Re:yet another worthless article about IPv6
on
An Introduction to IPv6
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As a Comcast customer, I resemble that remark!:) Anyway, there aren't any other options in this area for something reasonably cost effective, for the bandwidth that I get. There's a large wireless network in the nearby area, but they won't deal with individuals, and barely offer better than 56k dialup speeds.
As someone who wishes they weren't supporting Comcast, and is reasonably technically-oriented, what alternatives could anybody suggest?
That's the exact reason why people lump themselves into categories like "liberal", "conservative", "republican", and "democrat", so that in a broad brush consideration of a group of people, you can see what the general opinions of those people labeled as such are likely to be. Unfortunately, yes these terms are now being used as "good" and "bad" instead of just two differing opinions.
Mod Parent Up! This is some of the best common sense, non-BS-PC awesomeness I've ever seen on Slashdot. I wish I'd saved some mod points for just such a wonderful post.
Nice to see a fellow DSMer on Slashdot:) Yeah... insurance on these things is a b!@#$ I live in Massachusetts, which has funky insurance, and seems fairly corrupt. I called up the company, and this is how my end of the conversation went, with me getting more and more depressed
"Yes, I'm 23... I have a couple of speeding tickets... 92 Plymouth Laser... Yes, the turbo... No, no ABS..."
First off: "reckless"... Second off, it was in the public domain anyway. Now that many more people know of that info, it's probably not just the "bad guys" that know about it, so those people are better off having that information linked to many people.
Honestly, I do that as it is today! During the winter, I'm a cheap miser, and keep the rest of the house at about 50. I keep my computer in my room and always keep the door closed, and it'll reach a balmy 70 degrees just from the PC.
I feel the same way. The description of the ionized air is extremely eerie, and I can't help but imagine the devastation, and horrible beauty of that scene. It gives me the creepy crawlies. Just something about a force so powerful that you can't actually feel until your body starts what amounts to dissolving.
I almost fell on my butt when I saw the giant elephants in Return Of The King. "You mean Lucas stole the AT-ATs from Tolkien??" I had always thought the idea of elephant-like walking tanks was brilliant, turns out he stole that too.
What're you, retarded? That could've come from anywhere. He could have "borrowed" it from seeing elephants at the circus, or even *gasp* a history book. They used to use elephants like that to haul around crap. The only thing elephantine about gigantic mechanical quadrapeds is the whole "four legs" thing. Maybe he modeled them after Gazelle, or Triceratops? Next, you'll be telling me he stole the idea of spaceships from somewhere else. It's pretty goddamn common knowledge. For you to bring up Tolkien is beyond stupid.
I've enjoyed every single Star Ward movie I've seen, including the new ones. If you re-watch the original movies, then watch the new ones, they're all very much along the same vein. Simple, clear storylines; mostly predictable plot; silly alien characters and situations; and some nice special effects.
The Mitsubishi "Starion" is supposedly an occurance of engrish from a carmaker. It was released to compete directly with the Mustang of the time, with comparable power, styling, and cost. Say Starion with a heavy Japanese accent if you don't get it, and think of Mustangs:D
Everything is essentially the same. I'll still have the same car I have today, if not another car that may have a Diesel engine (diesel being more efficient). I don't see any alternative energies getting such a boost in the next 10 years that we switch from useful gasoline. Gas will cost $6 per gallon however. Wasteful government construction crews will still repair potholes in roads. Computers will still be the same thing they are today, just faster. The internet might have some more technologies, and wireless "broadband" type speeds will have coverage pretty much across the US. You'll still check your e-mail by going to hotmail.com, you'll just be able to do it from your back yard instead. You'll still have to make your own damn coffee in the morning. Things like the Roomba floor vacuum robots might be more popular though. Cellphones will be able to play some pretty neat games, and will basically be what most people use for their day-to-day computing needs, checking mail, talking with friends, taking pictures. It'll just have better screens and keyboards, probably voice recognition that still mixes up words occasionally. The big corporations will be bigger, but resentment of that fact will also be larger; the underdogs will have a very secure foothold, and a bright future. The US government will have kept up the current trend of restricting certain freedoms in the name of preventing terror. We'll possibly all have ID cards, like what is used for special people at airports now. You have to be verified as a "good guy" first, instead of assumed.
Basically, just a bit more of what we have now, nothing radically different.
First off... All of these "disposable" cameras aren't thrown out. When you return them from whence they came to get your piccies off of them, they refurb them, and resell them, exactly the same way as is done with analog "disposable" cameras nowadays. They rip the worn thin plastic shell off of them, develop your pictures inside, sell you the pictures, and re-sell the camera with a new shell.
