Not sure if that applies, but isn't the whole internet essentially a very large asynchronous switched circuit? Data transfer is still reliable given the right protocols. Even if it is outside reasonable thought to implement a multiprocessor-interconnect over, say, TCP/IP because of latency and bandwidth issues, I think it's not fundamentally impossible to do. I would see SETI@home and United Devices as a kind of asynchronous processing system with very different timings. Bus throughput may be measured in kilobytes, latency in hours and task/context-switching in days - but an asynchronous system nonetheless.
So either asynchronous components add a huge overhead in synchronization efforts, (sync) error correction and buffering, but is not impossible or I didn't understood what you wrote.;)
Compare a DVD and a CD of yours and you'll see that the DVD is made of two plastic layers with the reflective surface between them, while the CD only has one with the reflective surface at max barely protected bv a coating.
If you have an old or damaged DVD and CD, try scratching them from the label side. The CD will instantly have scratches that can be seen from both sides, but I'll bet you won't damage the reflective surface of the DVD if you scratch it with anything short of a box cutter. That's why the manufacturer logo and other preprinted text on the DVD-R label side appears a bit "fuzzy" sometimes - it is beneath 0,6mm a polycarbonate layer.
This was the only drawing I found without searching too long. It pictures a dual layer DVD, but the general construction scheme is the same.
Upper polycarbonate layer:
Outer label (optional, mostly used on movie DVDs)
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Data U-1 and semi-reflective layer upper side (optional for dual-layer, double-side discs, only with no outer label)
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Data U2 and full reflective layer upper side (optional for double-side discs, only with no outer label)
Inner label (optional, used on most DVD-Rs, only without label and not on double-sided discs of course) Bonding glue Lower polycarbonate layer:
Full reflective layer down side and data D-2
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Semi-reflective layer down side and data D-1 (optional for dual-layer discs)
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Thickness total ~1,2mm. All DVDs have two layers of polycarbonate with the primary reflective surface sandwiched between them (the secondary, if present, is embedded within). You can scratch the underside, diffracting the laser but you cannot peel off the reflective coating anymore like you could with CD-Rs. That gives DVDs a better durability and theoretical aging resistance, but how fast the glue between the sandwiches dissolves or affects the refletive layer is yet to be determined.
Each reflective surface has a capacity of ~4,7 GB, hence dual-layer discs have ~2x 4,7 and double-sided, dual-layer discs ~4x 4,7. (a little less due to longer pit lengths in dual layer recording) The rare "double-sided DVDs" actually have two sides of data like an old vinyl recording.
If that's an incentive to keep people posting logged-in even on controversial topics, I don't mind. Some people don't like to gamble with their karma, but simply have to get their opinion written. A trollish discussion between various logged-ins is - at least in my opinion - more desirable than a more substantial debate between various ACs. Frequent ACing discourages respect and encourages "punishment" on those that remain logged-in for a different opinion.
The least that could happen would be that we we'll never know when some chap is celebrating it's own posts...
unprincipled suppression of the source from whence he drew his information
So someone wrote a book, copying important parts off other people's works and then sold his ideas as his own. This is totally different than copying a song with filename and artist reference intact. The person you mentioned ripped someone off, "stole" his ideas and never gave him at least the respect to say "I owe this idea at least partly to X, if you want to read 'the source', take book X on page Z" or something similar.
If you copy the new Marily Manson song (just an example) and you tell everyone it's your's, rename it "Nugget(7382) - Sweet Dreams (Eurythmics cover).mp3", then sell it to a recording studio and rake in the millions without giving Manson's Name, you are a genuine pirate in the definition you posted.
If you keep original artist name and title intact, it's copyright infringement, a "crime" created by some King of England centuries ago trying to suppress widespread uncontrolled circulation of printing presses. Just like it is used today *again*.
Milli Vanilli were genuine pirates at their times. Today they'd be presidents, but who knows:)
Net Timeout Error
The operation timed out when attempting to contact www.fredoneverything.net.
The browser timed out while trying to connect to the specified site. The site may be experiencing high loads that are slowing it down, or network problems are preventing data from being received from it in a timely manner. If the site is likely to be busy, consider waiting a few moments before retrying the request.
Try again
If a site refuses my browser, whatever that browser may be, then I refuse to surf that site. It's that simple;) I wouldn't say this is absolute, but it had to be a damn good site to make me change that ID.
I still have the IE installed just in case, but after nearly 2 years, I've only had to use it for Windows Update so far.
So I'm certainly no zealot, but there's an almost emotional satisfaction in the thought that a narrow minded webmaster just missed it. If these webmasters don't want 10 or more percent of all websurfers, they don't need my visit. I'm too proud to fake myself into an ominous majority over such a non-issue. The web is vast and there are more than enough websites to surf instead that have decent platform-independent code.
