They can collect my DNA off their face. This law is too loosly worded and gives much to much leeway in applying it. This gives the government a thumbs up to illegaly detain and collect DNA from any person they want.
I have an Ipod. And I have a Dell DJ30 (for Rhapsody to go). And the Dell sucks in unimaginable ways compared to the Ipod in terms of user interface.
It's slow.
The controls don't respond instantly.
The little scroll wheel is MUCH too sensitive and impossible to use while riding a bike, or driving a car, or walking fast.
The feature set is lacking in terms of playlists and shuffle/repeat modes.
Ok to give you an example, Say you hit pause to put the player to sleep because you don't feel like holding the tiny power button down for 6 seconds. When you want to power it back on you hold down power for an eternity and it finally comes up. But none of the buttons work for the first 10 seconds after turning it on because it's CPU is being used to initialize everything, but the display is siting there showing the last song you were listening to. Finally after now 20 seconds since you hit power the buttons start working. You hit play and wait, and wait and wait and finally it begins to play the song you were listening to when it went to sleep.
You are listening to a track and want to listen to the next or previous song so you hit a track button. It takes 5-10 secons to change a track. This doesn't sound unbearable unless you consider it takes almost 30-45 secons to go forward 6 tracks. This thing is unbelievably slow with regards to changing songs, loading playlists, etc.
My ipod on the other hand is instant. It changes tracks as fast as I can press the button.
The DJ? To fast forward through a song you have to hold down the track change button. And hold it. And hold it. And 15 seconds later it finally begins to fast forward through the song.
Dell screwed up big time by under powering what ever process they use for the operating system. The sound quality and everything is fine, but the interface is so slow and clunky that if it weren't for the wma to go capability I would have sent it back.
And I don't see this new ditty player to be any better.
You don't get more power by adding hydrogen to your engine intake. There has to be a proper ratio of fuel to air in order for efficient combustion to occurr and the ration isn't 1:1. If you add more fuel (hydrogen is a fuel) your richening the mixture which makes it burn inefficently and actually increases emissions and decreases power.
You have to have more oxygen in the combustion chamber when you add more fuel. The only way to do that is by forced induction. This is a bullshit product.
Hey all we have are ideas about our climate. We are still learning about it. There is so much more to learn that we can't call any idea we have about things concrete.
If we can't predict the weather a month from now how do you expect to predict it 30 years from now? The fact that we can only deal with averages and best guesses when predicting the weather proves that we don't understand our climate.
Until the day we have weather prediction that includes all the holidays for the year and exactly what the temperatures and precipitation for those will be then we really can't say we can predict anything.
The climate is a complex, chaotic system. There is no "tipping point" It's a dynamic system, not something static that can be measured in such a way a 5 yr old can understand it. It is INFINITEly complex and we don't understand anything about it's processes. We only have the slightest, most vague idea how it all comes together.
Yeah, we can do weather forcasts, try to predict where a hurricane is going to make landfall, but they are all little better than guesses.
Guesses don't equal fact.
Do you even have the foggiest idea how much energy it would take to raise the average temperature of the earth by 1 degree???
More energy than man posseses. It takes the energy of something like the sun. And the total energy of mankind wouldn't even equal a solar flare, much less the power of the sun.
The same with carbon emmissions. Humans might have an impact on an environment. But to affect teh global climate? To raise the temperature of the earth? Get real.
To put this on a smaller scale, just think how hard it would be to raise the temperature of one of the great lakes by 1 degree. Now imagine all the worlds oceans, all the land, all the atmosphere that extends thousands of feet into space.
The earths temp goes through cycles.
1. Man does not have the power to drasticly alter the temperature of the earth.
2. We couldn't have stopped the ice melting anyway. Now they are trying to make it look like we are the reason this is happening.
That is about as dumb as saying human beings cause volcanos or plate techtonics to change. Or sunspots for that matter.
Even if we had a nuclear war and covered the earth in darkness it would recover within a few years.
Carbon emissions from cars did NOT cause the climate to change. The fact is the climate changes all the time. It did it before man, it did it during man, and it will do it when man is gone.
From the point of view of denying the recording company of revenue, how is peer 2 peer file sharing any different from the used music market?
A new CD is pressed. Someone buys it and the record company gets money. That person listens a few months and then sells it to a used CD store and gets some of his money back. The CD is sold the next day to someone and the store gets some money back but the record company gets no money for the transaction. So when you buy used music the record companies get nothing for it. By buying used music instead of new music you are denying the record companies money .
Now the p2p version.
