They've actually done that. Big mechanical bunch of pins or something in the back of a chair. A camera that makes each pin act as a pixel and poke into the subject's back. Terribly unwieldy, but it does give people an image in their mind's eye.
I've submitted the following:
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is a legally binding set of basic rights for minors (http://www.unicef.org/crc/). The only two countries which are not signatories to the CRC are Somalia and the United States. Somalia has not had a functioning government for some time.
As President, would you seek the ratification the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?
Wasn't there a case of a news program basically ripping off someone's YouTube video, then the same guy uploaded to YouTube a recording of the original video being used on the program, and then got slapped with a DMCA notice.
It's a bit like spam: if email were $.50 a pop, then finding the one in a hundred people that will respond to your email costs you $50. Trolling court records is a lot harder if you have to get them in hardcopy or pay a fee.
You don't need multiverses, just a cyclical universe with infinite Big Bangs/Big Crunches. Each Big Bang throws the dice and resets the constants. Since there's an infinite number of universes in the past and the future, our universe has to show up eventually.
I despise- despise- pseudo-scientific mystical mumbo-jumbo about quantum entanglement. Yes, Einstein thought it was "spooky". And it is, and the behavior of entangled photons is indeed counterintuitive and violates classical notions of probability. But it does not, as far as anyone knows, violate either the speed of light or causality. Google "tachyon pistols thought experiment" to see what would happen if it could.
The basics of entanglement are thus: Person A produces an entangled pair of particles. He sends person B one half of the pair; if they're photons, probably through fiber-optic cables. Totally classical, speed-of-light communication. Now, the weird thing is that if person A observes his particle's spin, he can predict the spin of the other one with greater than random accuracy. That's weird, because both particles' spins are determined randomly (there's no "hidden variable" determined when they were created). But you can't poke one particle and see the other particle instantly wiggle, mainly because observing them destroys the entanglement.
1. Obtain 4 x 10^12 chunks of iron
2. Label them 1, 2, 3... 4000000000000 (optional)
3. Magnetize the nth chunk if the nth bit is one, don't magnetize it otherwise.
4. Ship to Viacom
One thing I've noticed is that most of my friends who I know (IRL) seem to have switched from AIM to GMail's chat (which is Jabber of course). I don't know how much of a bite gmail has taken from AIM, but I would wager it is nontrivial.
Surely the best, and most reasonable, way to choose your position on McCain would be to actually look at his actions and words and figure out, yourself, whether he is personally any of those things you ascribe to his generation. For example, his anti-gay marriage stance is a perfectly reasonable motive to oppose him, if that view is contrary to yours.
Saying "Most old people are evil old bastards" is just as wrong as saying "Most (Jews/blacks/Muslims) are evil bastards" even if you hold out the possibility that not all of them are. You're accusing an individual of holding prejudices based on a prejudice. That doesn't make any sense at all.
You can do this with HIV, too, sort of. I think it's immune globulin, that (in theory) if you take fast enough after exposure it'll alert your immune system and it will clobber the virus before it infiltrates your cells. It would mostly be useful for medics and people exposed to blood.
If you found a manuscript for a terrible play but could conclusively prove it was written by Shakespeare at the age of 11 (and was in his handwriting), there would be huge historical value in that. It might not be a good play, but it would be words from a specific historical context, from a specific historical person who is of great interest to us today.
It's called stereoblindness, I think. One eye is dominant (my right, I think everyone has a dominant eye) and usually I don't see double. Some people get stuck seeing double, especially if they weren't born with it. I can flip between looking through both (seeing double) and looking through (mostly) my right. I still perceive stuff in my left peripheral vision, but everything in front of me is taken over by my right eye. I wear glasses whose only purpose is to bend the light to try to line it up with my wonky eyes, and I think they help a bit. Certainly if I don't wear them for too long I start getting headaches.
Sometimes babies undergo surgery to fix their eyes if it's obvious they aren't working together. If it's done early enough, they sort of lock in and can see in stereo. At this point, though, I think the medical consensus is that surgery wouldn't actually help me.
Depth perception is actually remarkably easy to get around without. There are all sorts of monocular cues like perspective and parallax that can help with judging distances. Try walking around with one eye closed. Doors, especially, I imagine look very different to people who can perceive in 3D. They look more like flat parallelograms rather than 3D rectangles to me.
Not if you were born without stereoscopic vision. I've two, perfectly functional eyes (on their own) but they don't actually work together enough to produce 3D.
I've tried a program called cFosSpeed (Windows only I think?) that prioritizes packets quite well. The main point is to keep latency as low as possible, especially during uploads, and I think it would work quite well for VOIP.
Or, like Comcast I believe, the limit was in mp3s. As in "You can download the equivalent of xxxx songs in a month." I vote bandwidth caps should be given in Libraries of Congress.
Slashdot Mirror
They've actually done that. Big mechanical bunch of pins or something in the back of a chair. A camera that makes each pin act as a pixel and poke into the subject's back. Terribly unwieldy, but it does give people an image in their mind's eye.
I've submitted the following: The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is a legally binding set of basic rights for minors (http://www.unicef.org/crc/). The only two countries which are not signatories to the CRC are Somalia and the United States. Somalia has not had a functioning government for some time. As President, would you seek the ratification the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child?
