it, but I personally wouldn't trust a commercial vendor to certify its own product.
As for good software vanishing, well, yeah, I mean if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself, I guess. At least with Free software, you have the right to improve it to meet your requirements. You don't always have that right with proprietary software.
Software is a tool, not necessarily a solution. Its up to you to determine if its the right tool for your solution.
If they want to increase their market share, the movie companies should take that share away from other media, for example, the print media. To that end, I propose that they set up book burning kiosks in video stores world wide.
How did we get to this state of affairs?
Whether or not a software vendor should be held liable for bugs in their software depends on what they promised to the customer. They should be held liable for no more and no less than that. It's the same as with a vendor of any product, not just software products.
If you go to solutions provider X, and hand them a list of your requirements, and they agree to provide a solution that satisfies those requirements, and you both sign a contract that embodies that agreement, then of course they should be held liable if they fail to meet their burden under the terms of the contract.
If you buy a box of software from Vendor Y that says that its purpose is to enable you to write letters to your grandma, that is an implicit contract, since you are exchanging your money for the product's functionality. Depending on where you live, you might have legal recourse, if the product fails to live up to its stated purpose.
The obvious escape from this, which all software vendors take, is to not state that the software enables you to do anything specific, and to explicitly disclaim fitness of use, for any purpose, in the software EULA. They can then say that the name "Grandma Writer(tm)" was merely meant to convey that the product is so easy to use, that even your grandma could use it, and not that it is guaranteed to facilitate communications between you and your grandma.
So, for example, if you download gcc and your airplane crashes because gcc generated incorrect code for your embedded processor, then you're shit out of luck if you want to sue the core gcc dev team. The license agreement for gcc explicitly states that the software is not guaranteed for any purpose whatsoever, so use it at your own risk. By accepting the licence, you shoulder the responsibility for any damage that results from your use of the software.
In the case of the Vendor Y, the EULA is to cover the vendor's ass, so they can make some profit, instead of spending all their time and money in court. In the case of gcc, the license is to cover the developers' collective ass, so they can continue to develop gcc, instead of spending all their time and money in court.
Vendors: Do what you promised you were going to do. You have a contract with the user. Live up to it. But don't expect users to rush to buy your product if you don't actually promise that it will do anything.
Users: Vendors are responsible only for what they agree to be responsible for. If you need the software to do more than that, then renegotiate your contract, certify it yourself, or get a third party to certify it. The vendor is passing the buck, and it's up to you to either walk away, pass it on or accept the responsibility. You are the solutions provider here. You have to decide who's going to be first against the wall when the revolution comes.
lostchicken wins. His slashdot ID is lower.
I wonder if they taste good...
How many hours is your work week?