In RF land the concept of placing object A near object B means very little. The big question is antenna gain/directionality and reciever gain and the ability of both to reject out of band noise and not create in band noise.
If a cell phone can read a signal from your credit card over a 2" gap then an antenna in a van can do it from across the street and Jodrell Bank can do it from the other side of the planet.
My team seems to do ok on the estimates. Then we get beaten into 1/2 that by management. Then in the end it takes twice as long as management expected. So the original estimate was good.
So we would be fine if only management did not try and squeeze it.
Management never accepts the "debug", "refactor" and "new feature" timelines, those are generally considered as "not needed". It just supposed to work perfectly and on the timeline they negotiated before consulting the people who would actually deliver it. *sigh*
The density is measured including its interior space. In reality the interior space is filled with air and its realtive weight is the carbon structure alone. To make it float you would have to find a way to seal off the interior structure and remove the air from that.
Make a bag around it. Remove the air. We have an airship with the lift somewhere between H and He.
So how strong is the aerogel? How big a bag can we make and have it support atmospheric pressure on the other side? That will really determine the lift efficiency.
I don't know how you can get much more efficient than cycling for getting from a to b. The additional mass of a bicycle is small compared to a human and the low rolling resistance conserves momentum. Lots and lots of studies.
Rep Ed Orcutt (R — WA) is off is rocker, but we knew that already. I wonder where the $$ for this opinion came from. We need good reports that can ask "Cycling is more efficient that walking for distance covered, energy wise and CO2 burned. Is this bad opinion against cycling yours alone or did someone pay you to say that?"
I'd be more impressed with some heavy weapons and fire call interfaces. Mortar and anti-vehicle missles controlled by google-glass type interfaces on human scouts. Also let big dog launch a couple of aerial drones also linked in.
I would not really call it a "political" detention, but rather a "coporate" detention. Views on copyright do not really reflect on political issues but rather on corporate profit issues.
Sure copyrights and patent are part of the legal process of civil society decided by our politics. But in the end their purpose as defined in the laws that enact them is purely to drive a profit.
As a penalty the next takedown request from NASCAR to youtube should require full documentation requiring a lawyers affidavit and full documentation of ownership of all material asserted to be owned and an full explanation of the way in which copyright is violated and a $10K deposit. Youtube may then take up to a week to process the take down request. An improper request will not remove the penalty and the deposit will be forfit.
In the 21'st century a politicians constituents are the various lobby interests that give him money to run the campaigns that get them elected. "citizens" don't come into the picture except as demographics to be manipulated by the advertising campaign.
I suspect this bill was advanced directly in the interests of one of the senators "constituents".
My phone is protected by an electronic protection device. You have to push the "ON" button to enable interaction. Breaking that top-secret process violates the DMCA and means you are breaking the encryption and security apparatus on the phone.
Thanks DMCA for not definining minimum secutiry levels.
> The title of the article is "Samsung Laptop Bug Is Not Linux Specific" for fuck's sake. Learn to read.
Sorry, but you need to learn to think.....
Sure the bug is not Linux specific. But Linux was the first to expose it. If they had tested on Linux they would have known it was broken and could have fixed it before releasing the hardware. That is my point. Linux gives more hardware coverage and can expose bugs that might not be found otherwise. Linux provides a pretty much free test load for the hardware.
Any test house should be very very happy to have a pretty much free (only cost is small time to setup boot) second test suite for the hardware.
They can't take copyright without compensation. It would mean renegotiating the contracts for teachers.
If they want the copyright on my kids work, that will $1000 a page. The kid is a creative genius. I will supply the crayons the paper. If they are willing to pay.
What if he had composed a single page with references to all the documents. The page could have been local or anywhere in the world. Then used a regular web browser with the feature "open all referred pages". There would not even be a programmed access issue in the case, it would have been the ruleset/functionality of a normal web browser that he leveraged. There would be no malicious ruleset abuse. Just levaraging of the normal process.
This is the way the internet works. He broke nothing, he misused nothing. He used the normal interactive process supported by HTTP request transfer agents.
Internet Rule #1: If you don't want it accessed don't put it on the net. Corrollary #1: If it is on the net it will be accessed in all ways and forms.
All access to computers is automated. I push a button or move a mouse it becomes that is interperted by the device interface which becomes a coded interaction moveing through layers of interface code to an application. The application then does something with the input given it. It is all automated. What happens depends on all the layers.
Browsers fetch all the data refered to on a "page" this can result in data fetches from 100's of places. I doubt any modern page is composed of data from a single fetch.
The "page" displayed by a browser is composed of data from many sources. Your browser does this automatically following a ruleset built into it. How is this structurally different from a automated fetcher which follows its own rule set and gets data from many sources? The difference is not the automation of multiple fetches, it is not the interaction with the human, the only different is the ruleset used to do the collecting of data.
My question is how do they describe how one automated rule set, say that used by a browser, is legal, while another ruleset, say that used by a sweeper is illegal? Both are fully automated fetch processes. They just have different rule-sets.
Slashdot Mirror
We are still killing each other for irrational reasons down here.
Why would intelligent life even want to stop by for conversation? ((with a bunch of violent irrational creatures))
In RF land the concept of placing object A near object B means very little. The big question is antenna gain/directionality and reciever gain and the ability of both to reject out of band noise and not create in band noise.
If a cell phone can read a signal from your credit card over a 2" gap then an antenna in a van can do it from across the street and Jodrell Bank can do it from the other side of the planet.
Profitabily is 12 to 18 months out. Thats when the hockey stick curves up.
It was that way 3 months ago. It will be that way in 3 months.
My team seems to do ok on the estimates. Then we get beaten into 1/2 that by management. Then in the end it takes twice as long as management expected. So the original estimate was good.