Very interesting link, thanks. I have no clue why this won an Ignobel award, I think it's not that improbable to never be repeated, because they found a coherent and reversible relation between perceived and actual skill of an individual. This way, it should be possible to make an educated guess about the real competence just by hearing someone's self-judgement.
Maybe I've just ironically proven this research to be absolutely true, but that's a risk I must take. I think it's a good read, please tell me if it's not, after reading the linked article, I don't believe in myself anymore;)
Be fair and be treated fair as well. Otherwise you make your argumentation for the same assumption the other way around. People concerned with are neither privacy nuts nor ready to riot at a moment's notice. I won't call you a closet fascist ready to install an Orwellian telescreen in every home and deporting dissents soon thereafter just because you say you've got nothing to hide, OK?
Back on topic:
You said, you are sure, some people will behave like anarchists when technology makes them invisible.
Law enforcement officers are people, so this is begging the question:
Why won't some officers behave like anarchists when they are invisible?
Now tell me there's no more notebooks with a ATI mobility Radeon 9800 chip coming out. Grr, I'm waiting for any manufacturer other than Dell and Apple to sell such a product but they don't.
Just because Hitler caused more than 40 million deaths in the end, we should NEVER feel safe from harm from anyone.
The German people living in the year 1934 did know he was a dictator, but they never suspected him to be a mass murderer of epic proportions. In hindsight, we can laugh or tremble at their foolish beliefs, see through the Nazis lousy ideological concealment and pat ourselves on the back how we would have foreseen the Holocaust and the rest of this dark chapter of history.
Today, we are very similar to solitary aircrash survivors: we perceive every threat as only a minor nuisance compared to what is behind us. That's foolish and delusional, I think, because we will overlook growing dictatorships and expanding fascism in the way.
Because some politician has not yet totally subverted the goverment and has not started a new Holocaust doesn't mean he cannot compare to Hitler.
Don't mix a fully informed hindsight after an extremely dangerous period in history with our limited insight about a current government that may be an emerging new dictatorship. Do not mix what you know Hitler did with what some current administration may be doing hidden somewhere now or may do in the future.
Comparing the attitudes of Hitler and Bush will give some insights, I'm sure. And there's a lot less differences than I'd wish there were. Government by force, invading countries with forged evidence, fabricating its own bogeymen, subverting the election processes, putting millions in jails, opening secret jails in other countries, torturing inmates, restricting the rights of his own countrymen, using fear and scare tactics for population control while still singing a fake song of freedom and wrapping everything together in a nice patriotic package. If that is not at least a small bit comparable to a mindset of a typical Hitler, I don't know what it is.
Godwin's Law prohibits these discussions. But Hitler is not that abomination in history you think he is. People in his time did not recognize his unspeakable crimes until it was far too late. Nothing can reach Hitlers crimes for a long time, but God forbid we feel safe just because of this. If the ovens are ever to start operating againg anywhere, it certainly is too late to complain.
It is not easier to show, but it is a *lot* harder to hide. That's the point why everyone is making such a fuss around this issue, I think.
Today, you carry some form of ID, be it driver's license in the US, a national ID in Europe or whatever. You are most of the time obliged to show this piece of ID to law enforcement officers if they ask for.
Either the officer authenticates him/herself with his badge, a similar ID item or just the entire appearance along with police equipment and police car. So in 99% of all cases, I know when my ID is checked and by whom and I'm sure it was read by real officers on duty or someone is going to jail for posing as one.
With RFID, none of us can ever know if we were checked, let alone by whom. If that person was really authorized by law and duty to check us, we can only pray for. We want to hide our ID from anyone's eyes who has not identified himself as a lawful officer on duty. With RFID it is hardly possible.
If the regular police cannot or does not perform simple duties in plain sight, with proper uniform, without hiding the officers identity behind something, having the officers armed only with the law and a baton, our society as a whole is in trouble. Riot shields, handcuffs and a low power hand gun may be necessary at times, but cable ties, fully automatic rifles, masks are certainly unacceptable for me. Special units can have them, but regular policemen and -women should not. Hidden and unnoticed checks for unsuspecting passer-bys performed by guess-who are totally out of question.
Law enforcement should not use mobster tactics. Should not be armed like mobsters, should not act like them. This may give criminals and terrorists an advantage, but it is the only way to make sure we can distinguish between officers and mobsters. If we allow the police to act like the mob, guess how long it takes for these two to merge...
I think this is a fairly stunning result that is able to explain, why aristocracy and monarchy proved pretty successful for thousands of years.
If Most sacrifice themselves for a few "chosen" ones they can do better than most others against the rest of the "world". Pretty convincing.