Someone buys a new CD and the record company gets money. The person copies the CD and puts up mp3's on kazaa lite. People download copies of the CD but neither the person nor the record company get money. In this scenario it is the buyer who gets short changed. In both scenarios the record companies get squat past the initial purchase.
You can't argue that p2p is 'theft' because it denies the record companies revenue. There are plenty of perfectly legal ways to listen to music that also deny the companies revenue and we don't call them theft.
Is it stealing when you rent a DVD instead of buying it? If you rent, then Blockbuster gets some money but the movie studios don't. When you buy a DVD they make more money. How is this any different?
You cannot call something which does not deprive a person of property 'theft'. If I copy a song it does not destroy the original. When our forefathers instituted copyright it was for 7 years and was meant as a method for an individual to recover money for their contribution. Now we have 90year copyrights. And you wonder why people copy music?
If you want to see where IT is heading then take a look at manufacturing. When was the last time you picked up a pair of sneakers that were made in the USA? How about a shirt or a childrens toy?
I liked one persons comment about America becoming a services country. It's a true statement because we don't really manufacture a lot of what we use. Even American companies often build their products in other nations. Chrysler PT Cruisers are built in Mexico for instance.
The only reason this hasn't happened as much in the automobile industry is because of unionization and tarrifs. Is it wrong to buy a Honda when its made in the USA at a Honda plant? The only industry I think I could confidently say is outsourcing proof is defense. That's is only because we spend more money on our military than just about any other nation on the planet.
The fact is, that outsourcing will continue but that eventually the market will stabilize. And it's pretty true that the only people that really profit from outsourcing are the rich. After all, Nikes are still $50, that didn't change when they went over to cheap labor and $25 an item profits.
It's funny to think that we live in a large country with billions of acres of undeveloped land, yet one of the highest costs of living we endure is housing costs. Hopefully as our work habits change and working remotely becomes more mainstream it will be possible to live in Wyoming where land can be had for a song and still make a good living. People go to cities for the jobs, but what happens when the jobs become de-centralized?
Why should I even answer such a sarcastic question?
Ok.
The earth had no oxygen at all in it's atmosphere when the first life formed on our planet. It was all carbon dioxide, brought up by volcanism. Then, some primative bacteria began producing oxygen as a waste product. This went on for millions of years until life developed that 'gasp' used oxygen as a fuel instead of carbon dioxide. Oxygen is a POISON you see so this completely changed the face of the earth, driving most anabolic organisms deep under the surface in oxygen free zones.
However some organisms like plants evolved to make the best of the situation and they continue to consume carbon dioxide and expel oxygen as a waste product just like those primative bacteria.
It's worth mentioning that algae also scrub the atmosphere of excess carbon dioxide, giving us oxygen.
So when I talk about the earth having checks and balances this is what I'm talking about. If the climate changes, it will grant some species an edge over others. Lets use ocean plankton and algae as an example. A warmer ocean will let them grow faster and produce more offspring. More carbon dioxide means more food for them. The more they reproduce and thrive, the more carbon dioxide they consume.
I'm not making this shit up either. It is PROVEN FACT that the temperature of the earth fluctuated wildly, long before man entered the picture. And the ocean levels have gone up and down by several hundred feet as the ice caps froze and melted.
Don't forget that most of the central united states was under water at some point in the permian basin. And all without the benefit of man to blame it on.
Like I said, we would like to think we have some control over our planet and that if something is changing we have the power to stop it. But we would be fooling ourselves to think we can make a significant impact to our global weather.
Why don't you read a climatology text book and study prehistoric geology and then come up with a more compelling argument than sarcasm.
The earth is cooler than it has been for much of it's life. The earth was a much hotter and more humid place during the time of the dinosaurs. If you look back at climate history for a few million years you will see that the earth is always getting warmer and colder in cycles. It's natural, and it happened long before the automobile.
In fact, the earth had more carbon dioxide than oxygen when life began. The fact is that as much as we might like to think we are so powerfull we can permanently change the earths climate it just isn't so. It is a very complex system but like all things in nature it has checks and balances. If one variable (like CO2) increases the temperature, other variables balance it out.
We have some dread fascination with global disasters. In the 60's it was global nuclear annihalation. In the 70's and 80's it was acid rain. In the 90's it was global warming and asteroids.
I don't worry about it. Even if the ice caps melt and the seawater rises it won't be the end. Because areas that are currently uninhabitable like northern canada, siberia, antarctica, would be warm enough to sustain crops and for people to live in larger numbers. It would open shipping lanes through the north pole that would cut down on the cost of the global economy and open up new paths to our neighbors. We would gain as much land as we would loose to flooding. And the northern lattitudes have some of the most fertile soil in the world thanks to glacial action.
