I actually tend to agree with this point involving peak oil (something I've read up on myself, and believe will become a huge factor in the future), although I ask you one question: Would it be easier to implement a cost effective train system that replaces the long-haul highway system now, OR possibly take the fuel cell technology being developed, and put it into planes (probably for the most part limited to turbo-prop commuters at first)? I would think that fuel cell driven electric plans would probably make for a great cost effective way to travel moderate distances, and would probably be easier to develop than the fuel cell cars people keep talking about due to the tech issues surrounding the safety of hydrogen in cars. As airports would be easier to convert to make use of Hydrogen as a fuel then cars and their infrastructure would be, it makes a LOT of sense to try to develop such technology.
I debated about moderating this or commenting on this, and decided to comment on this, as it was such a good comment. To put some numbers to what you are saying, I did a little test. I checked the train fairs for NYC Penn Station on June 1, 8am to Washington DC, returning on June 3, at 6pm. The fare provided (not using high-speed train service btw, as the Acela is offline) came to a low of $152 round trip and a high of $274, depending on how closely I chose the trains based on time, etc. Now, I looked on exactly ONE airline's website (Independence Air), and got prices for Newark to Dulles for the same times, on the same dates, and got a price of $136. So basically, I can fly from NYC to DC cheaper then I can take a train. Yes, I have to go through the point security as you pointed out at an airport, so I loose some time there. Also, depending on where in or near NYC I start from, and where I'm going in Washington, the additional costs will vary (Taxi's, etc), but the point is, flying is VERY competative to train. Now consider that the airfair is LOWER than the lowest train ticket I could get through Amtrack, which is government funded, and has lost over 1B dollars a year since 2001, when with 9/11, you would have expected losses to have decreased. I personally think that trains have an appropriate place, but I believe that planes have an appropriate place as well. Trains work well when the distance is short, and the overhead for security, etc, work to their favor. Airlines work best for somewhat longer distances though. The factors that really dictates where there is a break-even is government subsidies, distance, and existing infrastructure, as adding infrastructure and cost of right of ways is increasing every year. Air travel doesn't have to worry about that as much, as the only expansion that has to be done is at the airport level. Just some thoughts.
And I haven't seen this stressed enough. Not only is there at best a disputed issue over if "new" SCO (aka Caldera) even has the rights to sue over this due to the wording of the Novell agreement selling "old" SCO the right to license the code (note the code itself was not SOLD in the first place by Novell), there isn't anything showing exactly what "old" SCO actually sold to "new" SCO, as apparently that paperwork was lost. To claim what "new" SCO claims, they have to have a clear authority over the code they are claiming, and they don't. The ONLY way the license issues will ever be resolved is if a) "new" SCO goes out of business, b) Novell reverts to being the owner based on their agreements, and c) Novell open sources the code under a dual GPL/BSD license, so that any contamination that MAY have occured is no longer in dispute by any party, and everybody can live happily ever after. The end.
Considering that you see the trail, this implies the picture is from the BACK, not the front. It does show how much the rover is sinking into the dirt though, and with that shows the level of the problem they are facing right now.
Yep, and nobody will be able to send or receive mail because they will just blacklist everybody. They don't care, they blacklist anybody, for any reason, without cause, and will do it at 6pm on a Friday night when nobody will answer the phone. They won't tell anybody they are being blacklisted, and for days at a time legitimate businesses will not be able to do business. Good idea.
When my mom was young, her parents kept the christmas presents in a closet protected by a conbination lock. She and her sisters would spend hours trying to get it open. One day, they did. Then they couldn't lock it again, and their parents found out. So yes, the kids will hack it.:)
Yes, but the cost of the oil is still controlled by a cartel. It's the European governments that tax the hell out of the oil that raises the prices to the level where they make more money than the cartel does.
WiFi SUCKS!!!!!! If cities put wifi, and people drop their DSL/cable thinking they will get a good service, they are sadly mistaken, AND will ruin the efforts of the companies to actually provide decent bandwidth. I have wifi in my apartment, and sometimes, the disruption is so bad, I can touch the wifi adapter to the AP, and STILL not get a good signal. The bands used for services like this need to be well regulated, and as of now they are not, leading to portable phones effectively blocking wifi receiption while they are in use. I've also used several different wifi adapter modes, and several AP models, they all have similar problems in any sort of congested area. So, which would you rather have, poor city provided wireless service, or decent (but for fee) DSL and cable service?
Guess not everybody bought the book Google Hacks 2 years ago that goes into details like this about what Google can do. It IS old news though, and just because a bunch of people don't know it doesn't mean it should be posted as news.
Re:Personally I think it would be worth repair
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 1
You could make a new hubble for the cost of repairing it. Which would be a better choice?
Now put this in context of deplying a city-wide network. See the problem? As wifi, would it classified as amateur radio or as a part 15 basis? If part 15 (as the sticker on my USB wifi adapter says), that means that if this city-wide network messed with Amateur radio services, then the city's network would have to shut down, correct? Doesn't sound safe to invest time and money into by me.