If this strategy succeeds, we have a fairly sound theory why and how monarchy evolved from simple tribal structures. Secret societies, hierarchies and everything else would suddenly seem logical.
Does not leave a feelgood-residue like having read Axelrod, but at least we know it now...
Keep on being faithful for 90-18=72 years. Don't cheat on your partner for three thousand seven hundred fourty-four weeks and weekends.
You are not married and you didn't have a long-term relationship yet, did you? One side of the relationship always becomes dull and passive, while the other partner becomes more active and dominant. Observed this in my own and many other relationships from friends. If you are the passive partner, no problem, just enjoy a solitary hobby or cuddle and hug your partner to death. Passive partners are happy enough to be around their partner, live with them and for them. If you're the active partner, wait for years for the next sexual activity, die from pure and severely hurting boredom, search a geeky niche hobby and disconnect from society or engage in extra-marital relationships.
Sounds harsh, but that's the way it is. Unless both partners happen to like the same almost-solitary hobby or a miracle of love happens, one of the partners is invariably bound to be bored by all that cuddly-fluffy relationship stuff. Once the process started, you have a positive feedback problem going on as the passive partner retreats into him/herself, into his/her hobbies or develops an unnatural and potentially unhealthy servitude for his partner. All that while the active partner, more and more assured by unquestioning love *and* tethered at the same time is facing the problem of feeling guilt for doing social (harmless) activities without his/her partner or ending up doing everything with him/her. The active partner then decides by gut feeling for one of the two ways, leading him/her to a intensively private relationship, having only the partner and at max two or three very similar couples as his/her friends and contact OR having "the bird waiting at home" while engaging in a circle of friends distinct from his/her partner, leading to encounters, flirts and sexual activity with like minded people from that circle or meeting new ones.
Having your social activity reduced to 5 persons at max, living intensely intimate and solitary OR having to deal with changing relationships and frequent feelings of guilt or life- and self-breaking decisions "leave current long-time partner for a possibly very short new interesting flirt that hurts in the end" or "sleep around, bury conscience and be a bad person" - not funny for anyone.
The partner that is more possible to leave the other is the active one. Are you the active or passive partner? Find out now: Do you have fear your partner's gonna leave some day? Is it impossible to do too many activities in common with your partner? Passive! Do you feel trapped in endless cuddling? Is the idea of having activities without the partner enticing on this fact alone? Active!
Feel free to comment on that, but perfect relationships are mostly described by "passive" partners that cannot imagine one on one life may NOT be sufficient for anyone;)
A broad and false assumption may be, that social activity without and in a different circle of friends of the partner ultimately leads to potential sexual attraction, but that's what I witnessed more often than not.
Humans are not built to be happy, but to reproduce. - dunno who said this, but it is sadly true, trust me.
Ha;) no way I'll mistake this for the real thing. No offense, but a mobility 9700 is in no way ever close to a mobility 9800 except for the successive character in their model numbers. ATI is just too errrm let's say hesitating to call this thing by its real name. The mobility 9700 was a version of the desktop 9600xt, the mobility 9600 was something older, but the new mobility 9800 is a slightly toned down X800(!). 60 percent more graphics power while only using slightly more energy. No way I ever buy my new gaming notebook without one, except when nVidia surprisingly unveils a blistering fast chip really soon now because I'd trust their drivers more than ATI's. Until then I prepare for the current mobile GPU flagship, trust me. But not from Dell, but that's a personal matter for me...;)
Maybe they are quite sufficient for most home users? Working on a 500MHz Athlon after being used to a 1800+ has made me quite indifferent to processor speeds.
I'd prefer a fast and responsive interface any time over high processing speeds. And watching the cpu usage on the 500mhz machine, I swear most things I do at home except gaming are limited by ram size. hdd seek speed may be an issue but only after the ram is full and the OS needs to swap. Swapping sucks that much, I'd invest insane amounts of money to have 2 gig of ram on my next machine when there's finally a notebook with a Radeon Mobility 9800 without a Dell logo available.
If there's no regular gaming habit, a strong VIA cpu is sufficient wide and far. MP3 encoding and DVD processing is the hardest task by now and I've no problem setting the machine aside for an hour or so. If the owner isn't going to play recent games, I'd save any money possible on the CPU and invest heavily in ram and fast harddrives. If there weren't all that noise and heat, a 15k rpm drive was perfect. But I'll never want to experience a machine bogged down while swapping ever again. Argh, I'll calm down now...
I mean, come on, there's a whole lot more keys reachable when you've got your fingers in the middle of the keys instead of the edge of the keyboard...