Also consider how long it would take to replace the satellites. It's not easy to build and launch a replacement. We would be incapacitated for a long time.
There is really no way to avoid this. We all rely on communications for both public and military needs. The speed and in-accessibility of orbital platforms make surface based defense of orbiting satellites almost impossible.
An orbiting weapons platform in space is almost untouchable except to other orbiting weapons. This means that if another nation put a weapon into orbit that could launch on another nation or take out their satellites, that nation would be helpless unless it had it's own orbiting weapon.
Imagine the havoc that would be wreaked upon us if we suddenly lost satellite communications. No long distance, no TV, internet would be affected, we would effectively be rendered helpless. People would fall into mass hysteria without communication with the outside world. Think "Trigger effect" but on a national scale.
I hate weapons. I hate war. But I have to be realistic about the whole thing. It's going to happen. You can either be prepared for it, or pretend it's not a problem.
I use both a PC and a Mac. After some time with the Mac I could nail down the main difference in philosophy and user base between the two.
PC's are like a home built car. You can buy pre-made kits but it's still a kit car. You can customize it out the wazoo to have something utterly unique and you can make it do what you want. Want a sport car, make it low and wide. Want an offroad car, make it big and beefy. The PC approach means high flexibility but some reliablilty issues and it means some parts don't always want to work together and when it breaks you fix it.
Mac is more like a production car. Sure it's not going to beat a high performance kit car in price or in performance, but everything fits properly, all the pieces work together and offer you simplicity. You turn the key and it goes. It breaks, the dealer fixes it. But, it looks like every other car from that same model, has the same performance as anyone else who bought that model, the same factory colors etc. You sacrifice flexibility in the design and it takes more effort to customize it to your needs. Apples are great. You take it out of the box and turn it on and your done. Want to add an Apple upgrade? Just plug it in, your done.
PC's are an open architecture with parts made everywhere. You get to pick and choose what you want but there is no garauntee that everything is going to work together.
Some people want to just put the key in and go. Some people want to pick and choose. Different people, different philosophies. Both valid.
I believe the center wheel set is to keep the chassis from bottoming out over the edge of each stair step when going back up the stairs and to provide extra traction when climing stairs. However as you can see and hear from the video it still slips and has to claw at each step to make it up. A larger wheel and ground clearance could do this better with 4 wheels instead of 6. He should have built it on a Traxxas E-Maxx platform if he wanted to climb over rought terrain and stairs easily.
Jesus, I have to laugh when I read something like this. Cell phones do NOT use microwaves. They transmit at 1800-1900mhz, less than the portable headsets, and wireless game controllers people use everyday that are 2.4ghz.
The only mobile phones that use microwaves are Iridum sattelite phones. Check your facts..
Because when you buy a used CD no money goes back to the artists because it's used. I don't care how you try to label it, copying music is not theft. You aren't depriving anybody of anything.
If you want to see real copyright abuse don't look at downloaders. Look at 75+ year copyrights that keep getting extended. Look at corporations that own copyrights that will never expire as long as the corporation exists. Copyright law in the U.S. was made to allow artists to make a living but the work was supposed to be returend to the public domain. Now the works stay in the private domain indefinately due to a corrupt system of kickbacks and lobbying.
Wow a lecture on networking. It's so nice that peoples opinions on networking and security give them a high perch with which to look down on others.
I'm not some bumpkin who got a router for xmas. I work for a major telecommunications company at a high level troubleshooting networking issues in a wireless environment. GPRS, WAP, in addition to circuit switched networks. You might not think I know my shit but you would be wrong.
And I do know the difference between a firewall and a router. And you don't have to explain how the internet works to me.
From the perspective of blocking packets from outside of your private network, any cheap home networking router will absolutely isolate you. And it's the outside in that I care about on my home lan. If I don't explicitly open a port to my private wan from the lan side, then nobody on the net can reach it. I would call that a pretty effective, if simplified, solution.
Maybe I didn't understand what the original poster was looking for. In an enterprise environment you certainly need a better firewall solution than a home router, but I thought he was talking about securing a machine or two on a home network.
And a router is generally less hackable/exploitable than a software firewall like zonealarm. Not to mention you only need to modify one configuration instead of setting up each machine independently. And when a soft firewall has problems it generally destroys your network stack preventing you from getting on any network, despite uninstalling and deleting it. I have witnessed hundreds of blue screens of death from fellow engineers when their software firewalls started acting up. That's why the first thing I did on my work laptop was to remove it completely.
