A killawatt can't turn the freezer to -21C (as opposed to the usual -18C) for a couple of hours with strong winds (and therefore close to free electricity).
Of course that requires variable electricity prices, but I can't imagine that there will be many civilized places without them in 10 years.
much less that it needs to eat more than 2 watts 24/7 just to wait for a power-on signal from some lazy fatass who can't stand up and walk 8 feet from the couch to turn it on.
That can be achieved with less than 0.1W. It's close enough to 0 for me. Mandate that instead of mandating physical switches.
Air isn't all that clean in general, you should have a good chance at seeing a 25W beam from the side. Just look at all the dust in a "ray" of sunlight. The eye is really good at spotting flickers of light like that.
Just because you reverse engineer something doesn't automatically mean a copyright violation.
You not only have to reverse engineer, you have to reimplement from scratch. Reverse engineering is relatively easy, the documentation + cleanroom part is hard.
Your proposal would create additional incentives for people to hide their work instead of sharing it and we have enough problems with that already.
Practically all software which isn't Free Software is already hidden. For the rest, the source is useless because you still have to do the documentation + reimplementation. It can't get worse.
What does bundling have to do with the end of copyright? Once copyright is gone, the GPL has lost its teeth, and therefore it can't "protect" us against DRM. That's when the training wheels come off and Free Software will have to win (or not) on an even field.
Luckily the content creators are in the minority. Besides, copyright on content is much less harmful than copyright on software, so that's a whole other battle.
You can still find plenty of people in Russia and the rest of former USSR who will say that things were better during communism. Some of them are probably right too.
At least there are fewer political prisoners there now.
At least this one is visible light. I'm somewhat paranoid when I'm playing with fiber optics because it's all infrared. You probably wouldn't have stuck your hand into a 25W visible-light laser beam.
Some of us GPL defenders are hoping to one day see the end of copyright. Yes that will kill off the GPL, but the GPL is unnecessary and needlessly restrictive anyway at that point.
Plus it supports all the applications Linux does. Whoohoo!
Maybe so, and I do remember my days of trying to keep various Free Software running on a variety of Unix systems with a certain fondness. However, I have no desire to relive the experience.
Again, nothing to do with LVM, such a failure will affect any system.
Of course not. That's what barriers are all about -- making journalled file systems actually work. LVM silently discarding barriers is nasty. Fortunately it has been fixed; I haven't actually tried it out though.
You currently have ext3 fs that are NOT on LVM. In the future, choose LVM.
The choice isn't that simple. LVM comes with its own complications, including a tendency to get volume offsets "wrong" so the file system data doesn't align nicely to RAID stripes. This is not good for performance.
Also, LVM has only recently acquired barrier support, and the combination of no barriers + write cache can be quite dangerous if power is lost. Even battery backed cache won't save you if you use a journalling file system (and everybody does these days) because request ordering isn't guaranteed.
I haven't touched Solaris since it had a 2 in front of its version number, but I must admit that I suffer from ZFS envy.
I must admit that I don't understand why people find the Postgres role system confusing. Having the database users match the Unix users by default seems so elegant and easy, and not having to maintain passwords in the database at all is brilliant!
That's why the system should have multiple fall back BOPs. AND they should be required to drill a relief well at the same time as the main well, so that if something like this happens, it doesn't take 3 months to stop it.
Sure, you can require that. However, all this wouldn't have happened if BP had simply required the existing system to be working. If you add extra requirements and the drilling companies ignore the state those new safety devices are in, they will fail too. The human factor is the main problem in this system, and it is difficult to come up with a technical fix for that.
What they should have is a shaped charge of explosives that can pinch the well bore shut. No hydraulics, just a very primitive electric ignition system needed.
The existing system would have been able to deal with the problem if it had been broken in just one way instead of having multiple known failures.
"As many as three of every 1,000 persons with measles will die in the U.S. In the developing world, the rate is much higher, with death occurring in about one of every 100 persons with measles."
Newly found? The "look and feel" lawsuit started in 1988, and led to FSF's Apple boycott.
