But you learn SO MUCH about how your system works. Afterwards you're able to use your computer so much better, since you know how it got that way in the first place. The documentation guides you very well through the process, too. If you aren't capable of installing from the command line, you won't be able to fix any problems from the command line either.
Ok, it's actually pretty simple. Imagine a box that will spit two balls out, one red and one blue, but you don't know which comes out on which end. Alice takes the balls coming out of one side, and Bob the other. They don't look at them. When they get home, and want to send something encrypted, they take out the balls (which are in order, of course) and Alice encrypts her message with the key coded into her balls. Then Bob can decrypt it by using the opposite of the key coded on his balls. In the quantum world, however, it's a bit different. When you measure the state of a ball, it actually changes the state, so you can only measure it once. Also, the "balls" (particles in this case) don't actually HAVE a definite state until you look at them. This can be proven, but I don't really want to go into the details, they're really confusing. The important part is, you can get two sets of particles to randomize themselves, match exactly, and not work more than one time. The message itself has to be transmitted slower-than-light, however, since you can't affect the balls' colors, only measure them.
This guide is a non-technical, irreverent critique of electronic dance music. Its purpose is to entertain before it inforums. I suppose it could be used as a credited resource or educational primer, but that's not recommended since I made most of it up. Several biases here are celebrated lavishly, because downcasting people for their taste in music is close-minded. Except if their taste in music sucks.
I like competition as much as the next guy, but I'm worried that if this turns into a "Browser War" we're going to end up with conflicting standards: widgets that only work with Microsoft products, and then widgets that only work with Mozilla/Opera/KHTML. And then we'd be stuck coding two different versions of each widget, or doing hacks like are currently done in CSS to get it to work on winIE.
They won't do this, because Apple software is designed to run on Apple hardware. This is so they can make sure that every configuration works well. If they were to do this, they'd have to get their OS and drivers to work with all sorts of stuff you could plug in, or risk ruining the overall experience.
Windows Update evaluates a Globally Unique Identifier (GUID) that is stored on your computer to uniquely
identify it. The GUID does not contain any information that can be used to identify you.
Note that it is identifying your computer, just not you personally.
How are you going to get a virus on your picture frame by running WinCE? Sure, Linux is cheaper, but the security doesn't matter as long as the picture frame isn't connected to anything else.
The only problem was the excessive amount of sidetalkin' involved in using it as a phone. And the fact that you had to take the battery out to change games.
The article says: "Once the standard parcels are defined, they can be sold to the highest bidders," Huber writes. "To keep for how long? Forever. Just like land." If just one UHF (ultrahigh frequency) television station in Los Angeles were permitted to transfer its spectrum to a third cellular provider, Huber estimates, "the overall public gain would be about $1 billion, or so the government itself estimated in 1992." Wireless technologies would be huge winners, if the spectrum were privatized.
I'm not sure how well this would work; we'd need new legislation to make sure one wealthy person wasn't hogging a large slice of the spectrum. And it probably would result in temporary anarchy as different private owners grabbed different sections of the spectrum. I still think it's a bad idea overall; the FCC needs some sort of reforming, but this is not the way to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
But you learn SO MUCH about how your system works. Afterwards you're able to use your computer so much better, since you know how it got that way in the first place. The documentation guides you very well through the process, too. If you aren't capable of installing from the command line, you won't be able to fix any problems from the command line either.
Does your software account for shrinking distances at relativistic speeds?
Parent's joke was shamelessly stolen from here: http://www.spamusement.com/view.php?id=43
Ok, it's actually pretty simple. Imagine a box that will spit two balls out, one red and one blue, but you don't know which comes out on which end. Alice takes the balls coming out of one side, and Bob the other. They don't look at them. When they get home, and want to send something encrypted, they take out the balls (which are in order, of course) and Alice encrypts her message with the key coded into her balls. Then Bob can decrypt it by using the opposite of the key coded on his balls.
In the quantum world, however, it's a bit different. When you measure the state of a ball, it actually changes the state, so you can only measure it once. Also, the "balls" (particles in this case) don't actually HAVE a definite state until you look at them. This can be proven, but I don't really want to go into the details, they're really confusing. The important part is, you can get two sets of particles to randomize themselves, match exactly, and not work more than one time.
The message itself has to be transmitted slower-than-light, however, since you can't affect the balls' colors, only measure them.
No, because as soon as you touch, change, or measure the particle, it will stop being entangled.
The web page is a joke. ;)
Maybe because then virus and spyware creators would start targeting them more, just making them look really stupid?
Seems like this would be useful for people trying to build clusters with commodity hardware.
Well, not exactly all OS X users, just the ones who installed the "X11" package off of their developer CDs.
I like competition as much as the next guy, but I'm worried that if this turns into a "Browser War" we're going to end up with conflicting standards: widgets that only work with Microsoft products, and then widgets that only work with Mozilla/Opera/KHTML. And then we'd be stuck coding two different versions of each widget, or doing hacks like are currently done in CSS to get it to work on winIE.
They won't do this, because Apple software is designed to run on Apple hardware. This is so they can make sure that every configuration works well. If they were to do this, they'd have to get their OS and drivers to work with all sorts of stuff you could plug in, or risk ruining the overall experience.
Have you considered that there may be different people working on RSS and IE-compliant page rendering?
Note that it is identifying your computer, just not you personally.
How are you going to get a virus on your picture frame by running WinCE? Sure, Linux is cheaper, but the security doesn't matter as long as the picture frame isn't connected to anything else.
Would that be an isotope of Administratium?
They forgot megaman!
The only problem was the excessive amount of sidetalkin' involved in using it as a phone. And the fact that you had to take the battery out to change games.
as soon as your keys leave the keyboard
;)
It would be kinda hard to type on a keyboard with no keys...
How can emulation (running Java in a virtual machine) be any faster than running a native executable?
CSS3? IE doesn't even support most of CSS2 correctly. I don't think the CSS3 spec is finished yet, anyway.
The article says:
"Once the standard parcels are defined, they can be sold to the highest bidders," Huber writes. "To keep for how long? Forever. Just like land." If just one UHF (ultrahigh frequency) television station in Los Angeles were permitted to transfer its spectrum to a third cellular provider, Huber estimates, "the overall public gain would be about $1 billion, or so the government itself estimated in 1992." Wireless technologies would be huge winners, if the spectrum were privatized.
I'm not sure how well this would work; we'd need new legislation to make sure one wealthy person wasn't hogging a large slice of the spectrum. And it probably would result in temporary anarchy as different private owners grabbed different sections of the spectrum. I still think it's a bad idea overall; the FCC needs some sort of reforming, but this is not the way to do it.
A link to the english front page, since the submitter seems to not have realized that it was in german. ;)
Here's a quick babelfish translation.