I prefer
R/F for forward/back (l. middle)
D/G for left/right strafe (l. ring/index)
Space for jump (l. thumb)
W for use/enter/exit vehicle (l. ring) (hit E too often accidentally so the character stepped out of car, heli or whatever)
Q/A/Z/S for prone/walk/crouch/sprint
T or 4th mousebutton (r. thumb) for reload
Middle mouse for (r. middle) zoom/aim/use ironsights (AA:O )
Has two advantages over "traditional" WASD: more keys available, pinky finger modifies walking stances, mouse hand controls everything concerning weapons, middle finger selects vehicles and weapons and it's more in the middle of the number keys for them.
But the best: most keyboards have a small bump on the F, J and Num5 keys that are perfect to reposition the fingers safely after a quick type or drink without the need to look away from the screen.
Disadvantages: strains left middle finger and left pinky. Walking stances are hard to combine if there's no toggle function for fast crouching, slow crouching etc.
Your combination sounds umm a bit strange, I'd probably mock you, too;)
But I know a guy that plays Quake etc. with just the keyboard. That's right, no mouse to look up, down or whatever, just with page-up/down/re-center. And he's good at it, better than most other friends. But it's a real show to watch this: he sees the enemy, his right hand leaves the cursor block to bash on page-up/down, he shoots with left crtl, hits END for view center and returns to the cursor keys. All in one blink. His hand literally blurs in that move, it's that quick. This technique fails in long range combat, obviously so in Battlefield etc. he has to use the mouse and I think he became more of a "regular" mouse player that way, but Quake, UT and the occasional ZDoom he plays still in the old Doom/Duke Nuk'em style. Preferring splash damage weapons, I might add. But I do, too because aiming sucks while gibs rock.;)
I'm trying to understand why applying the brakes didn't help at all. What in the world could have prevented the main brakes to operate correctly?
Why didn't he stall the engine or press the clutch? No power to the wheels or stalling the engine - either way it should have stopped the car with much less trouble. An automatic transmission would probably be finished after that, but it had been safer for him.
I'd stomped on the brakes or even scratch the roadside crash barriers, but no way I'd keep on racing through heavy traffic. No chance to tell insurance "my car kept on accelerating so I had to ram sideways into the barrier to decelerate", but hitting a truck is presumably worse.
Conspiracy, driver a nutcase or marketing ploy from a competitor, who knows?
If you bikers have problems being recognized by vehicle drivers on the road, I can heavily recommend driving with the lights on. Speaking for the traffic situation in Europe, all motorbikers are required by law to always have their headlights on day and night, vehicle drivers are a lot more sensitive to anything on two wheels if it has its headlights on.
Batteries add weight, generators add drag, but I think it's worth the effort. Because I personally dislike battery powered bike lights, I'd further recommend generator hubs, as they add a lot less drag than tire driven ones. You can write off both for increased muscle buildup, if you like;)
There's a good summary on quality bike lighting here, please don't mind that it's a bit focused on two manufacturers - strong bike headlights switched on even at daytime can save some situations. Myself, I'd prefer hub driven generators anytime over tire driven or battery powered lighting, because I'm too lazy to recharge the batteries;)
Thanks, I thought the same reading the article and skimmed the comments here.
Self righteous judgement is the last we need to protect us from something and there is no way anyone can convince me that a general delete of all files on a "pirate" machine is even debatable. This is "justice" in the same way murder for "disrespect" is "justice" - unproportionate, indiscriminating and error-prone.
What if the piracy detection flags the wrong user? What if the home directory contains data of a thousand times the value of the pirated software? What if this somehow manages to shut down business and production machines?
Many comments here have been more or less paraphrasing "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" - a bit disappointing from the standpoint of freedom and justice. We cannot seriously advocate mob tactics, intimidation and outright unfair punishments. We do not smash the cars of speeders, windows of noisy neighbours or brains of annoying fellows.
We couldn't leave our houses if more people would give in to this urge. Or we'd have smashed cars every day someone thinks we might have remotely endangered their kid or have a gunfight each time someone makes other people wait in line behind hin at the ATM or the supermarket.
Common sense dictates that we as an intelligent lifeform and sane human just assume that no other sane human would ever leave a property item exceeding the value of half an average yearly income free for taking. So it's clearly imaginable that someone has enough from FoxNews, politics, ClearChannel, Avril Lavigne, DoD-funded action movies and other crowd control is offering his home entertainment system free for anyone willing to take it.;)
A car with the keys in the ignition or the motor running means "owner will be back in a few moments", an old television set sitting on the sidewalk for more than a week means "it still works but I bought the plasma TV - take it if you want".
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty interesting stuff, I wish I had mod points.
Not sure if that applies, but isn't the whole internet essentially a very large asynchronous switched circuit? Data transfer is still reliable given the right protocols. Even if it is outside reasonable thought to implement a multiprocessor-interconnect over, say, TCP/IP because of latency and bandwidth issues, I think it's not fundamentally impossible to do. I would see SETI@home and United Devices as a kind of asynchronous processing system with very different timings. Bus throughput may be measured in kilobytes, latency in hours and task/context-switching in days - but an asynchronous system nonetheless.