And it's not firewalls that generally allow you to be hacked. It's much easier to hack someone's apache server or other service running behind the firewall, execute a buffer overflow exploit and then connect out than it is to find an exploit in the router or firewall software.
Hmm. Considering a router completely isolates your private subnet from the internet except for ports you specifically open to the outside world. Yes I would consider it a firewall. My firewall has saved me from several hacking attempts after people breached my apache webserver and attempted to take down software firewalls on my server they then tried to remote connect out but I had the ports blocked on the router and they did not succeed in gaining root priv or remote access to my box other than the limited buffer over run exploit. They could make my box receptive to remote control but couldn't actually connect to it.
And my real world experience with software firewalls has lead me to absolutely believe they are more performance impacting than a router firewall. They cause plenty of connection headaches and when they break, it really screws your machine up and kicks you off the network all together.
I would encourage anybody and everybody to research the history of copyright law. I think you would be surprised at how much the laws have changed purpose from allowing new ideas to be rewarded but ultimately allowing the public to use and re-use them, to having 100 year copyrights that give nearly indefinite privileges to the copyright holders with little or no public benefit or use.
Imagine what the world would be like today if Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Bach, Beethoven, and Vivaldi still had copyrights going..... Imagine a world where Shakespeare, Bronte, Byron, Longfellow, and Dickens could not be re-interpreted, reprinted, or read without copyright permission.....
The public has a fundamental right to free access to these works. To re-interpret them, and to use them in new and interesting ways. And now this freedom is under attack by Hollywood and the music industry at an unprecedented scale. They have extended the length of copyrights so many times in the last 50 years that some copyrights, such as Disney's Mickey Mouse, that should have expired already are now covered well into the next millennium. By reforming and extending copyrights, the government is essentially ensuring that these works NEVER enter the public domain.
As a society we have a public consciousness. Nobody has original ideas, or original thoughts. Everything we are, is a result of public interactions. When an artist writes a song, or a book, or a movie, they are taking from their interactions with society and the world, re-interpreting them, and creating something different. But you don't see them giving any money to the public for the ground work of their art. Under the original copyright laws the owner would be able to recoup expenses and turn a profit but the work would become public domain within a span of years instead of decades or centuries. When a work of art is returned to the public domain the cycle begins anew, with new people reworking our collective ideas to come up with something different, and then that work is returned to the public domain which inspires new art, and so on, and so forth, that is the way it is supposed to be.
When you stack the deck in favor of Hollywood, like the supreme court has done on countless occasions, you interrupt that cycle and new work cannot be done without being sued for copyright infringement.
The supreme court ruled today that P2P file sharing programs can be held liable for piracy on their networks. This ruling has dire consequences for the free exchange of ideas. It will NOT stop piracy. But it will give Hollywood and the MPAA the tools to dismantle public networks in the name of copyright infringement. It paves the way for even more legislation to take away public rights and further the profits of mega corporations.
Our founding fathers believed in the idea of revolution. They believed that the only way to maintain freedom, was to give the people the power to revolt against their government. Our freedoms and liberties are being systematically reduced and offset to pave the way for private interests to become richer and richer. Our fundamental rights are being sold off, wholesale, by a corrupt judicial and legislative system.
I for one will NOT allow my freedoms to be sold to the highest bidder. I will revolt. I will not give an inch to these money grubbing swine. I will revolt with my dollars. With my paycheck. I will not spend my hard earned money on movies and music that feed the system. I will willingly champion and patronize the artists themselves whenever possible but I will under mine, disrupt, and batter the corporate interests at every opportunity presented.
If the government passes a law that the people do not believe in, and that cannot be enforced, then that law is null an void in the hearts of the people and we WILL not abide them.
Your argument is based on the peole being able to buy goods and services. If they are laid off they won't be buying any IBM products will they? When you slash the work force in the name of profits the ONLY people who benefit are the shareholders and corporate management. The common man gets NOTHING of value out of it.
People, if you want to see the future of the IT field in a world market look at manufacturing. How many products are made in the USA anymore? It does not bode well.
There are plenty of skilled people here in the USA. We have the best colleges, and some of the brightest people. If it is about saving money then why not set up operations in the midwest where housing and the cost of living are low? That would keep the jobs in American hands as well as re-vitalize the economies of the poorest states and counties in America.
somehow he added himself to my localhosts file so I hacked in and got access to all his files. I can see everything on his computer!
Not, This is a hoax, who would be that dumb?
Slashdot Mirror
They can collect my DNA off their face. This law is too loosly worded and gives much to much leeway in applying it. This gives the government a thumbs up to illegaly detain and collect DNA from any person they want.