Back then they lost. Today they would have patented everything and won. Or possibly even won without patents; copyright on computer software is much broader than it was in the 80's.
There are set, tested plans. They are a) let the blow-out-preventer do its job so that the whole event ends up at the bottom of page 19 and b) if the blow-out-preventer fails, drill a relief well. Well they did a) and it failed spectacularly, so now they're doing b) which takes 3 months. They are also doing a lot of crazy things from c) through z) which weren't ever planned, but that's better than everyone thinking they are doing nothing at all.
Copyright does not protect from reverse engineering.
With copyright, reverse engineering is almost useless. Sure you get the source code, but you can't use it except as documentation. You have to clean-room reimplement everything.
The atmosphere ends before gravity has diminished significantly. We're 6000km+ from the center of gravity, and a mere 100km out I can guarantee you that the engine won't work (likely it won't work higher than 20km). 6000km vs. 6100km just isn't going to make a significant difference.
And again, escape velocity is much worse. I'm only talking about getting to orbit.
I don't see this as cutting air drag, which goes up to the fourth power as speed increases
In a flow without flow separation, drag increases linearly with speed. With flow separation, drag increases ~ with the square of the speed. Nowhere near the fourth power in either case.
A scramjet needs to get to about mach 25 to reach escape velocity, which is significantly faster than this test, but give it time.
A scramjet needs to get to about mach 25 within the atmosphere get to orbit. This means it will either have to accelerate stupidly fast or stay low for too long and burn up. It seems to me that it would be better to go mach 10, leave the atmosphere, and go by rocket the rest of the way.
Visited is very useful for mailing list archives. If you try to follow a thread you can keep clicking next and previous and so on, and you can tell by the colour of the link whether you've read it before.
Slashdot Mirror
A killawatt can't turn the freezer to -21C (as opposed to the usual -18C) for a couple of hours with strong winds (and therefore close to free electricity).
Of course that requires variable electricity prices, but I can't imagine that there will be many civilized places without them in 10 years.
much less that it needs to eat more than 2 watts 24/7 just to wait for a power-on signal from some lazy fatass who can't stand up and walk 8 feet from the couch to turn it on.
That can be achieved with less than 0.1W. It's close enough to 0 for me. Mandate that instead of mandating physical switches.
Air isn't all that clean in general, you should have a good chance at seeing a 25W beam from the side. Just look at all the dust in a "ray" of sunlight. The eye is really good at spotting flickers of light like that.
Maybe I just don't clean enough, of course.
Just because you reverse engineer something doesn't automatically mean a copyright violation.
You not only have to reverse engineer, you have to reimplement from scratch. Reverse engineering is relatively easy, the documentation + cleanroom part is hard.
Your proposal would create additional incentives for people to hide their work instead of sharing it and we have enough problems with that already.
Practically all software which isn't Free Software is already hidden. For the rest, the source is useless because you still have to do the documentation + reimplementation. It can't get worse.
What does bundling have to do with the end of copyright? Once copyright is gone, the GPL has lost its teeth, and therefore it can't "protect" us against DRM. That's when the training wheels come off and Free Software will have to win (or not) on an even field.
Luckily the content creators are in the minority. Besides, copyright on content is much less harmful than copyright on software, so that's a whole other battle.
At least minerals are more difficult to extract than oil. Hopefully sufficiently difficult that only a well-developed local industry can handle it.
The environment will be wrecked of course, but maybe, just maybe, the average Afghan can benefit.
You can still find plenty of people in Russia and the rest of former USSR who will say that things were better during communism. Some of them are probably right too.
At least there are fewer political prisoners there now.
At least this one is visible light. I'm somewhat paranoid when I'm playing with fiber optics because it's all infrared. You probably wouldn't have stuck your hand into a 25W visible-light laser beam.
Sure, reverse-engineering is theoretically possible, but not feasible. It is not the preferred form of editing.
The primary reason why reverse-engineering is almost never done is that you can't use the result anyway. Copyright prevents that.
With copyright gone, reverse engineering tools would become much much better.