So we would be fine if only management did not try and squeeze it.
Management never accepts the "debug", "refactor" and "new feature" timelines, those are generally considered as "not needed". It just supposed to work perfectly and on the timeline they negotiated before consulting the people who would actually deliver it.
*sigh*
The density is measured including its interior space. In reality the interior space is filled with air and its realtive weight is the carbon structure alone.
To make it float you would have to find a way to seal off the interior structure and remove the air from that.
Make a bag around it. Remove the air. We have an airship with the lift somewhere between H and He.
So how strong is the aerogel? How big a bag can we make and have it support atmospheric pressure on the other side? That will really determine the lift efficiency.
100 metric tons/ 100,000 years /1000 years
1 metric tonne/1000 years
1000kg
1kg/year
I don't know how you can get much more efficient than cycling for getting from a to b.
The additional mass of a bicycle is small compared to a human and the low rolling resistance conserves momentum.
Lots and lots of studies.
Rep Ed Orcutt (R — WA) is off is rocker, but we knew that already. I wonder where the $$ for this opinion came from. We need good reports that can ask
"Cycling is more efficient that walking for distance covered, energy wise and CO2 burned. Is this bad opinion against cycling yours alone or did someone pay you to say that?"
Can we please institute basic tests for elected officials.
Say something like basic grade 8 science, math, history and english.
See that building in the background 5 miles away? Did they pay that building owner? And the building beside that ....
I'd be more impressed with some heavy weapons and fire call interfaces.
Mortar and anti-vehicle missles controlled by google-glass type interfaces on human scouts.
Also let big dog launch a couple of aerial drones also linked in.
No more shots from a helicopter.
Also I would guess we are only a few years from replacing camera on boom or rails with a flying digital camera.
I would not really call it a "political" detention, but rather a "coporate" detention. Views on copyright do not really reflect on political issues but rather on corporate profit issues.
Sure copyrights and patent are part of the legal process of civil society decided by our politics. But in the end their purpose as defined in the laws that enact them is purely to drive a profit.
Aaron Shwartz, death by corporate agenda.
Will we then be able to confirm water on the surface of mars?
Also the building blocks for life? http://stardust.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news115.html
As a penalty the next takedown request from NASCAR to youtube should require full documentation requiring a lawyers affidavit and full documentation of ownership of all material asserted to be owned and an full explanation of the way in which copyright is violated and a $10K deposit.
Youtube may then take up to a week to process the take down request. An improper request will not remove the penalty and the deposit will be forfit.
At least I can dream.
> betrayal of your constituents like this
In the 21'st century a politicians constituents are the various lobby interests that give him money to run the campaigns that get them elected. "citizens" don't come into the picture except as demographics to be manipulated by the advertising campaign.
I suspect this bill was advanced directly in the interests of one of the senators "constituents".
My phone is protected by an electronic protection device. You have to push the "ON" button to enable interaction.
Breaking that top-secret process violates the DMCA and means you are breaking the encryption and security apparatus on the phone.
Thanks DMCA for not definining minimum secutiry levels.
> The title of the article is "Samsung Laptop Bug Is Not Linux Specific" for fuck's sake. Learn to read.
Sorry, but you need to learn to think.....
Sure the bug is not Linux specific. But Linux was the first to expose it. If they had tested on Linux they would have known it was broken and could have fixed it before releasing the hardware.
That is my point. Linux gives more hardware coverage and can expose bugs that might not be found otherwise. Linux provides a pretty much free test load for the hardware.
Any test house should be very very happy to have a pretty much free (only cost is small time to setup boot) second test suite for the hardware.
Embrace Linux as an additional test suite for your hardware.
They can't take copyright without compensation. It would mean renegotiating the contracts for teachers.
If they want the copyright on my kids work, that will $1000 a page. The kid is a creative genius.
I will supply the crayons the paper. If they are willing to pay.
Sure there are lots of resources just floating around out there.
Please explain a safe way to get them down here in any sort of quantity and usable form.
**footfall**
What if he had composed a single page with references to all the documents. The page could have been local or anywhere in the world. Then used a regular web browser with the feature "open all referred pages". There would not even be a programmed access issue in the case, it would have been the ruleset/functionality of a normal web browser that he leveraged. There would be no malicious ruleset abuse. Just levaraging of the normal process.
This is the way the internet works. He broke nothing, he misused nothing. He used the normal interactive process supported by HTTP request transfer agents.
Internet Rule #1: If you don't want it accessed don't put it on the net.
Corrollary #1: If it is on the net it will be accessed in all ways and forms.
All access to computers is automated. I push a button or move a mouse it becomes that is interperted by the device interface which becomes a coded interaction moveing through layers of interface code to an application. The application then does something with the input given it. It is all automated. What happens depends on all the layers.
Browsers fetch all the data refered to on a "page" this can result in data fetches from 100's of places. I doubt any modern page is composed of data from a single fetch.
The "page" displayed by a browser is composed of data from many sources. Your browser does this automatically following a ruleset built into it. How is this structurally different from a automated fetcher which follows its own rule set and gets data from many sources? The difference is not the automation of multiple fetches, it is not the interaction with the human, the only different is the ruleset used to do the collecting of data.
My question is how do they describe how one automated rule set, say that used by a browser, is legal, while another ruleset, say that used by a sweeper is illegal? Both are fully automated fetch processes. They just have different rule-sets.
Dell had threatened to make nice cheap $50 appliance that connected to a host OS in the cloud.
That threat seems to have produced a nice response from the NW.
Book keeping nightmare. Anytime anyone tells anyone in the company their name or any details it would have to be logged.
Also some information is required for tax record purposes. Are they going to tax things required for the tax system. Crazy system.