Since it was acting like a tuner I was wondering if you could use the signal to run DVR software without a tuner card. I should have been more specific. I've yet to try any of the DVR software but it'd be a way to run the software without additional hardware potentially. There are external tuner boxes of coarse but it'd be a lot cheaper and simpler if I could just do it through the slingbox. I'm already thinking about it as a rabbit system so I can run wireless cable through all my computers. Potentially each would then be a DVR. Sometimes I go days without seeing anything I want to record then I wind up with three things on at once. Just be handy.
I think it was just under 100 years ago that we were using waterless urinals. Why is it that we need to patent them now?
I grew up in Michigan and we called them trees and if some one hasn't patented them they will any day now. I'm quite sure no one has patented trees for the express use as a traget for dogs and the odd hunter or wino.
I've been curious about Slingbox for TV on the go. I was also wondering if you could run DVR software without hardware with one as well. It'd solve some problems at home as well as on the go. I'd be curious to hear from anyone familiar with Slingboxes? Seems like a good solution, just not sure if it works as advertised.
I heard Microsoft recived a patent on the computer crash. A judge agreed it was a unique Microsoft feature and issued the patent. Next they hope to patent a "virus friendly environment". Not sure the commercial value but hey it keeps their army of patent lawyers employed.
You could always go to a pin hole camera and eliminate the problem entirely. Alright so you'd need 10,000 ASA film or.1 lux for video but focas would never be an issue. Always been a massive fan of pin hole cameras. It's also a handy trick for those of us with failing eyesight for reading fine print. There have also been lensless cameras that use a rotating slit. There are 360 cameras that use the principal. Fun with optics
Is anything a crime in China? I mean, apart from free speech?
I believe paying american artists and producers of music and movies for rights is against the law? Near as I can tell they only allow one copy into the country for ripping purposes. I say we get our revenge by only allowing them to buy copies of current releases. The miserable quality of current films will have them crying uncle in no time and we can finally get fair distribution laws. We could get really nasty and only allow remakes and sequels. That might break some International human rights laws though.
I've got to wonder what standard they used? Apollo 13, 2001 and Contact were solid and obvious choices but a lot of the rest were largely fantasy films. If hard science was a factor most of the rest of the films barely gave science a nod. If it was a science fiction list, several were definately fantasy and Apollo 13 was factual. Seemed to more reflect box office than anything. Another pointless ten best list.
Did anyone else have a Kolchak chill go up their spine? Picking the bones of dead TV shows is what passes for original thinking in entertainment today.
Actually it shows how important plot is given they liked it better with an imagined plot than the real one. I find a lot of films I didn't like the first time I saw them work far better with the sound off. I often times turn off the sound on films for various reasons and found this to be the case. A friend used to be big on playing Godzilla films with the sound off and some ramdom piece of music on. The films were a lot more fun. Pick any visually interesting film with a bad plot and turn the sound off and put on music.
Why don't they just tatoo the insides of our eyelids so we can see ads in our sleep? What the advertizers don't realize is a little thing called diminising return. Agressive ads don't make people buy it makes them shut down and they are no longer receptive. A prime example is one of the first aggressive techniques instituted, incresing the volume during commercials. The ironic thing is since the commercials are opressively loud I reflexsively now turn off the sound during commercials. Instead of a net gain they have a total loss with me since no longer watch or listen to commercials ever. Same with on-line ads. If I notice one it's because it's being too obnoxious and I simply take note of the company, avoid buying from them if possible and switch to another web site. Gee and they wonder why ads are no longer effective? If you can't stand the ad you won't buy the product. Force feeding me advertising only turns me off of the company. Sadly a small percentage are swayed so the companies keep pushing harder but the falling numbers prove it isn't working.
We called them Clift Notes back in the day. Hey rent the movie and you get it in two hours or less. With the great works the story is secondary to the writing. Picking high notes in the great works renders them banal and pointless. Let's reduce Citizen Kane to "some rich ole dude croaks and his last words are the name of his sled he had as a kid, the end". Does it have the same impact?
