But something like it could very well be 'the thing' that the 6 billion other people would be willing to work for. It's mostly a social and technical problem at this point.
IMHO, it's more of a social/political issue, not technical. Let me explain this thought....
*read below from the POV of individuals/businesses, not nations/countries/governments* Once you have a global, universal currency, you then enable true global markets and economies not under strict control of sovereign country/nations governments. (this also enables a unified global government, theoretically) Established governments will stomp anything like this out, if they can, to protect their control over commerce/markets. It' too big a source of revenue for them to give up without a fight.
Now I'm no Harry Selden, but this popped up in my mind immediately, yet this is OS out of my region of expertise....but then again, maybe because I don't know, is why I thought this...Head Asplodes!
...and making things harder on people than they need to be.
Your type of thinking is fueling this hacker craze. Your type is feeding them, encouraging them to stick around and grow.
Until you break out of this mindset that IT security is a cost that needs choked for increased next-quarter profits, security breaches will keep happening.
I'm sure those 'in the trenches' share your attitude, but you need to focus your anger and frustration back to where they belong...your PHB that makes your IT security decisions. In essence, by blaming LulSec, you are 'shooting the messenger' that's telling you your security is a fucked up mess.
You apparently have a right-spin dryer. These are known to reverse the polarity of left socks, converting them to right socks. To correct this, you must manually spin the dryer the opposite direction exactly half the number of rotations. This will reverse the polarity of half the socks back to left socks.
Furthermore, the Federalist Papers actually warn explicitly about having too many representatives (which leads to its own form of herd mentality) and having too few representatives per voter (which leads to a distant representative and a clustering of votes around special interests).
*Head asplodes at built-in contradiction*
Yes, we're fucked, but the Founders knew we were going to be fucked no matter what they set up, and merely tried to set things up in such a way that it minimizes the amount of stupid that goes around.
"D'oh!" Thanks NC. I've went from a high-IQ, confident, educated and considered intelligent person...to a bumbling moronic idiot in 30 seconds, just from reading your comment!:-) No, I'm not hostile towards you, and rather thankful instead.
Let me explain further. Until now, I have been effectively brain-washed in the belief that our 'Founding Fathers' were close to omnipotent in their foresight in forming our gov't., and the current problems were caused by 'professional politicians' feathering their respective nests. Really, sad to say.
Even though I have perused the Federalist Papers, I can't claim to have read them all thoroughly. (need to do that ASAP) While reading bits of them, I now realise the filtering that was going on mentally by me. That last sentence of your comment was like a slap in the face with a frozen mackerel. Damn.
Thanks a bunch. It was an important eye/mind opener for me about politics and more importantly, political systems, and the way I think about them.
Right now, that 'little voice in my head' is shaking it's finger at me and saying, "Lucy, you got some explaining to do!", while simultaneously, Ralph is shaking his fist at me, shouting "To the moon, Alice, to the moon!".
I think I've some rethinking to do....
BTW, please pardon the ambiguous tone...I really am rocked hard by this revelation, no sarcasm, no hostility intended. As/. is my witness[at least those that haven't filtered my sorry ass out], I humbly thank you, and credit you for instigating a profound event in my life.:-)
I see this as some media outlets trying to make a buck by riding the 'Wikileaks Wave'. The people seem to be eating this up, too. It may be due to the lack of transparency with our gov't until wikileaks spilled the beans.
I agree this does not seem to be the most efficient method to 'get to the goodies', but I don't think that is the point of this.
I don't think he realised how bad this boomerang he Hulk-Heaved out there is going come back at him.
It will probably start with his email server melting down, then the Holy/Morality Wars erupt on Twitter and Facebook....their servers melt down, cascading to a DDOS from overload of our Justice Dept., followed by civil war, the Canadian and Chinese Invasions of a civil war-torn, blind-staggering USA, then...[....]...well, in the end you get hit by a bus, then eaten by a bear.;-)
While I'm no expert, I have recently read about a recent paper submitted to "Science" journal, and the debate it caused. (I think it was from 2006?) I don't know if the debate has been resolved since then...