Wasn't there a case of a news program basically ripping off someone's YouTube video, then the same guy uploaded to YouTube a recording of the original video being used on the program, and then got slapped with a DMCA notice.
The website has bits and pieces in Flash, rather than Silverlight. Funny that.
I had a physics teacher who was fond of screaming "THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SUCK!" repeatedly.
It's a bit like spam: if email were $.50 a pop, then finding the one in a hundred people that will respond to your email costs you $50. Trolling court records is a lot harder if you have to get them in hardcopy or pay a fee.
Goodness. Reasoned, thoughtful comments on slashdot? Inconceivable! I applaud you sir.
You don't need multiverses, just a cyclical universe with infinite Big Bangs/Big Crunches. Each Big Bang throws the dice and resets the constants. Since there's an infinite number of universes in the past and the future, our universe has to show up eventually.
I despise- despise- pseudo-scientific mystical mumbo-jumbo about quantum entanglement. Yes, Einstein thought it was "spooky". And it is, and the behavior of entangled photons is indeed counterintuitive and violates classical notions of probability. But it does not, as far as anyone knows, violate either the speed of light or causality. Google "tachyon pistols thought experiment" to see what would happen if it could.
The basics of entanglement are thus: Person A produces an entangled pair of particles. He sends person B one half of the pair; if they're photons, probably through fiber-optic cables. Totally classical, speed-of-light communication. Now, the weird thing is that if person A observes his particle's spin, he can predict the spin of the other one with greater than random accuracy. That's weird, because both particles' spins are determined randomly (there's no "hidden variable" determined when they were created). But you can't poke one particle and see the other particle instantly wiggle, mainly because observing them destroys the entanglement.
Drilling might improve supply... by 2015. Not many speculators bet on oil that far out, the bulk of futures are in the 6 months range, I think.
Doesn't TrueCrypt let you use a binary/other big file as a passphrase? At least I remember seeing the option anyway.
1. Obtain 4 x 10^12 chunks of iron
2. Label them 1, 2, 3... 4000000000000 (optional)
3. Magnetize the nth chunk if the nth bit is one, don't magnetize it otherwise.
4. Ship to Viacom
One thing I've noticed is that most of my friends who I know (IRL) seem to have switched from AIM to GMail's chat (which is Jabber of course). I don't know how much of a bite gmail has taken from AIM, but I would wager it is nontrivial.
Surely the best, and most reasonable, way to choose your position on McCain would be to actually look at his actions and words and figure out, yourself, whether he is personally any of those things you ascribe to his generation. For example, his anti-gay marriage stance is a perfectly reasonable motive to oppose him, if that view is contrary to yours.
Saying "Most old people are evil old bastards" is just as wrong as saying "Most (Jews/blacks/Muslims) are evil bastards" even if you hold out the possibility that not all of them are. You're accusing an individual of holding prejudices based on a prejudice. That doesn't make any sense at all.
*cough*FDR*cough*
Not that many people knew at the time, of course, no TV and all that.
[Citation needed]
You can do this with HIV, too, sort of. I think it's immune globulin, that (in theory) if you take fast enough after exposure it'll alert your immune system and it will clobber the virus before it infiltrates your cells. It would mostly be useful for medics and people exposed to blood.
If you found a manuscript for a terrible play but could conclusively prove it was written by Shakespeare at the age of 11 (and was in his handwriting), there would be huge historical value in that. It might not be a good play, but it would be words from a specific historical context, from a specific historical person who is of great interest to us today.
Or skin cells, for that matter.
It's called stereoblindness, I think. One eye is dominant (my right, I think everyone has a dominant eye) and usually I don't see double. Some people get stuck seeing double, especially if they weren't born with it. I can flip between looking through both (seeing double) and looking through (mostly) my right. I still perceive stuff in my left peripheral vision, but everything in front of me is taken over by my right eye. I wear glasses whose only purpose is to bend the light to try to line it up with my wonky eyes, and I think they help a bit. Certainly if I don't wear them for too long I start getting headaches.
Sometimes babies undergo surgery to fix their eyes if it's obvious they aren't working together. If it's done early enough, they sort of lock in and can see in stereo. At this point, though, I think the medical consensus is that surgery wouldn't actually help me.
Depth perception is actually remarkably easy to get around without. There are all sorts of monocular cues like perspective and parallax that can help with judging distances. Try walking around with one eye closed. Doors, especially, I imagine look very different to people who can perceive in 3D. They look more like flat parallelograms rather than 3D rectangles to me.
Not if you were born without stereoscopic vision. I've two, perfectly functional eyes (on their own) but they don't actually work together enough to produce 3D.
I've tried a program called cFosSpeed (Windows only I think?) that prioritizes packets quite well. The main point is to keep latency as low as possible, especially during uploads, and I think it would work quite well for VOIP.
Couldn't there be www.google? ie, domain "www" TLD "google".
I've got the same thing, I've used my xbox as a DVD player ever since I lost my DVD remote. The fan does tend to be a bit loud though.
Or, like Comcast I believe, the limit was in mp3s. As in "You can download the equivalent of xxxx songs in a month." I vote bandwidth caps should be given in Libraries of Congress.