Actually the teeth were found some time ago. What's new is the dating information. Dogma claimed that they died out 500,000+ years ago. The new evidence brings the date up to 100,000 years ago. This will now become current dogma given this is not likely to be the date they actually died out. So few teeth and bones have been found it's impossible to even guess at an extinction date but until more bones are found it's the new hard ceiling and any more recent teeth found will be held to a high standard of evidence inorder to break through the entrenched dogma. It's amazing to me that an animals entire history is assumed based on a few bones. We know for a fact that T-Rexs died out 65,000,000 years ago. No in fact we don't know that it's simply that the most recent fossils found are 65 mill old. Very few T-Rex skeletons have been found so any dates given are wild guesses. The KT boundry exists based on a large number of fossils but few of them were Rex fossils. They probably did died out during that period there simply are no hard facts to support that and some dinosaurs are bound to have survived the KT barrier for a few million years we simply haven't found the fossils. Given the sparce nature of the record it's possible none of the fossils exist so true dates may never be known. The same situation exists with the ape fossils. The actual extinct probably occured more recently there simply aren't fossils to back it up yet. It's even possible a small number survived until historic times but that's unlikely. If they died out recently it's probable that bones would have been found unless they existed in very remote areas in small numbers. The irony is that if they were isolated the giant ape might have even lost much of it's size. The pygmy effect that happens to island bound animals can happen in isolated pockets in non island areas. There's obviously talk that they still survive and are the source of the Bigfoot legends. Highly unlikely given if they lived until modern times and actually managed to spread their range to North America there would have been bones to find. There hasn't been a single primate bone or fossil found in either Canada or the US. It sounds likely that like Pandas they were locked into a diet of Bamboo so it's probable that a bamboo die off ultimately killed them and probably not man. With a calorie intact like they had major die offs like we have today would have been devastating and probably kept their numbers low. I'm praying on a complete fossil to settle the upright or knuckle walk issue. The skull points to upright but most resist that idea so most recontructions still show knuckle walking. Dogma always supercedes evidence until it's impossible to ignore. Pterosaurs are still considered flying reptiles because of a dispute over leg orientation. Their skeletons were identical to small theropod dinosaurs but dogma still states that they somehow walked splay legged. People are slow to change. Remember that most still think of Europe as a continient inspite of having water on only three sides. The source of that was Victorian arrogance not scientific fact.
The largest crocodile fossils found so far have mostly been in South America, there have been large ones found in Texas as well. The biggest so far was around 50', at last word. That would dwarf the new find. I would have said the fish shaped tail made it unique but that's not the first time for that feature. Actually sounds fairly unexceptional so far. Have to check out the NG issue and see if there's more to it.
19' to 21' is the accepted high end for salt water Crocs but there have been larger ones found. I have heard reliable stories about one just under 30' which is possible but I think that would be an extreme high end and the animal would be over 100 years old. There was a Nile found recently that I saw film of that seemed to be north of 20', I believe they called it Gustav. I've seen film of 19' crocs and this one was considerably larger. Personally I think it was well north of 20', not 25' or 30' but definately bigger than 20'. At first they thought it was over 60 but later decided it was closer to 35 which gave it a lot of growth potential. It would seem to support the idea that the real high end is 25' to 30'. I doubt many ever reached that size given most simply don't live long enough. Even Gustav seems to have died around the time it was filmed and hasn't been seen since. The poor animal even had machine gun wounds on it's side. I'd be surprised if any currently alive were over 21'.
Seems like it would make more sense to manuver a smaller asteriod to accomplish the same task. The asteroid would end up a moon of the larger rock and be availible if further coarse corrections were they needed. Launching something of that mass, obviously a series of launchings, makes little sense.
By definition Intellegent Design is in no way a theory. Science is held to a high standard and religion is held to no standard. I'm not knocking religion it just has no place in science. The claim that there are unexplainable parts of evolution is untrue. More gaps are being filled in every day. The individual parts of a cell have been replicated using materials and processes availible in the early days of the planet. The effort now is to bring those elements together. The difference between science and religion is the story of how the world began is roughly 3 to 4 thousand years old and was originally Jewish not Christian, Christianity is less than two thousand years old. Science is a living breathing discipline that adapts as new information is found. Darwinianism hasn't been disproved it has been expanded on. The only things Darwin seemed to be wrong about were issues like speed of change. He thought it was a slow gradual process where as the fossil record seems to indicate sudden changes with long periods of minimal change. This is not disproving Darwinism it's simply refining the model using evidence not availible to Darwin. Religion demands blind faith and offers no proof. I don't want my children learning that the world is six thousand years old in Science class, there's a place for those beliefs and it's called church. There is a massive amount of evidence for the age of the planet and evolution and absolutely none for "Intellegent Design". Creationism is based on an oral tale that was written down on scrolls some three thousand years ago and recoppied countless times since. I've heard people claim the devil put fossils in the ground to confuse us. That is very scary thinking. I thought we got over that a few hundred years ago, guess not.If we head down this road we'll have people claiming once again that the earth is the center of the Universe and we should be teaching alternatives to astronomy. Think it can't happen? I personally think Intellegent Design is just as whacky. I've heard the religious right making nice with the UFO extremist inorder to legitize the "science" of intellegent design. Now there's desperate bedfellows.