Basically the jury is still out on debate on this one. The point(1) is correct, (2) is also correct. However (3)has been resolved somewhat. That was the subject of the paper mentioned above.
Someone figured a way to better the resolution than 'every couple of seconds'. Their results pointed to more anaerobic metabolism happening than aerobic. Many others rushed out to confirm/disprove, and I have not heard anything newer than this.
How does this relate? Until 1970 it was widely believed that during 'heavy processing', the brain used more oxygen. In 1970, a couple of researchers presented data that suggested the increase in oxygen used was small(around 5-7%), and the brain relied on anaerobic(lactase) to work. The consensus slowly drifted towards this view until recently(within the past 15 years) when the debate was re-ignited by research findings that suggested that the increase in aerobic activity was higher than singe-digit percentages, and was more on the order of around 30%. What seems to be consistent in the debate is that both aerobic and anaerobic metabolism jump significantly with increased brain activity, and that the jump in anaerobic metabolism happens almost immediately, the aerobic metabolism shows around a 2-3 second lag behind the anaerobic. Most of the debate seems to be centered on two things: 1)What is the actual rise in aerobic metabolism?
different studies show widely varying results for this. 2) What is the ratio of aerobic/anaerobic metabolism actually happening here?
My own inexpert hypothesis is that 'under load', the brain depends on anaerobic metabolism until more oxygen can be supplied.
While my reply was not meant to refute, I hope it provided some useful information for you.:-) While I don't think that fMRI is bullshit, I do think we don't know enough about the brain to use fMRI for the ultimate diagnostic tool.
Ask any vet whether waiting for something bad to happen (pre-battle jitters, being in a precarious position, walking into a potential ambush) is worse than anything that happens to you when the shoe drops. Everyone I know (and I can't think of a single man in my family that I know of that hasn't served in the military at one time or another, and in every single war of the past 100 years in many cases) that's been in those situations will tell you that your mind can do worse things to you than anything else.
That is one of the morale-killing effects of both artillery, and snipers....waiting for that next one...that may 'have your name on it'. Been there, done that, and have the bullet-holed tee shirt.
There's a reason for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder was formerly known as Shell Shock.
To crudely paraphrase a somewhat famous quote, by someone I have forgotten: 'The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.', or something like that.
I do agree with your comment overall, but the second part of your last sentence I have an issue with.
Seems to me that we are becoming a Democracy in theory but not in practice, maybe we always have.
[my emphasis]
IMHO, we have not always had this problem. It seems to me that this started shortly after we developed career politicians.
Once we eliminated the stress/hardship of being away from the day to day means of making a living to attend the legislature, it became easier for our politicians to become disconnected from their constituents/the 'common man', and whore themselves[their influence] out to the deepest pockets. The only concern they really have since then is getting re-elected.
Until term limits are imposed on them, I don't see this changing. Oh, and campaign contributions by corps and industries don't help the situation either,IMHO.
I see all of this as a reaction to the latter 1960's and early 1970's. I'm assuming[hopefully] by your/. UID that you might have been around back then. It was a turbulent time in the USA: The Vietnam War, and all of the protests, sit-ins, Kent State riots, anarchist groups, terrorists hijacking airliners, etc., with the Feds caught off guard and having to react[at least from their point of view].
Or, maybe I'm just an armchair sociologist that has it wrong. I don't know for sure.:-)
Toss in the complicated dynamics of the air inside the plenum and it's hard for carbs to precisely meter out fuel.
Countless hours spent with grinders, milling machines, welders, power tools, hand tools, 'flow benches' and engine dynometers, etc., in my misspent youth, will wholeheartedly second this!
IMHO though, I would have to add '...and atomize that amount of fuel.' to that sentence.
Since airflow through a engine at wide open throttle is fairly well known, and easy to meter for, the carb can be adjusted to precisely match that and get the desired air-fuel ratios.
How true, but again I feel the need to address fuel atomization.
Dumping unburnt fuel out of the exhaust is counter-productive in any context. Racing/high-performance or fuel economy, both depend on efficient use of allowed/accepted resources.[research Smokey Yunick, if you're not already familiar with his wizardry] to achieve their goals.