As soon as they start filtering the content, they will be considered a publisher, at which time their protections disappear. And you were right on lose, vs. loose, sorry for typing in a response fast and not proofreading it. BTW, maybe if you don't post as AC, we can see what you have posted?
Seriously. 802.11b is on an UNREGULATED band. What does this mean? You can't guarantee ANYTHING. I have times when my wifi card is TOUCHING my AP, and the signal doesn't get through due to my neighbors being on their 2.4gz phone. 2.4 Ghz is NOT a band you can do a reliable service on, and any attempts to do so will be an utter disaster. Get out while you can, don't waste any more money or time on it, let everybody else get a black eye trying to do this. IMHO.
Nope, once the carriers have signed this, they loose public carrier protections, and they can be sued for carrying content that is illegal. Once you put your toe in the water of denying service for content reasons, they are NOT protected.
They won't be a public carrier which is what has shielded them from litigation. They arn't morons, and nobody will sign it. A website is NOT illegal, the content may be, but if they filter by content, they loose their protections. The RIAA just wants to be able to go after the big fish instead of the little fish with this move.
12-15m. They arn't actually cornered, as several groups have the bpo's for them, BUT they don't undercut each other that much either, so it's sorta a cartel. Other attempts have been to buyout the morphite market to jack up the prices, and a few others I can't recall at once, but it is interesting to watch the game mechanics. And yes, the market interface is awsome.
Stuff like this happens often in Eve. People are cornering various products all the time in order to drive prices up, and it works, as long as people will pay the prices.
You are thinking of the people that have ip rights to things that are obvious and/or have become industry standards before they try to enforce them, or have a business model of buying someone's old patents and litigating for cash. Come up with something unique and licensing it to others is a completely different model, and one I think most/.'ers endorse.
I wonder why IBM with it's facination in Linux now doesn't open source the workplace shell code for OS/2 and port it to Linux. It would make an awsome desktop, or at least a baseline for further work.
It all depends on what is modified. If you have a seperate GUI that is a standalone program on it's own, and communicates via messages, they may have modified the original only a minor amount. If everything is glued together (my guess though), then you are correct.
Way back when, I was one of those guys that bought their OS/2 software, and it was great. I loved Galactic Civ, and the Object Desktop. OS/2 was a LONG way ahead of Windows at the time. I wonder how fast it would run on current systems now.:)
Slashdot Mirror
I actually tend to agree with this point involving peak oil (something I've read up on myself, and believe will become a huge factor in the future), although I ask you one question: Would it be easier to implement a cost effective train system that replaces the long-haul highway system now, OR possibly take the fuel cell technology being developed, and put it into planes (probably for the most part limited to turbo-prop commuters at first)? I would think that fuel cell driven electric plans would probably make for a great cost effective way to travel moderate distances, and would probably be easier to develop than the fuel cell cars people keep talking about due to the tech issues surrounding the safety of hydrogen in cars. As airports would be easier to convert to make use of Hydrogen as a fuel then cars and their infrastructure would be, it makes a LOT of sense to try to develop such technology.
I debated about moderating this or commenting on this, and decided to comment on this, as it was such a good comment. To put some numbers to what you are saying, I did a little test. I checked the train fairs for NYC Penn Station on June 1, 8am to Washington DC, returning on June 3, at 6pm. The fare provided (not using high-speed train service btw, as the Acela is offline) came to a low of $152 round trip and a high of $274, depending on how closely I chose the trains based on time, etc. Now, I looked on exactly ONE airline's website (Independence Air), and got prices for Newark to Dulles for the same times, on the same dates, and got a price of $136. So basically, I can fly from NYC to DC cheaper then I can take a train. Yes, I have to go through the point security as you pointed out at an airport, so I loose some time there. Also, depending on where in or near NYC I start from, and where I'm going in Washington, the additional costs will vary (Taxi's, etc), but the point is, flying is VERY competative to train. Now consider that the airfair is LOWER than the lowest train ticket I could get through Amtrack, which is government funded, and has lost over 1B dollars a year since 2001, when with 9/11, you would have expected losses to have decreased. I personally think that trains have an appropriate place, but I believe that planes have an appropriate place as well. Trains work well when the distance is short, and the overhead for security, etc, work to their favor. Airlines work best for somewhat longer distances though. The factors that really dictates where there is a break-even is government subsidies, distance, and existing infrastructure, as adding infrastructure and cost of right of ways is increasing every year. Air travel doesn't have to worry about that as much, as the only expansion that has to be done is at the airport level. Just some thoughts.
And I haven't seen this stressed enough. Not only is there at best a disputed issue over if "new" SCO (aka Caldera) even has the rights to sue over this due to the wording of the Novell agreement selling "old" SCO the right to license the code (note the code itself was not SOLD in the first place by Novell), there isn't anything showing exactly what "old" SCO actually sold to "new" SCO, as apparently that paperwork was lost. To claim what "new" SCO claims, they have to have a clear authority over the code they are claiming, and they don't. The ONLY way the license issues will ever be resolved is if a) "new" SCO goes out of business, b) Novell reverts to being the owner based on their agreements, and c) Novell open sources the code under a dual GPL/BSD license, so that any contamination that MAY have occured is no longer in dispute by any party, and everybody can live happily ever after. The end.