Also, what's the big deal with having a disposable mindset? It's extremely good for the economy, and no worse for the environment providing you recycle. You _do_ recycle, don't you? Anyway, if you bought say... a window fan back in the 1930s, you'd still have it today. It's ruggedly made out of steel and brass, and other nice metals. Look at the brand name on the bottom of them. Doesn't look familiar, right? That's because they sold 10,000 fans to everybody who wanted one, and then everybody who wanted one had one, so the company closed. All of those people in the company are now out of work, and can't buy any more window fans. Stagnation due to selling overly durable items is far worse than a disposable culture. Disposable things keep the money flowing, which is important for a healthy capitalistic nation.
Lake Ontario being cooled by unused air conditioners from Toronto area. The polluted lake burst into flame this morning, apparently due to a raising temperature over the past few days. Authorities are investigating the cause of the temperature spike. Meanwhile, thousands of unused air conditioners are being utilized to attempt to chill the lake. Water is being cascaded across thousands of air conditioner evaporators, at the cost of megawatts of electricity from the local grid.
US Car companies do get funding for fuel efficient vehicles, but there's no capitalistic reason to build fuel efficient vehicles. They wouldn't sell any more, and they lose the money it would take to develop a very good fuel efficient vehicle, especially one with an alternate form of fuel. There are developments by some companies for greater fuel efficiency, but they are companies that really _need_ to, specifically Honda is the one I'm talking about. Their country is so overcrowded that pollution is a _huge_ deal, unlike it is here in the US at this moment anyway. They have a new diesel powered accord I believe that gets 76 MP us Gallon. Otherwise, the companies that get money for fuel efficient vehicles don't get nearly enough to make it worth their while.
Look into electric vehicles some day, and what companies have done. GM recalled all of theirs without explanation pretty much, and just crushed them flat. Toyota had a model, RAV4 I believe, but stopped making it, despite huge demand in California (many more people pre-paid for these cars than they actually made), etc.
The fact is, there's just no motivation out there for greedy (as they should be, it's their purpose) companies.
So, let's all drive 8 MPG, 6000+ lb. vehicles that roll over at the drop of a hat, and still kill the drivers just as easily when crashing into a similarly sized vehicle. Your body is traveling X miles an hour whether or not you're in a 6000 lb vehicle or a 1000 lb vehicle, and crash deceleration can happen as easily in a large vehicle as a small vehicle, so there's no inherent benefit to driving a large vehicle unless you hit another smaller one. A very stiff vehicle is worse in an accident than one that smooshes. We're screwed either way though. The benefit to small, lightweight, efficient cars is we won't be dicking over the environment at the same time. It's much like an arms race in vehicular mass, but in the end the trees always win no matter how large you are.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but most cars nowadays are built in mostly one piece. They're usually called "unibody", as opposed to having a frame that the body is attached to. Everything from the Chevy Metro to the new Ferrari Enzo uses Unibody technology, though the Chevy is built from spit and tape and the Enzo is built from carbon fiber. The Unibodies usually also have bolt-on quarterpanels and bumpers, the most likely areas to be damaged in a light accident, thus being replaceable.
Technically though... isn't it? The helicopter is buoyed up by the pressure differential across the rotor. It's just instead of a water-air, or air-helium boundary, we have an air-air boundary... Does that count?
This just in - the housekeeping industry is absolutely appalled at the lack of men in the profession. They have started summer housekeeping camps for highschool boys to try and attract more into the career.
More breaking news, the garbage collection industry has decided that it is also appalled at the lack of women in the industry, and has also started its own garbage-based summer camps for kids.
-Jesse
Re:Obligatory Futurama reference ...
on
3D Monitor
·
· Score: 1
Now that I think about it, I'll bet the developed ability to switch the dominant eye is based on having slightly different vision in each eye (whether it be direction, color, or focus). Visual feedback is perfect for learning stupid human tricks like this.
-Jesse
Re:Obligatory Futurama reference ...
on
3D Monitor
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I get the slightly different color effect too. Mine are red-left, and green-right (very slight tinting for either eye). I also have developed the skills to switch which eye is dominant at the moment but I never use it (both my eyes see clearly equally well). I always notice it when my brain auto-switches the dominant eye though, everything will either red or green shift:D
Slashdot Mirror
As a Comcast customer, I resemble that remark! :) Anyway, there aren't any other options in this area for something reasonably cost effective, for the bandwidth that I get. There's a large wireless network in the nearby area, but they won't deal with individuals, and barely offer better than 56k dialup speeds.