Very nice post, BTW. Very well stated, and informative.
But I don't think it is very exciting to the general public...
Ah, but your/. crowd is not in that category. Maybe all of us/.'ers are not very interested in this subject: that does not mean a substantial percentage of us are not.
My original intent was to post a snarky/sarcastic comment with the title of "Beam me up, Scotty", followed with a comment about Teleporter/Transporter tech finally advancing a small step in the 'right/correct' direction to make it happen.
Don't give up on us 'laymen', and arm-chair physicists. Maybe we can't join the ranks with our PHD's, but we still want TO KNOW.
Keep posting with 'informed' stuff, some of us love it. We may stop there, or use that data as a 'spring-board' to further knowledge.
Of course, deep down, we're all rooting for him to catch the little bugger. And, really... if he had the money to order all of that crap from ACME, why didn't he just order a pizza?
Despite your lower UID, I have to ask... Do you not recall the widespread popularity of the "Beep! Beep! Your Ass!" tee shirts in the early to mid 1970's? IIRC, the usually depicted Wiley Coyote jerking Roadrunner off the ground by his long, slender neck with one hand, and the other hand either cocked back in a fist, or holding a melee weapon, ready to strike.
Order a pizza, indeed. You're missing the point of his popularity. (see my reply to 'Q-Hack (37846)' #35751618- the part about the 'Wiley Coyote Award')
Side note: The fact that we were rooting for him for so long, made his distributors some profit, until Looney Tunes became 'politically incorrect' for promoting violence, and taken off the airwaves in the USA.
When Bugs decided you needed to be taught a lesson, he made damned sure you knew he was teaching it to you.;-)
No joke. Bugs didn't mess around with you, except for his amusement...then he made an example out of you; it was a lose/lose scenario for his adversary.
Rocket motors sputtering out all of the time, detonators failing, wings collapsing, etc. and ad nauseam....I second that.
I also cast my vote for Wiley Coyote without reservation.
I also would like to propose the creation of a 'Wiley Coyote' award to be used for those that show exceptional ability to single-mindedly pursue a single goal...no matter what happens. Dedication to the mission, perseverance, and willing to bounce right back into it, no matter what.
Maybe set it up like the Nobel awards work, with a committee to vote on the winner from a pool of candidates.
The candidates would be selected by ?....Profit!!!
I would like to get my foot in the door and suggest for the voting committee: 1. Scott Adams 2. Gary Larson 3. Frank Zappa 4. scratch #3, he's dead, Jim. 5. George Carlin...dammit, see #4 6. The Gong Show crew 7. *continue list here*
A gunshot sound is actually composed of a series of sounds, most of them are sonic booms.
...the sound the exploding powder makes inside the gun...
What you are hearing here, is the sonic boom of the escaping gasses from the burned powder exiting the barrel behind the bullet.
If you are near the path of the bullet, you will also hear the sonic boom of the bullet while it is still supersonic. If it is subsonic, you will here a buzzing noise like angry bees-this is the sound of the actual bullet disrupting the air. [note: if you hear the angry bees, it was too close for comfort!]
This was demonstrated to us in US Army Basic Training, at what they called 'the crack and thump range'. They put us in a pit and shot rounds from different directions and distances over our heads. We learned to estimate range and direction from this exercise. The 'crack' is the sonic boom made by the hypersonic bullet passing by you. You time the interval from hearing the 'crack' until you hear the 'thump' from the hot gasses expanding as the gas exits the barrel. You also determine direction from the 'thump'.
At subsonic speeds, there is no crack sound.
I'm guessing that these detectors are 'just' a more accurate, electronic version of the crack and thump exercise.
Like they say, you never hear the bullet that gets you.
Slashdot Mirror
But something like it could very well be 'the thing' that the 6 billion other people would be willing to work for. It's mostly a social and technical problem at this point.
IMHO, it's more of a social/political issue, not technical. Let me explain this thought....