I have an Ipod. And I have a Dell DJ30 (for Rhapsody to go). And the Dell sucks in unimaginable ways compared to the Ipod in terms of user interface. It's slow. The controls don't respond instantly. The little scroll wheel is MUCH too sensitive and impossible to use while riding a bike, or driving a car, or walking fast. The feature set is lacking in terms of playlists and shuffle/repeat modes. Ok to give you an example, Say you hit pause to put the player to sleep because you don't feel like holding the tiny power button down for 6 seconds. When you want to power it back on you hold down power for an eternity and it finally comes up. But none of the buttons work for the first 10 seconds after turning it on because it's CPU is being used to initialize everything, but the display is siting there showing the last song you were listening to. Finally after now 20 seconds since you hit power the buttons start working. You hit play and wait, and wait and wait and finally it begins to play the song you were listening to when it went to sleep. You are listening to a track and want to listen to the next or previous song so you hit a track button. It takes 5-10 secons to change a track. This doesn't sound unbearable unless you consider it takes almost 30-45 secons to go forward 6 tracks. This thing is unbelievably slow with regards to changing songs, loading playlists, etc. My ipod on the other hand is instant. It changes tracks as fast as I can press the button. The DJ? To fast forward through a song you have to hold down the track change button. And hold it. And hold it. And 15 seconds later it finally begins to fast forward through the song. Dell screwed up big time by under powering what ever process they use for the operating system. The sound quality and everything is fine, but the interface is so slow and clunky that if it weren't for the wma to go capability I would have sent it back. And I don't see this new ditty player to be any better.
You don't get more power by adding hydrogen to your engine intake. There has to be a proper ratio of fuel to air in order for efficient combustion to occurr and the ration isn't 1:1. If you add more fuel (hydrogen is a fuel) your richening the mixture which makes it burn inefficently and actually increases emissions and decreases power. You have to have more oxygen in the combustion chamber when you add more fuel. The only way to do that is by forced induction. This is a bullshit product.
Hey all we have are ideas about our climate. We are still learning about it. There is so much more to learn that we can't call any idea we have about things concrete. If we can't predict the weather a month from now how do you expect to predict it 30 years from now? The fact that we can only deal with averages and best guesses when predicting the weather proves that we don't understand our climate. Until the day we have weather prediction that includes all the holidays for the year and exactly what the temperatures and precipitation for those will be then we really can't say we can predict anything. The climate is a complex, chaotic system. There is no "tipping point" It's a dynamic system, not something static that can be measured in such a way a 5 yr old can understand it. It is INFINITEly complex and we don't understand anything about it's processes. We only have the slightest, most vague idea how it all comes together. Yeah, we can do weather forcasts, try to predict where a hurricane is going to make landfall, but they are all little better than guesses. Guesses don't equal fact.
Do you even have the foggiest idea how much energy it would take to raise the average temperature of the earth by 1 degree??? More energy than man posseses. It takes the energy of something like the sun. And the total energy of mankind wouldn't even equal a solar flare, much less the power of the sun. The same with carbon emmissions. Humans might have an impact on an environment. But to affect teh global climate? To raise the temperature of the earth? Get real. To put this on a smaller scale, just think how hard it would be to raise the temperature of one of the great lakes by 1 degree. Now imagine all the worlds oceans, all the land, all the atmosphere that extends thousands of feet into space.
The earths temp goes through cycles. 1. Man does not have the power to drasticly alter the temperature of the earth. 2. We couldn't have stopped the ice melting anyway. Now they are trying to make it look like we are the reason this is happening. That is about as dumb as saying human beings cause volcanos or plate techtonics to change. Or sunspots for that matter. Even if we had a nuclear war and covered the earth in darkness it would recover within a few years. Carbon emissions from cars did NOT cause the climate to change. The fact is the climate changes all the time. It did it before man, it did it during man, and it will do it when man is gone.
Damn straight. We can't rightly call ourselves the good guys if we use the same underhanded tactics and lawless means that our enemies do.