As someone who wishes they weren't supporting Comcast, and is reasonably technically-oriented, what alternatives could anybody suggest?
-Jesse
That's the exact reason why people lump themselves into categories like "liberal", "conservative", "republican", and "democrat", so that in a broad brush consideration of a group of people, you can see what the general opinions of those people labeled as such are likely to be. Unfortunately, yes these terms are now being used as "good" and "bad" instead of just two differing opinions.
-Jesse
yup.
AAH CRAP! As I was reading this article, apparently I got mod points, and now I can't use them! ARG!
-Jesse
Mod Parent Up! This is some of the best common sense, non-BS-PC awesomeness I've ever seen on Slashdot. I wish I'd saved some mod points for just such a wonderful post.
-Jesse
Nice to see a fellow DSMer on Slashdot :) Yeah... insurance on these things is a b!@#$ I live in Massachusetts, which has funky insurance, and seems fairly corrupt. I called up the company, and this is how my end of the conversation went, with me getting more and more depressed
"Yes, I'm 23... I have a couple of speeding tickets... 92 Plymouth Laser... Yes, the turbo... No, no ABS..."
Heh
-Jesse, NewEngDSM
First off: "reckless"... Second off, it was in the public domain anyway. Now that many more people know of that info, it's probably not just the "bad guys" that know about it, so those people are better off having that information linked to many people.
-Jesse
Honestly, I do that as it is today! During the winter, I'm a cheap miser, and keep the rest of the house at about 50. I keep my computer in my room and always keep the door closed, and it'll reach a balmy 70 degrees just from the PC.
-Jesse
I feel the same way. The description of the ionized air is extremely eerie, and I can't help but imagine the devastation, and horrible beauty of that scene. It gives me the creepy crawlies. Just something about a force so powerful that you can't actually feel until your body starts what amounts to dissolving.
-Jesse
I almost fell on my butt when I saw the giant elephants in Return Of The King. "You mean Lucas stole the AT-ATs from Tolkien??" I had always thought the idea of elephant-like walking tanks was brilliant, turns out he stole that too.
What're you, retarded? That could've come from anywhere. He could have "borrowed" it from seeing elephants at the circus, or even *gasp* a history book. They used to use elephants like that to haul around crap. The only thing elephantine about gigantic mechanical quadrapeds is the whole "four legs" thing. Maybe he modeled them after Gazelle, or Triceratops? Next, you'll be telling me he stole the idea of spaceships from somewhere else. It's pretty goddamn common knowledge. For you to bring up Tolkien is beyond stupid.
-Jesse
I've enjoyed every single Star Ward movie I've seen, including the new ones. If you re-watch the original movies, then watch the new ones, they're all very much along the same vein. Simple, clear storylines; mostly predictable plot; silly alien characters and situations; and some nice special effects.
Am I alone in this?
-Jesse
The Mitsubishi "Starion" is supposedly an occurance of engrish from a carmaker. It was released to compete directly with the Mustang of the time, with comparable power, styling, and cost. Say Starion with a heavy Japanese accent if you don't get it, and think of Mustangs :D
-Jesse
Everything is essentially the same. I'll still have the same car I have today, if not another car that may have a Diesel engine (diesel being more efficient). I don't see any alternative energies getting such a boost in the next 10 years that we switch from useful gasoline. Gas will cost $6 per gallon however. Wasteful government construction crews will still repair potholes in roads. Computers will still be the same thing they are today, just faster. The internet might have some more technologies, and wireless "broadband" type speeds will have coverage pretty much across the US. You'll still check your e-mail by going to hotmail.com, you'll just be able to do it from your back yard instead. You'll still have to make your own damn coffee in the morning. Things like the Roomba floor vacuum robots might be more popular though. Cellphones will be able to play some pretty neat games, and will basically be what most people use for their day-to-day computing needs, checking mail, talking with friends, taking pictures. It'll just have better screens and keyboards, probably voice recognition that still mixes up words occasionally. The big corporations will be bigger, but resentment of that fact will also be larger; the underdogs will have a very secure foothold, and a bright future. The US government will have kept up the current trend of restricting certain freedoms in the name of preventing terror. We'll possibly all have ID cards, like what is used for special people at airports now. You have to be verified as a "good guy" first, instead of assumed.
Basically, just a bit more of what we have now, nothing radically different.
What do you guys think?
-Jesse
What's a Wallah? Oh OOHhh, you mean "voila"... I see..