;)
So either asynchronous components add a huge overhead in synchronization efforts, (sync) error correction and buffering, but is not impossible or I didn't understood what you wrote.
Compare a DVD and a CD of yours and you'll see that the DVD is made of two plastic layers with the reflective surface between them, while the CD only has one with the reflective surface at max barely protected bv a coating.
If you have an old or damaged DVD and CD, try scratching them from the label side. The CD will instantly have scratches that can be seen from both sides, but I'll bet you won't damage the reflective surface of the DVD if you scratch it with anything short of a box cutter. That's why the manufacturer logo and other preprinted text on the DVD-R label side appears a bit "fuzzy" sometimes - it is beneath 0,6mm a polycarbonate layer.
This was the only drawing I found without searching too long. It pictures a dual layer DVD, but the general construction scheme is the same.
Upper polycarbonate layer:
Outer label (optional, mostly used on movie DVDs)
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Data U-1 and semi-reflective layer upper side (optional for dual-layer, double-side discs, only with no outer label)
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Data U2 and full reflective layer upper side (optional for double-side discs, only with no outer label)
Inner label (optional, used on most DVD-Rs, only without label and not on double-sided discs of course)
Bonding glue
Lower polycarbonate layer:
Full reflective layer down side and data D-2
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Semi-reflective layer down side and data D-1 (optional for dual-layer discs)
Polycarbonate 0,3mm
Thickness total ~1,2mm. All DVDs have two layers of polycarbonate with the primary reflective surface sandwiched between them (the secondary, if present, is embedded within). You can scratch the underside, diffracting the laser but you cannot peel off the reflective coating anymore like you could with CD-Rs. That gives DVDs a better durability and theoretical aging resistance, but how fast the glue between the sandwiches dissolves or affects the refletive layer is yet to be determined.
Each reflective surface has a capacity of ~4,7 GB, hence dual-layer discs have ~2x 4,7 and double-sided, dual-layer discs ~4x 4,7. (a little less due to longer pit lengths in dual layer recording) The rare "double-sided DVDs" actually have two sides of data like an old vinyl recording.
If that's an incentive to keep people posting logged-in even on controversial topics, I don't mind. Some people don't like to gamble with their karma, but simply have to get their opinion written. A trollish discussion between various logged-ins is - at least in my opinion - more desirable than a more substantial debate between various ACs. Frequent ACing discourages respect and encourages "punishment" on those that remain logged-in for a different opinion.
The least that could happen would be that we we'll never know when some chap is celebrating it's own posts...
unprincipled suppression of the source from whence he drew his information
:)
So someone wrote a book, copying important parts off other people's works and then sold his ideas as his own. This is totally different than copying a song with filename and artist reference intact. The person you mentioned ripped someone off, "stole" his ideas and never gave him at least the respect to say "I owe this idea at least partly to X, if you want to read 'the source', take book X on page Z" or something similar.
If you copy the new Marily Manson song (just an example) and you tell everyone it's your's, rename it "Nugget(7382) - Sweet Dreams (Eurythmics cover).mp3", then sell it to a recording studio and rake in the millions without giving Manson's Name, you are a genuine pirate in the definition you posted.
If you keep original artist name and title intact, it's copyright infringement, a "crime" created by some King of England centuries ago trying to suppress widespread uncontrolled circulation of printing presses. Just like it is used today *again*.
Milli Vanilli were genuine pirates at their times. Today they'd be presidents, but who knows
Net Timeout Error
The operation timed out when attempting to contact www.fredoneverything.net.
The browser timed out while trying to connect to the specified site. The site may be experiencing high loads that are slowing it down, or network problems are preventing data from being received from it in a timely manner. If the site is likely to be busy, consider waiting a few moments before retrying the request.
Try again
Google to the rescue
Why don't anyone in the western world concern themselves with the laws of North Korea, China and Saudi-Arabia? ;)
Access Denied
You don't have permission to access "http://www.georgewbush.com/" on this server.
Currently surfing with a *.net domain from Germany.
If a site refuses my browser, whatever that browser may be, then I refuse to surf that site. It's that simple ;) I wouldn't say this is absolute, but it had to be a damn good site to make me change that ID.
I still have the IE installed just in case, but after nearly 2 years, I've only had to use it for Windows Update so far.
So I'm certainly no zealot, but there's an almost emotional satisfaction in the thought that a narrow minded webmaster just missed it. If these webmasters don't want 10 or more percent of all websurfers, they don't need my visit. I'm too proud to fake myself into an ominous majority over such a non-issue. The web is vast and there are more than enough websites to surf instead that have decent platform-independent code.