From the point of view of denying the recording company of revenue, how is peer 2 peer file sharing any different from the used music market? A new CD is pressed. Someone buys it and the record company gets money. That person listens a few months and then sells it to a used CD store and gets some of his money back. The CD is sold the next day to someone and the store gets some money back but the record company gets no money for the transaction. So when you buy used music the record companies get nothing for it. By buying used music instead of new music you are denying the record companies money . Now the p2p version. Someone buys a new CD and the record company gets money. The person copies the CD and puts up mp3's on kazaa lite. People download copies of the CD but neither the person nor the record company get money. In this scenario it is the buyer who gets short changed. In both scenarios the record companies get squat past the initial purchase. You can't argue that p2p is 'theft' because it denies the record companies revenue. There are plenty of perfectly legal ways to listen to music that also deny the companies revenue and we don't call them theft. Is it stealing when you rent a DVD instead of buying it? If you rent, then Blockbuster gets some money but the movie studios don't. When you buy a DVD they make more money. How is this any different? You cannot call something which does not deprive a person of property 'theft'. If I copy a song it does not destroy the original. When our forefathers instituted copyright it was for 7 years and was meant as a method for an individual to recover money for their contribution. Now we have 90year copyrights. And you wonder why people copy music?
If you want to see where IT is heading then take a look at manufacturing. When was the last time you picked up a pair of sneakers that were made in the USA? How about a shirt or a childrens toy? I liked one persons comment about America becoming a services country. It's a true statement because we don't really manufacture a lot of what we use. Even American companies often build their products in other nations. Chrysler PT Cruisers are built in Mexico for instance. The only reason this hasn't happened as much in the automobile industry is because of unionization and tarrifs. Is it wrong to buy a Honda when its made in the USA at a Honda plant? The only industry I think I could confidently say is outsourcing proof is defense. That's is only because we spend more money on our military than just about any other nation on the planet. The fact is, that outsourcing will continue but that eventually the market will stabilize. And it's pretty true that the only people that really profit from outsourcing are the rich. After all, Nikes are still $50, that didn't change when they went over to cheap labor and $25 an item profits. It's funny to think that we live in a large country with billions of acres of undeveloped land, yet one of the highest costs of living we endure is housing costs. Hopefully as our work habits change and working remotely becomes more mainstream it will be possible to live in Wyoming where land can be had for a song and still make a good living. People go to cities for the jobs, but what happens when the jobs become de-centralized?
It's a tabloid and not a journalistic newspaper.
Why should I even answer such a sarcastic question?
Ok.
The earth had no oxygen at all in it's atmosphere when the first life formed on our planet. It was all carbon dioxide, brought up by volcanism. Then, some primative bacteria began producing oxygen as a waste product. This went on for millions of years until life developed that 'gasp' used oxygen as a fuel instead of carbon dioxide. Oxygen is a POISON you see so this completely changed the face of the earth, driving most anabolic organisms deep under the surface in oxygen free zones.
However some organisms like plants evolved to make the best of the situation and they continue to consume carbon dioxide and expel oxygen as a waste product just like those primative bacteria.
It's worth mentioning that algae also scrub the atmosphere of excess carbon dioxide, giving us oxygen.
So when I talk about the earth having checks and balances this is what I'm talking about. If the climate changes, it will grant some species an edge over others. Lets use ocean plankton and algae as an example. A warmer ocean will let them grow faster and produce more offspring. More carbon dioxide means more food for them. The more they reproduce and thrive, the more carbon dioxide they consume.
I'm not making this shit up either. It is PROVEN FACT that the temperature of the earth fluctuated wildly, long before man entered the picture. And the ocean levels have gone up and down by several hundred feet as the ice caps froze and melted.
Don't forget that most of the central united states was under water at some point in the permian basin. And all without the benefit of man to blame it on.
Like I said, we would like to think we have some control over our planet and that if something is changing we have the power to stop it. But we would be fooling ourselves to think we can make a significant impact to our global weather.
Why don't you read a climatology text book and study prehistoric geology and then come up with a more compelling argument than sarcasm.
The earth is cooler than it has been for much of it's life. The earth was a much hotter and more humid place during the time of the dinosaurs. If you look back at climate history for a few million years you will see that the earth is always getting warmer and colder in cycles. It's natural, and it happened long before the automobile.
In fact, the earth had more carbon dioxide than oxygen when life began. The fact is that as much as we might like to think we are so powerfull we can permanently change the earths climate it just isn't so. It is a very complex system but like all things in nature it has checks and balances. If one variable (like CO2) increases the temperature, other variables balance it out.
We have some dread fascination with global disasters. In the 60's it was global nuclear annihalation. In the 70's and 80's it was acid rain. In the 90's it was global warming and asteroids.
I don't worry about it. Even if the ice caps melt and the seawater rises it won't be the end. Because areas that are currently uninhabitable like northern canada, siberia, antarctica, would be warm enough to sustain crops and for people to live in larger numbers. It would open shipping lanes through the north pole that would cut down on the cost of the global economy and open up new paths to our neighbors. We would gain as much land as we would loose to flooding. And the northern lattitudes have some of the most fertile soil in the world thanks to glacial action.