-Jesse
First off... All of these "disposable" cameras aren't thrown out. When you return them from whence they came to get your piccies off of them, they refurb them, and resell them, exactly the same way as is done with analog "disposable" cameras nowadays. They rip the worn thin plastic shell off of them, develop your pictures inside, sell you the pictures, and re-sell the camera with a new shell.
Also, what's the big deal with having a disposable mindset? It's extremely good for the economy, and no worse for the environment providing you recycle. You _do_ recycle, don't you? Anyway, if you bought say... a window fan back in the 1930s, you'd still have it today. It's ruggedly made out of steel and brass, and other nice metals. Look at the brand name on the bottom of them. Doesn't look familiar, right? That's because they sold 10,000 fans to everybody who wanted one, and then everybody who wanted one had one, so the company closed. All of those people in the company are now out of work, and can't buy any more window fans. Stagnation due to selling overly durable items is far worse than a disposable culture. Disposable things keep the money flowing, which is important for a healthy capitalistic nation.
Most of all, relax.
-Jesse
That is, until the infomercials in the morning start hocking battery recharge kits.
-Jesse
Lake Ontario being cooled by unused air conditioners from Toronto area. The polluted lake burst into flame this morning, apparently due to a raising temperature over the past few days. Authorities are investigating the cause of the temperature spike. Meanwhile, thousands of unused air conditioners are being utilized to attempt to chill the lake. Water is being cascaded across thousands of air conditioner evaporators, at the cost of megawatts of electricity from the local grid.
-Jesse
US Car companies do get funding for fuel efficient vehicles, but there's no capitalistic reason to build fuel efficient vehicles. They wouldn't sell any more, and they lose the money it would take to develop a very good fuel efficient vehicle, especially one with an alternate form of fuel. There are developments by some companies for greater fuel efficiency, but they are companies that really _need_ to, specifically Honda is the one I'm talking about. Their country is so overcrowded that pollution is a _huge_ deal, unlike it is here in the US at this moment anyway. They have a new diesel powered accord I believe that gets 76 MP us Gallon. Otherwise, the companies that get money for fuel efficient vehicles don't get nearly enough to make it worth their while.
Look into electric vehicles some day, and what companies have done. GM recalled all of theirs without explanation pretty much, and just crushed them flat. Toyota had a model, RAV4 I believe, but stopped making it, despite huge demand in California (many more people pre-paid for these cars than they actually made), etc.
The fact is, there's just no motivation out there for greedy (as they should be, it's their purpose) companies.
-Jesse
So, let's all drive 8 MPG, 6000+ lb. vehicles that roll over at the drop of a hat, and still kill the drivers just as easily when crashing into a similarly sized vehicle. Your body is traveling X miles an hour whether or not you're in a 6000 lb vehicle or a 1000 lb vehicle, and crash deceleration can happen as easily in a large vehicle as a small vehicle, so there's no inherent benefit to driving a large vehicle unless you hit another smaller one. A very stiff vehicle is worse in an accident than one that smooshes. We're screwed either way though. The benefit to small, lightweight, efficient cars is we won't be dicking over the environment at the same time. It's much like an arms race in vehicular mass, but in the end the trees always win no matter how large you are.
-Jesse
I'm not sure if you're aware, but most cars nowadays are built in mostly one piece. They're usually called "unibody", as opposed to having a frame that the body is attached to. Everything from the Chevy Metro to the new Ferrari Enzo uses Unibody technology, though the Chevy is built from spit and tape and the Enzo is built from carbon fiber. The Unibodies usually also have bolt-on quarterpanels and bumpers, the most likely areas to be damaged in a light accident, thus being replaceable.
-Jesse
Technically though... isn't it? The helicopter is buoyed up by the pressure differential across the rotor. It's just instead of a water-air, or air-helium boundary, we have an air-air boundary... Does that count?
-Jesse
This just in - the housekeeping industry is absolutely appalled at the lack of men in the profession. They have started summer housekeeping camps for highschool boys to try and attract more into the career.
More breaking news, the garbage collection industry has decided that it is also appalled at the lack of women in the industry, and has also started its own garbage-based summer camps for kids.
-Jesse
Now that I think about it, I'll bet the developed ability to switch the dominant eye is based on having slightly different vision in each eye (whether it be direction, color, or focus). Visual feedback is perfect for learning stupid human tricks like this.
-Jesse
I get the slightly different color effect too. Mine are red-left, and green-right (very slight tinting for either eye). I also have developed the skills to switch which eye is dominant at the moment but I never use it (both my eyes see clearly equally well). I always notice it when my brain auto-switches the dominant eye though, everything will either red or green shift :D
:)
Learn something every day
-Jesse
Already been done...
-Jesse - Rewrites code for my car's ECU.