Considering that you see the trail, this implies the picture is from the BACK, not the front. It does show how much the rover is sinking into the dirt though, and with that shows the level of the problem they are facing right now.
If you can't have a secure OS, the OS should be less vulnerable to being abused. So in effect, use Linux or other OS's if you need to use raw sockets.
Yep, and nobody will be able to send or receive mail because they will just blacklist everybody. They don't care, they blacklist anybody, for any reason, without cause, and will do it at 6pm on a Friday night when nobody will answer the phone. They won't tell anybody they are being blacklisted, and for days at a time legitimate businesses will not be able to do business. Good idea.
When my mom was young, her parents kept the christmas presents in a closet protected by a conbination lock. She and her sisters would spend hours trying to get it open. One day, they did. Then they couldn't lock it again, and their parents found out. So yes, the kids will hack it. :)
Yes, but the cost of the oil is still controlled by a cartel. It's the European governments that tax the hell out of the oil that raises the prices to the level where they make more money than the cartel does.
WiFi SUCKS!!!!!! If cities put wifi, and people drop their DSL/cable thinking they will get a good service, they are sadly mistaken, AND will ruin the efforts of the companies to actually provide decent bandwidth. I have wifi in my apartment, and sometimes, the disruption is so bad, I can touch the wifi adapter to the AP, and STILL not get a good signal. The bands used for services like this need to be well regulated, and as of now they are not, leading to portable phones effectively blocking wifi receiption while they are in use. I've also used several different wifi adapter modes, and several AP models, they all have similar problems in any sort of congested area. So, which would you rather have, poor city provided wireless service, or decent (but for fee) DSL and cable service?
Guess not everybody bought the book Google Hacks 2 years ago that goes into details like this about what Google can do. It IS old news though, and just because a bunch of people don't know it doesn't mean it should be posted as news.
You could make a new hubble for the cost of repairing it. Which would be a better choice?
Now put this in context of deplying a city-wide network. See the problem? As wifi, would it classified as amateur radio or as a part 15 basis? If part 15 (as the sticker on my USB wifi adapter says), that means that if this city-wide network messed with Amateur radio services, then the city's network would have to shut down, correct? Doesn't sound safe to invest time and money into by me.
Ok, to quote the laws:
d es/47/chapters/5/subchapters/ii/parts/i/sections/s ection_230.html
http://http//caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/usco
As soon as they start filtering the content, they will be considered a publisher, at which time their protections disappear. And you were right on lose, vs. loose, sorry for typing in a response fast and not proofreading it. BTW, maybe if you don't post as AC, we can see what you have posted?
Seriously. 802.11b is on an UNREGULATED band. What does this mean? You can't guarantee ANYTHING. I have times when my wifi card is TOUCHING my AP, and the signal doesn't get through due to my neighbors being on their 2.4gz phone. 2.4 Ghz is NOT a band you can do a reliable service on, and any attempts to do so will be an utter disaster. Get out while you can, don't waste any more money or time on it, let everybody else get a black eye trying to do this. IMHO.
Nope, once the carriers have signed this, they loose public carrier protections, and they can be sued for carrying content that is illegal. Once you put your toe in the water of denying service for content reasons, they are NOT protected.
Yep, they rolled over to the information Nazi's this time. Didn't take long did it?
They won't be a public carrier which is what has shielded them from litigation. They arn't morons, and nobody will sign it. A website is NOT illegal, the content may be, but if they filter by content, they loose their protections. The RIAA just wants to be able to go after the big fish instead of the little fish with this move.
Yes, but do they run Linux?
http://www.woz.org/letters/general/78.html
VERY funny read, about Woz and his stack of perforated two dollar bills he carries around.
12-15m. They arn't actually cornered, as several groups have the bpo's for them, BUT they don't undercut each other that much either, so it's sorta a cartel. Other attempts have been to buyout the morphite market to jack up the prices, and a few others I can't recall at once, but it is interesting to watch the game mechanics. And yes, the market interface is awsome.
Stuff like this happens often in Eve. People are cornering various products all the time in order to drive prices up, and it works, as long as people will pay the prices.
You are thinking of the people that have ip rights to things that are obvious and/or have become industry standards before they try to enforce them, or have a business model of buying someone's old patents and litigating for cash. Come up with something unique and licensing it to others is a completely different model, and one I think most /.'ers endorse.
I wonder why IBM with it's facination in Linux now doesn't open source the workplace shell code for OS/2 and port it to Linux. It would make an awsome desktop, or at least a baseline for further work.
It all depends on what is modified. If you have a seperate GUI that is a standalone program on it's own, and communicates via messages, they may have modified the original only a minor amount. If everything is glued together (my guess though), then you are correct.
Way back when, I was one of those guys that bought their OS/2 software, and it was great. I loved Galactic Civ, and the Object Desktop. OS/2 was a LONG way ahead of Windows at the time. I wonder how fast it would run on current systems now. :)