Also consider how long it would take to replace the satellites. It's not easy to build and launch a replacement. We would be incapacitated for a long time.
There is really no way to avoid this. We all rely on communications for both public and military needs. The speed and in-accessibility of orbital platforms make surface based defense of orbiting satellites almost impossible. An orbiting weapons platform in space is almost untouchable except to other orbiting weapons. This means that if another nation put a weapon into orbit that could launch on another nation or take out their satellites, that nation would be helpless unless it had it's own orbiting weapon. Imagine the havoc that would be wreaked upon us if we suddenly lost satellite communications. No long distance, no TV, internet would be affected, we would effectively be rendered helpless. People would fall into mass hysteria without communication with the outside world. Think "Trigger effect" but on a national scale. I hate weapons. I hate war. But I have to be realistic about the whole thing. It's going to happen. You can either be prepared for it, or pretend it's not a problem.
I use both a PC and a Mac. After some time with the Mac I could nail down the main difference in philosophy and user base between the two. PC's are like a home built car. You can buy pre-made kits but it's still a kit car. You can customize it out the wazoo to have something utterly unique and you can make it do what you want. Want a sport car, make it low and wide. Want an offroad car, make it big and beefy. The PC approach means high flexibility but some reliablilty issues and it means some parts don't always want to work together and when it breaks you fix it. Mac is more like a production car. Sure it's not going to beat a high performance kit car in price or in performance, but everything fits properly, all the pieces work together and offer you simplicity. You turn the key and it goes. It breaks, the dealer fixes it. But, it looks like every other car from that same model, has the same performance as anyone else who bought that model, the same factory colors etc. You sacrifice flexibility in the design and it takes more effort to customize it to your needs. Apples are great. You take it out of the box and turn it on and your done. Want to add an Apple upgrade? Just plug it in, your done. PC's are an open architecture with parts made everywhere. You get to pick and choose what you want but there is no garauntee that everything is going to work together. Some people want to just put the key in and go. Some people want to pick and choose. Different people, different philosophies. Both valid.
I believe the center wheel set is to keep the chassis from bottoming out over the edge of each stair step when going back up the stairs and to provide extra traction when climing stairs. However as you can see and hear from the video it still slips and has to claw at each step to make it up. A larger wheel and ground clearance could do this better with 4 wheels instead of 6. He should have built it on a Traxxas E-Maxx platform if he wanted to climb over rought terrain and stairs easily.
Jesus, I have to laugh when I read something like this. Cell phones do NOT use microwaves. They transmit at 1800-1900mhz, less than the portable headsets, and wireless game controllers people use everyday that are 2.4ghz. The only mobile phones that use microwaves are Iridum sattelite phones. Check your facts..
Because when you buy a used CD no money goes back to the artists because it's used. I don't care how you try to label it, copying music is not theft. You aren't depriving anybody of anything.
If you want to see real copyright abuse don't look at downloaders. Look at 75+ year copyrights that keep getting extended. Look at corporations that own copyrights that will never expire as long as the corporation exists. Copyright law in the U.S. was made to allow artists to make a living but the work was supposed to be returend to the public domain. Now the works stay in the private domain indefinately due to a corrupt system of kickbacks and lobbying.
Hehe typing too fast. I meant to say "If I don't explicitly open a port to my private lan from the wan side, then nobody on the net can reach it."
Wow a lecture on networking. It's so nice that peoples opinions on networking and security give them a high perch with which to look down on others. I'm not some bumpkin who got a router for xmas. I work for a major telecommunications company at a high level troubleshooting networking issues in a wireless environment. GPRS, WAP, in addition to circuit switched networks. You might not think I know my shit but you would be wrong. And I do know the difference between a firewall and a router. And you don't have to explain how the internet works to me. From the perspective of blocking packets from outside of your private network, any cheap home networking router will absolutely isolate you. And it's the outside in that I care about on my home lan. If I don't explicitly open a port to my private wan from the lan side, then nobody on the net can reach it. I would call that a pretty effective, if simplified, solution. Maybe I didn't understand what the original poster was looking for. In an enterprise environment you certainly need a better firewall solution than a home router, but I thought he was talking about securing a machine or two on a home network. And a router is generally less hackable/exploitable than a software firewall like zonealarm. Not to mention you only need to modify one configuration instead of setting up each machine independently. And when a soft firewall has problems it generally destroys your network stack preventing you from getting on any network, despite uninstalling and deleting it. I have witnessed hundreds of blue screens of death from fellow engineers when their software firewalls started acting up. That's why the first thing I did on my work laptop was to remove it completely. And it's not firewalls that generally allow you to be hacked. It's much easier to hack someone's apache server or other service running behind the firewall, execute a buffer overflow exploit and then connect out than it is to find an exploit in the router or firewall software.