Very interesting link, thanks. I have no clue why this won an Ignobel award, I think it's not that improbable to never be repeated, because they found a coherent and reversible relation between perceived and actual skill of an individual. This way, it should be possible to make an educated guess about the real competence just by hearing someone's self-judgement.
;)
Maybe I've just ironically proven this research to be absolutely true, but that's a risk I must take. I think it's a good read, please tell me if it's not, after reading the linked article, I don't believe in myself anymore
Be fair and be treated fair as well. Otherwise you make your argumentation for the same assumption the other way around. People concerned with are neither privacy nuts nor ready to riot at a moment's notice. I won't call you a closet fascist ready to install an Orwellian telescreen in every home and deporting dissents soon thereafter just because you say you've got nothing to hide, OK?
Back on topic:
You said, you are sure, some people will behave like anarchists when technology makes them invisible.
Law enforcement officers are people, so this is begging the question:
Why won't some officers behave like anarchists when they are invisible?
"Once you go from the moral to the practical it is impossible to go back." - I think I've seen this statement far too often, but it's still true.
Now tell me there's no more notebooks with a ATI mobility Radeon 9800 chip coming out. Grr, I'm waiting for any manufacturer other than Dell and Apple to sell such a product but they don't.
Remember "Once you go from the moral to the practical, it is impossible to go back."
(dunno who said this first)
Just because Hitler caused more than 40 million deaths in the end, we should NEVER feel safe from harm from anyone.
The German people living in the year 1934 did know he was a dictator, but they never suspected him to be a mass murderer of epic proportions. In hindsight, we can laugh or tremble at their foolish beliefs, see through the Nazis lousy ideological concealment and pat ourselves on the back how we would have foreseen the Holocaust and the rest of this dark chapter of history.
Today, we are very similar to solitary aircrash survivors: we perceive every threat as only a minor nuisance compared to what is behind us. That's foolish and delusional, I think, because we will overlook growing dictatorships and expanding fascism in the way.
Because some politician has not yet totally subverted the goverment and has not started a new Holocaust doesn't mean he cannot compare to Hitler.
Don't mix a fully informed hindsight after an extremely dangerous period in history with our limited insight about a current government that may be an emerging new dictatorship. Do not mix what you know Hitler did with what some current administration may be doing hidden somewhere now or may do in the future.
Comparing the attitudes of Hitler and Bush will give some insights, I'm sure. And there's a lot less differences than I'd wish there were. Government by force, invading countries with forged evidence, fabricating its own bogeymen, subverting the election processes, putting millions in jails, opening secret jails in other countries, torturing inmates, restricting the rights of his own countrymen, using fear and scare tactics for population control while still singing a fake song of freedom and wrapping everything together in a nice patriotic package. If that is not at least a small bit comparable to a mindset of a typical Hitler, I don't know what it is.
Godwin's Law prohibits these discussions. But Hitler is not that abomination in history you think he is. People in his time did not recognize his unspeakable crimes until it was far too late. Nothing can reach Hitlers crimes for a long time, but God forbid we feel safe just because of this. If the ovens are ever to start operating againg anywhere, it certainly is too late to complain.
It is not easier to show, but it is a *lot* harder to hide. That's the point why everyone is making such a fuss around this issue, I think.
Today, you carry some form of ID, be it driver's license in the US, a national ID in Europe or whatever. You are most of the time obliged to show this piece of ID to law enforcement officers if they ask for.
Either the officer authenticates him/herself with his badge, a similar ID item or just the entire appearance along with police equipment and police car. So in 99% of all cases, I know when my ID is checked and by whom and I'm sure it was read by real officers on duty or someone is going to jail for posing as one.
With RFID, none of us can ever know if we were checked, let alone by whom. If that person was really authorized by law and duty to check us, we can only pray for. We want to hide our ID from anyone's eyes who has not identified himself as a lawful officer on duty. With RFID it is hardly possible.
If the regular police cannot or does not perform simple duties in plain sight, with proper uniform, without hiding the officers identity behind something, having the officers armed only with the law and a baton, our society as a whole is in trouble. Riot shields, handcuffs and a low power hand gun may be necessary at times, but cable ties, fully automatic rifles, masks are certainly unacceptable for me. Special units can have them, but regular policemen and -women should not. Hidden and unnoticed checks for unsuspecting passer-bys performed by guess-who are totally out of question.
Law enforcement should not use mobster tactics. Should not be armed like mobsters, should not act like them. This may give criminals and terrorists an advantage, but it is the only way to make sure we can distinguish between officers and mobsters. If we allow the police to act like the mob, guess how long it takes for these two to merge...