*read below from the POV of individuals/businesses, not nations/countries/governments*
Once you have a global, universal currency, you then enable true global markets and economies not under strict control of sovereign country/nations governments. (this also enables a unified global government, theoretically)
Established governments will stomp anything like this out, if they can, to protect their control over commerce/markets. It' too big a source of revenue for them to give up without a fight.
Now I'm no Harry Selden, but this popped up in my mind immediately, yet this is OS out of my region of expertise....but then again, maybe because I don't know, is why I thought this...Head Asplodes!
...and making things harder on people than they need to be.
Your type of thinking is fueling this hacker craze. Your type is feeding them, encouraging them to stick around and grow.
Until you break out of this mindset that IT security is a cost that needs choked for increased next-quarter profits, security breaches will keep happening.
I'm sure those 'in the trenches' share your attitude, but you need to focus your anger and frustration back to where they belong...your PHB that makes your IT security decisions.
In essence, by blaming LulSec, you are 'shooting the messenger' that's telling you your security is a fucked up mess.
You apparently have a right-spin dryer.
These are known to reverse the polarity of left socks, converting them to right socks.
To correct this, you must manually spin the dryer the opposite direction exactly half the number of rotations.
This will reverse the polarity of half the socks back to left socks.
*Head asplodes at built-in contradiction*
Yes, we're fucked, but the Founders knew we were going to be fucked no matter what they set up, and merely tried to set things up in such a way that it minimizes the amount of stupid that goes around.
"D'oh!" :-)
Thanks NC. I've went from a high-IQ, confident, educated and considered intelligent person...to a bumbling moronic idiot in 30 seconds, just from reading your comment!
No, I'm not hostile towards you, and rather thankful instead.
Let me explain further.
Until now, I have been effectively brain-washed in the belief that our 'Founding Fathers' were close to omnipotent in their foresight in forming our gov't., and the current problems were caused by 'professional politicians' feathering their respective nests.
Really, sad to say.
Even though I have perused the Federalist Papers, I can't claim to have read them all thoroughly. (need to do that ASAP)
While reading bits of them, I now realise the filtering that was going on mentally by me.
That last sentence of your comment was like a slap in the face with a frozen mackerel. Damn.
Thanks a bunch. It was an important eye/mind opener for me about politics and more importantly, political systems, and the way I think about them.
Right now, that 'little voice in my head' is shaking it's finger at me and saying, "Lucy, you got some explaining to do!", while simultaneously, Ralph is shaking his fist at me, shouting "To the moon, Alice, to the moon!".
I think I've some rethinking to do....
BTW, please pardon the ambiguous tone...I really am rocked hard by this revelation, no sarcasm, no hostility intended. /. is my witness[at least those that haven't filtered my sorry ass out], I humbly thank you, and credit you for instigating a profound event in my life. :-)
As
Don't forget all of the Dudely Do Right episodes.
Goatse link warning.
Then post just the text of the diff out of context!
Heheh, stirrin' mud puddles with my 200 hp Evinrude! ;-)
I see this as some media outlets trying to make a buck by riding the 'Wikileaks Wave'.
The people seem to be eating this up, too.
It may be due to the lack of transparency with our gov't until wikileaks spilled the beans.
I agree this does not seem to be the most efficient method to 'get to the goodies', but I don't think that is the point of this.
Just a thought....
'In Soviet Russia, ATM watches YOU.'?
I don't think he realised how bad this boomerang he Hulk-Heaved out there is going come back at him.
It will probably start with his email server melting down, then the Holy/Morality Wars erupt on Twitter and Facebook....their servers melt down, cascading to a DDOS from overload of our Justice Dept., followed by civil war, the Canadian and Chinese Invasions of a civil war-torn, blind-staggering USA, then...[....]...well, in the end you get hit by a bus, then eaten by a bear. ;-)
While I'm no expert, I have recently read about a recent paper submitted to "Science" journal, and the debate it caused. (I think it was from 2006?)
I don't know if the debate has been resolved since then...
Basically the jury is still out on debate on this one.
The point(1) is correct, (2) is also correct. However (3)has been resolved somewhat. That was the subject of the paper mentioned above.