Hmm. Considering a router completely isolates your private subnet from the internet except for ports you specifically open to the outside world. Yes I would consider it a firewall. My firewall has saved me from several hacking attempts after people breached my apache webserver and attempted to take down software firewalls on my server they then tried to remote connect out but I had the ports blocked on the router and they did not succeed in gaining root priv or remote access to my box other than the limited buffer over run exploit. They could make my box receptive to remote control but couldn't actually connect to it.
And my real world experience with software firewalls has lead me to absolutely believe they are more performance impacting than a router firewall. They cause plenty of connection headaches and when they break, it really screws your machine up and kicks you off the network all together.
I would encourage anybody and everybody to research the history of copyright law. I think you would be surprised at how much the laws have changed purpose from allowing new ideas to be rewarded but ultimately allowing the public to use and re-use them, to having 100 year copyrights that give nearly indefinite privileges to the copyright holders with little or no public benefit or use. Imagine what the world would be like today if Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Bach, Beethoven, and Vivaldi still had copyrights going..... Imagine a world where Shakespeare, Bronte, Byron, Longfellow, and Dickens could not be re-interpreted, reprinted, or read without copyright permission..... The public has a fundamental right to free access to these works. To re-interpret them, and to use them in new and interesting ways. And now this freedom is under attack by Hollywood and the music industry at an unprecedented scale. They have extended the length of copyrights so many times in the last 50 years that some copyrights, such as Disney's Mickey Mouse, that should have expired already are now covered well into the next millennium. By reforming and extending copyrights, the government is essentially ensuring that these works NEVER enter the public domain. As a society we have a public consciousness. Nobody has original ideas, or original thoughts. Everything we are, is a result of public interactions. When an artist writes a song, or a book, or a movie, they are taking from their interactions with society and the world, re-interpreting them, and creating something different. But you don't see them giving any money to the public for the ground work of their art. Under the original copyright laws the owner would be able to recoup expenses and turn a profit but the work would become public domain within a span of years instead of decades or centuries. When a work of art is returned to the public domain the cycle begins anew, with new people reworking our collective ideas to come up with something different, and then that work is returned to the public domain which inspires new art, and so on, and so forth, that is the way it is supposed to be. When you stack the deck in favor of Hollywood, like the supreme court has done on countless occasions, you interrupt that cycle and new work cannot be done without being sued for copyright infringement. The supreme court ruled today that P2P file sharing programs can be held liable for piracy on their networks. This ruling has dire consequences for the free exchange of ideas. It will NOT stop piracy. But it will give Hollywood and the MPAA the tools to dismantle public networks in the name of copyright infringement. It paves the way for even more legislation to take away public rights and further the profits of mega corporations. Our founding fathers believed in the idea of revolution. They believed that the only way to maintain freedom, was to give the people the power to revolt against their government. Our freedoms and liberties are being systematically reduced and offset to pave the way for private interests to become richer and richer. Our fundamental rights are being sold off, wholesale, by a corrupt judicial and legislative system. I for one will NOT allow my freedoms to be sold to the highest bidder. I will revolt. I will not give an inch to these money grubbing swine. I will revolt with my dollars. With my paycheck. I will not spend my hard earned money on movies and music that feed the system. I will willingly champion and patronize the artists themselves whenever possible but I will under mine, disrupt, and batter the corporate interests at every opportunity presented. If the government passes a law that the people do not believe in, and that cannot be enforced, then that law is null an void in the hearts of the people and we WILL not abide them.
Use a router. PAT and NAT are good enough firewall for me, and not crackable like a soft firewall, or performance impacting.
Your argument is based on the peole being able to buy goods and services. If they are laid off they won't be buying any IBM products will they? When you slash the work force in the name of profits the ONLY people who benefit are the shareholders and corporate management. The common man gets NOTHING of value out of it.
People, if you want to see the future of the IT field in a world market look at manufacturing. How many products are made in the USA anymore? It does not bode well.
There are plenty of skilled people here in the USA. We have the best colleges, and some of the brightest people. If it is about saving money then why not set up operations in the midwest where housing and the cost of living are low? That would keep the jobs in American hands as well as re-vitalize the economies of the poorest states and counties in America.
Now THAT would benefit the workers.
somehow he added himself to my localhosts file so I hacked in and got access to all his files. I can see everything on his computer! Not, This is a hoax, who would be that dumb?