I think this is a fairly stunning result that is able to explain, why aristocracy and monarchy proved pretty successful for thousands of years.
If Most sacrifice themselves for a few "chosen" ones they can do better than most others against the rest of the "world". Pretty convincing.
If this strategy succeeds, we have a fairly sound theory why and how monarchy evolved from simple tribal structures. Secret societies, hierarchies and everything else would suddenly seem logical.
Does not leave a feelgood-residue like having read Axelrod, but at least we know it now...
-Get married
;)
-Don't cheat
Keep on being faithful for 90-18=72 years. Don't cheat on your partner for three thousand seven hundred fourty-four weeks and weekends.
You are not married and you didn't have a long-term relationship yet, did you? One side of the relationship always becomes dull and passive, while the other partner becomes more active and dominant. Observed this in my own and many other relationships from friends. If you are the passive partner, no problem, just enjoy a solitary hobby or cuddle and hug your partner to death. Passive partners are happy enough to be around their partner, live with them and for them. If you're the active partner, wait for years for the next sexual activity, die from pure and severely hurting boredom, search a geeky niche hobby and disconnect from society or engage in extra-marital relationships.
Sounds harsh, but that's the way it is. Unless both partners happen to like the same almost-solitary hobby or a miracle of love happens, one of the partners is invariably bound to be bored by all that cuddly-fluffy relationship stuff. Once the process started, you have a positive feedback problem going on as the passive partner retreats into him/herself, into his/her hobbies or develops an unnatural and potentially unhealthy servitude for his partner. All that while the active partner, more and more assured by unquestioning love *and* tethered at the same time is facing the problem of feeling guilt for doing social (harmless) activities without his/her partner or ending up doing everything with him/her. The active partner then decides by gut feeling for one of the two ways, leading him/her to a intensively private relationship, having only the partner and at max two or three very similar couples as his/her friends and contact OR having "the bird waiting at home" while engaging in a circle of friends distinct from his/her partner, leading to encounters, flirts and sexual activity with like minded people from that circle or meeting new ones.
Having your social activity reduced to 5 persons at max, living intensely intimate and solitary OR having to deal with changing relationships and frequent feelings of guilt or life- and self-breaking decisions "leave current long-time partner for a possibly very short new interesting flirt that hurts in the end" or "sleep around, bury conscience and be a bad person" - not funny for anyone.
The partner that is more possible to leave the other is the active one. Are you the active or passive partner? Find out now:
Do you have fear your partner's gonna leave some day? Is it impossible to do too many activities in common with your partner? Passive!
Do you feel trapped in endless cuddling? Is the idea of having activities without the partner enticing on this fact alone? Active!
Feel free to comment on that, but perfect relationships are mostly described by "passive" partners that cannot imagine one on one life may NOT be sufficient for anyone
A broad and false assumption may be, that social activity without and in a different circle of friends of the partner ultimately leads to potential sexual attraction, but that's what I witnessed more often than not.
Humans are not built to be happy, but to reproduce. - dunno who said this, but it is sadly true, trust me.
Ha ;) no way I'll mistake this for the real thing. No offense, but a mobility 9700 is in no way ever close to a mobility 9800 except for the successive character in their model numbers. ATI is just too errrm let's say hesitating to call this thing by its real name. The mobility 9700 was a version of the desktop 9600xt, the mobility 9600 was something older, but the new mobility 9800 is a slightly toned down X800(!). ;)
60 percent more graphics power while only using slightly more energy. No way I ever buy my new gaming notebook without one, except when nVidia surprisingly unveils a blistering fast chip really soon now because I'd trust their drivers more than ATI's. Until then I prepare for the current mobile GPU flagship, trust me. But not from Dell, but that's a personal matter for me...
Maybe they are quite sufficient for most home users? Working on a 500MHz Athlon after being used to a 1800+ has made me quite indifferent to processor speeds.
I'd prefer a fast and responsive interface any time over high processing speeds. And watching the cpu usage on the 500mhz machine, I swear most things I do at home except gaming are limited by ram size. hdd seek speed may be an issue but only after the ram is full and the OS needs to swap. Swapping sucks that much, I'd invest insane amounts of money to have 2 gig of ram on my next machine when there's finally a notebook with a Radeon Mobility 9800 without a Dell logo available.
If there's no regular gaming habit, a strong VIA cpu is sufficient wide and far. MP3 encoding and DVD processing is the hardest task by now and I've no problem setting the machine aside for an hour or so. If the owner isn't going to play recent games, I'd save any money possible on the CPU and invest heavily in ram and fast harddrives. If there weren't all that noise and heat, a 15k rpm drive was perfect. But I'll never want to experience a machine bogged down while swapping ever again. Argh, I'll calm down now...