Someone figured a way to better the resolution than 'every couple of seconds'.
Their results pointed to more anaerobic metabolism happening than aerobic. Many others rushed out to confirm/disprove, and I have not heard anything newer than this.
How does this relate?
Until 1970 it was widely believed that during 'heavy processing', the brain used more oxygen. In 1970, a couple of researchers presented data that suggested the increase in oxygen used was small(around 5-7%), and the brain relied on anaerobic(lactase) to work.
The consensus slowly drifted towards this view until recently(within the past 15 years) when the debate was re-ignited by research findings that suggested that the increase in aerobic activity was higher than singe-digit percentages, and was more on the order of around 30%. What seems to be consistent in the debate is that both aerobic and anaerobic metabolism jump significantly with increased brain activity, and that the jump in anaerobic metabolism happens almost immediately, the aerobic metabolism shows around a 2-3 second lag behind the anaerobic.
Most of the debate seems to be centered on two things:
1)What is the actual rise in aerobic metabolism?
different studies show widely varying results for this.
2) What is the ratio of aerobic/anaerobic metabolism actually happening here?
My own inexpert hypothesis is that 'under load', the brain depends on anaerobic metabolism until more oxygen can be supplied.
While my reply was not meant to refute, I hope it provided some useful information for you. :-)
While I don't think that fMRI is bullshit, I do think we don't know enough about the brain to use fMRI for the ultimate diagnostic tool.
That is one of the morale-killing effects of both artillery, and snipers....waiting for that next one...that may 'have your name on it'.
Been there, done that, and have the bullet-holed tee shirt.
There's a reason for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder was formerly known as Shell Shock.
Usually an apple or carrot will entice them. If that fails, you will need a barrel of lube and a large hydraulic press. Oh, and a large funnel.
To crudely paraphrase a somewhat famous quote, by someone I have forgotten:
'The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.', or something like that.
I do agree with your comment overall, but the second part of your last sentence I have an issue with.
Seems to me that we are becoming a Democracy in theory but not in practice, maybe we always have.
[my emphasis]
IMHO, we have not always had this problem. It seems to me that this started shortly after we developed career politicians.
Once we eliminated the stress/hardship of being away from the day to day means of making a living to attend the legislature, it became easier for our politicians to become disconnected from their constituents/the 'common man', and whore themselves[their influence] out to the deepest pockets.
The only concern they really have since then is getting re-elected.
Until term limits are imposed on them, I don't see this changing.
Oh, and campaign contributions by corps and industries don't help the situation either,IMHO.
I see all of this as a reaction to the latter 1960's and early 1970's. /. UID that you might have been around back then.
I'm assuming[hopefully] by your
It was a turbulent time in the USA:
The Vietnam War, and all of the protests, sit-ins, Kent State riots, anarchist groups, terrorists hijacking airliners, etc., with the Feds caught off guard and having to react[at least from their point of view].
Or, maybe I'm just an armchair sociologist that has it wrong. I don't know for sure. :-)
On the very bottom, no less!
Toss in the complicated dynamics of the air inside the plenum and it's hard for carbs to precisely meter out fuel.
Countless hours spent with grinders, milling machines, welders, power tools, hand tools, 'flow benches' and engine dynometers, etc., in my misspent youth, will wholeheartedly second this!
IMHO though, I would have to add '...and atomize that amount of fuel.' to that sentence.
Since airflow through a engine at wide open throttle is fairly well known, and easy to meter for, the carb can be adjusted to precisely match that and get the desired air-fuel ratios.
How true, but again I feel the need to address fuel atomization.
Dumping unburnt fuel out of the exhaust is counter-productive in any context. Racing/high-performance or fuel economy, both depend on efficient use of allowed/accepted resources.[research Smokey Yunick, if you're not already familiar with his wizardry] to achieve their goals.
Very nice post, BTW. Very well stated, and informative.
But I don't think it is very exciting to the general public...
Ah, but your /. crowd is not in that category. Maybe all of us /.'ers are not very interested in this subject: that does not mean a substantial percentage of us are not.