Some of us GPL defenders are hoping to one day see the end of copyright. Yes that will kill off the GPL, but the GPL is unnecessary and needlessly restrictive anyway at that point.
Plus it supports all the applications Linux does. Whoohoo!
Maybe so, and I do remember my days of trying to keep various Free Software running on a variety of Unix systems with a certain fondness. However, I have no desire to relive the experience.
Again, nothing to do with LVM, such a failure will affect any system.
Of course not. That's what barriers are all about -- making journalled file systems actually work. LVM silently discarding barriers is nasty. Fortunately it has been fixed; I haven't actually tried it out though.
You currently have ext3 fs that are NOT on LVM. In the future, choose LVM.
The choice isn't that simple. LVM comes with its own complications, including a tendency to get volume offsets "wrong" so the file system data doesn't align nicely to RAID stripes. This is not good for performance.
Also, LVM has only recently acquired barrier support, and the combination of no barriers + write cache can be quite dangerous if power is lost. Even battery backed cache won't save you if you use a journalling file system (and everybody does these days) because request ordering isn't guaranteed.
I haven't touched Solaris since it had a 2 in front of its version number, but I must admit that I suffer from ZFS envy.
I must admit that I don't understand why people find the Postgres role system confusing. Having the database users match the Unix users by default seems so elegant and easy, and not having to maintain passwords in the database at all is brilliant!
That's why the system should have multiple fall back BOPs. AND they should be required to drill a relief well at the same time as the main well, so that if something like this happens, it doesn't take 3 months to stop it.
Sure, you can require that. However, all this wouldn't have happened if BP had simply required the existing system to be working. If you add extra requirements and the drilling companies ignore the state those new safety devices are in, they will fail too. The human factor is the main problem in this system, and it is difficult to come up with a technical fix for that.
What they should have is a shaped charge of explosives that can pinch the well bore shut. No hydraulics, just a very primitive electric ignition system needed.
The existing system would have been able to deal with the problem if it had been broken in just one way instead of having multiple known failures.
Maybe you should read the link you provided:
"As many as three of every 1,000 persons with measles will die in the U.S. In the developing world, the rate is much higher, with death occurring in about one of every 100 persons with measles."
0.3% isn't 1 out of every three.
newly found controlling and assholish nature.
Newly found? The "look and feel" lawsuit started in 1988, and led to FSF's Apple boycott.
Back then they lost. Today they would have patented everything and won. Or possibly even won without patents; copyright on computer software is much broader than it was in the 80's.
There are set, tested plans. They are a) let the blow-out-preventer do its job so that the whole event ends up at the bottom of page 19 and b) if the blow-out-preventer fails, drill a relief well. Well they did a) and it failed spectacularly, so now they're doing b) which takes 3 months. They are also doing a lot of crazy things from c) through z) which weren't ever planned, but that's better than everyone thinking they are doing nothing at all.
Copyright does not protect from reverse engineering.
With copyright, reverse engineering is almost useless. Sure you get the source code, but you can't use it except as documentation. You have to clean-room reimplement everything.
The atmosphere ends before gravity has diminished significantly. We're 6000km+ from the center of gravity, and a mere 100km out I can guarantee you that the engine won't work (likely it won't work higher than 20km). 6000km vs. 6100km just isn't going to make a significant difference.
And again, escape velocity is much worse. I'm only talking about getting to orbit.
I don't see this as cutting air drag, which goes up to the fourth power as speed increases
In a flow without flow separation, drag increases linearly with speed. With flow separation, drag increases ~ with the square of the speed. Nowhere near the fourth power in either case.
A scramjet needs to get to about mach 25 to reach escape velocity, which is significantly faster than this test, but give it time.
A scramjet needs to get to about mach 25 within the atmosphere get to orbit. This means it will either have to accelerate stupidly fast or stay low for too long and burn up. It seems to me that it would be better to go mach 10, leave the atmosphere, and go by rocket the rest of the way.
Escape velocity is even worse.
Visited is very useful for mailing list archives. If you try to follow a thread you can keep clicking next and previous and so on, and you can tell by the colour of the link whether you've read it before.