I mean, come on, there's a whole lot more keys reachable when you've got your fingers in the middle of the keys instead of the edge of the keyboard...
I prefer
- R/F for forward/back (l. middle)
- D/G for left/right strafe (l. ring/index)
- Space for jump (l. thumb)
- W for use/enter/exit vehicle (l. ring) (hit E too often accidentally so the character stepped out of car, heli or whatever)
- Q/A/Z/S for prone/walk/crouch/sprint
- T or 4th mousebutton (r. thumb) for reload
- Middle mouse for (r. middle) zoom/aim/use ironsights (AA:O )
Has two advantages over "traditional" WASD: more keys available, pinky finger modifies walking stances, mouse hand controls everything concerning weapons, middle finger selects vehicles and weapons and it's more in the middle of the number keys for them.But the best: most keyboards have a small bump on the F, J and Num5 keys that are perfect to reposition the fingers safely after a quick type or drink without the need to look away from the screen.
Disadvantages: strains left middle finger and left pinky. Walking stances are hard to combine if there's no toggle function for fast crouching, slow crouching etc.
Your combination sounds umm a bit strange, I'd probably mock you, too
But I know a guy that plays Quake etc. with just the keyboard. That's right, no mouse to look up, down or whatever, just with page-up/down/re-center. And he's good at it, better than most other friends. But it's a real show to watch this: he sees the enemy, his right hand leaves the cursor block to bash on page-up/down, he shoots with left crtl, hits END for view center and returns to the cursor keys. All in one blink. His hand literally blurs in that move, it's that quick. This technique fails in long range combat, obviously so in Battlefield etc. he has to use the mouse and I think he became more of a "regular" mouse player that way, but Quake, UT and the occasional ZDoom he plays still in the old Doom/Duke Nuk'em style. Preferring splash damage weapons, I might add. But I do, too because aiming sucks while gibs rock.
I think you're right.
I'm trying to understand why applying the brakes didn't help at all. What in the world could have prevented the main brakes to operate correctly?
Why didn't he stall the engine or press the clutch? No power to the wheels or stalling the engine - either way it should have stopped the car with much less trouble. An automatic transmission would probably be finished after that, but it had been safer for him.
I'd stomped on the brakes or even scratch the roadside crash barriers, but no way I'd keep on racing through heavy traffic. No chance to tell insurance "my car kept on accelerating so I had to ram sideways into the barrier to decelerate", but hitting a truck is presumably worse.
Conspiracy, driver a nutcase or marketing ploy from a competitor, who knows?
If you bikers have problems being recognized by vehicle drivers on the road, I can heavily recommend driving with the lights on. Speaking for the traffic situation in Europe, all motorbikers are required by law to always have their headlights on day and night, vehicle drivers are a lot more sensitive to anything on two wheels if it has its headlights on.
;)
;)
Batteries add weight, generators add drag, but I think it's worth the effort. Because I personally dislike battery powered bike lights, I'd further recommend generator hubs, as they add a lot less drag than tire driven ones. You can write off both for increased muscle buildup, if you like
There's a good summary on quality bike lighting here, please don't mind that it's a bit focused on two manufacturers - strong bike headlights switched on even at daytime can save some situations. Myself, I'd prefer hub driven generators anytime over tire driven or battery powered lighting, because I'm too lazy to recharge the batteries
Thanks, I thought the same reading the article and skimmed the comments here.
Self righteous judgement is the last we need to protect us from something and there is no way anyone can convince me that a general delete of all files on a "pirate" machine is even debatable. This is "justice" in the same way murder for "disrespect" is "justice" - unproportionate, indiscriminating and error-prone.
What if the piracy detection flags the wrong user? What if the home directory contains data of a thousand times the value of the pirated software? What if this somehow manages to shut down business and production machines?
Many comments here have been more or less paraphrasing "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" - a bit disappointing from the standpoint of freedom and justice. We cannot seriously advocate mob tactics, intimidation and outright unfair punishments. We do not smash the cars of speeders, windows of noisy neighbours or brains of annoying fellows.
We couldn't leave our houses if more people would give in to this urge. Or we'd have smashed cars every day someone thinks we might have remotely endangered their kid or have a gunfight each time someone makes other people wait in line behind hin at the ATM or the supermarket.
Common sense dictates that we as an intelligent lifeform and sane human just assume that no other sane human would ever leave a property item exceeding the value of half an average yearly income free for taking. So it's clearly imaginable that someone has enough from FoxNews, politics, ClearChannel, Avril Lavigne, DoD-funded action movies and other crowd control is offering his home entertainment system free for anyone willing to take it. ;)
A car with the keys in the ignition or the motor running means "owner will be back in a few moments", an old television set sitting on the sidewalk for more than a week means "it still works but I bought the plasma TV - take it if you want".