My original intent was to post a snarky/sarcastic comment with the title of "Beam me up, Scotty", followed with a comment about Teleporter/Transporter tech finally advancing a small step in the 'right/correct' direction to make it happen.
Don't give up on us 'laymen', and arm-chair physicists. Maybe we can't join the ranks with our PHD's, but we still want TO KNOW.
Keep posting with 'informed' stuff, some of us love it.
We may stop there, or use that data as a 'spring-board' to further knowledge.
I see it as a 'Win-Win' scenario. YMMV....
*obligatory:*
We don't have native trout here, you insensitive clod!
from:
Payne(as in 'Pain') County, Oklahoma
BTW, I giggled out loud reading your comment!
Oh, and I endorse your philosophy in this case.
Of course, deep down, we're all rooting for him to catch the little bugger. And, really ... if he had the money to order all of that crap from ACME, why didn't he just order a pizza?
Despite your lower UID, I have to ask...
Do you not recall the widespread popularity of the "Beep! Beep! Your Ass!" tee shirts in the early to mid 1970's?
IIRC, the usually depicted Wiley Coyote jerking Roadrunner off the ground by his long, slender neck with one hand, and the other hand either cocked back in a fist, or holding a melee weapon, ready to strike.
Order a pizza, indeed.
You're missing the point of his popularity.
(see my reply to 'Q-Hack (37846)' #35751618- the part about the 'Wiley Coyote Award')
Side note:
The fact that we were rooting for him for so long, made his distributors some profit, until Looney Tunes became 'politically incorrect' for promoting violence, and taken off the airwaves in the USA.
Awww, give him a break!
Was it his fault that Demon Murphy liked to hang out in his tail fur?
Cut him some slack, will ya'?
When Bugs decided you needed to be taught a lesson, he made damned sure you knew he was teaching it to you. ;-)
No joke.
Bugs didn't mess around with you, except for his amusement...then he made an example out of you; it was a lose/lose scenario for his adversary.
What's up, Doc?
Rocket motors sputtering out all of the time, detonators failing, wings collapsing, etc. and ad nauseam....I second that.
I also cast my vote for Wiley Coyote without reservation.
I also would like to propose the creation of a 'Wiley Coyote' award to be used for those that show exceptional ability to single-mindedly pursue a single goal...no matter what happens.
Dedication to the mission, perseverance, and willing to bounce right back into it, no matter what.
Maybe set it up like the Nobel awards work, with a committee to vote on the winner from a pool of candidates.
The candidates would be selected by ?....Profit!!!
I would like to get my foot in the door and suggest for the voting committee:
1. Scott Adams
2. Gary Larson
3. Frank Zappa
4. scratch #3, he's dead, Jim.
5. George Carlin...dammit, see #4
6. The Gong Show crew
7. *continue list here*
A gunshot sound is actually composed of a series of sounds, most of them are sonic booms.
What you are hearing here, is the sonic boom of the escaping gasses from the burned powder exiting the barrel behind the bullet.
If you are near the path of the bullet, you will also hear the sonic boom of the bullet while it is still supersonic. If it is subsonic, you will here a buzzing noise like angry bees-this is the sound of the actual bullet disrupting the air. [note: if you hear the angry bees, it was too close for comfort!]
This was demonstrated to us in US Army Basic Training, at what they called 'the crack and thump range'.
They put us in a pit and shot rounds from different directions and distances over our heads. We learned to estimate range and direction from this exercise.
The 'crack' is the sonic boom made by the hypersonic bullet passing by you.
You time the interval from hearing the 'crack' until you hear the 'thump' from the hot gasses expanding as the gas exits the barrel. You also determine direction from the 'thump'.
At subsonic speeds, there is no crack sound.
I'm guessing that these detectors are 'just' a more accurate, electronic version of the crack and thump exercise.
Like they say, you never hear the bullet that gets you.
Add another one here.
Also the first thing I thought of.
'You must be new here.'
Welcome aboard!
*whispers ominously* Psssst! Guard your sanity well!