Slashdot Mirror
Since it was acting like a tuner I was wondering if you could use the signal to run DVR software without a tuner card. I should have been more specific. I've yet to try any of the DVR software but it'd be a way to run the software without additional hardware potentially. There are external tuner boxes of coarse but it'd be a lot cheaper and simpler if I could just do it through the slingbox. I'm already thinking about it as a rabbit system so I can run wireless cable through all my computers. Potentially each would then be a DVR. Sometimes I go days without seeing anything I want to record then I wind up with three things on at once. Just be handy.
I grew up in Michigan and we called them trees and if some one hasn't patented them they will any day now. I'm quite sure no one has patented trees for the express use as a traget for dogs and the odd hunter or wino.
I've been curious about Slingbox for TV on the go. I was also wondering if you could run DVR software without hardware with one as well. It'd solve some problems at home as well as on the go. I'd be curious to hear from anyone familiar with Slingboxes? Seems like a good solution, just not sure if it works as advertised.
You want to impress me make one out of legos.
Great, now you can get Montezuma's Revenge from a photo.
I heard Microsoft recived a patent on the computer crash. A judge agreed it was a unique Microsoft feature and issued the patent. Next they hope to patent a "virus friendly environment". Not sure the commercial value but hey it keeps their army of patent lawyers employed.
You could always go to a pin hole camera and eliminate the problem entirely. Alright so you'd need 10,000 ASA film or .1 lux for video but focas would never be an issue. Always been a massive fan of pin hole cameras. It's also a handy trick for those of us with failing eyesight for reading fine print. There have also been lensless cameras that use a rotating slit. There are 360 cameras that use the principal. Fun with optics
Actually that's a shark with silicone laser breast implants thank you very much.
Just all the code your company has written, is writing, or ever will write. Not that much really.
I believe paying american artists and producers of music and movies for rights is against the law? Near as I can tell they only allow one copy into the country for ripping purposes. I say we get our revenge by only allowing them to buy copies of current releases. The miserable quality of current films will have them crying uncle in no time and we can finally get fair distribution laws. We could get really nasty and only allow remakes and sequels. That might break some International human rights laws though.
I've got to wonder what standard they used? Apollo 13, 2001 and Contact were solid and obvious choices but a lot of the rest were largely fantasy films. If hard science was a factor most of the rest of the films barely gave science a nod. If it was a science fiction list, several were definately fantasy and Apollo 13 was factual. Seemed to more reflect box office than anything. Another pointless ten best list.
Isn't that where they are setting the next Survivor?
Did anyone else have a Kolchak chill go up their spine? Picking the bones of dead TV shows is what passes for original thinking in entertainment today.
Actually it shows how important plot is given they liked it better with an imagined plot than the real one. I find a lot of films I didn't like the first time I saw them work far better with the sound off. I often times turn off the sound on films for various reasons and found this to be the case. A friend used to be big on playing Godzilla films with the sound off and some ramdom piece of music on. The films were a lot more fun. Pick any visually interesting film with a bad plot and turn the sound off and put on music.
It's flat because some one let the air out. Ever try to roll a flat tire? If people would just use common sense science would make sense.
The equation is 40DD=MC2.
Are you on crack!? The earth is stationary. It is the sun that's moving.
It's the fact that it's flat that gives it the illusion of motion.
Why don't they just tatoo the insides of our eyelids so we can see ads in our sleep? What the advertizers don't realize is a little thing called diminising return. Agressive ads don't make people buy it makes them shut down and they are no longer receptive. A prime example is one of the first aggressive techniques instituted, incresing the volume during commercials. The ironic thing is since the commercials are opressively loud I reflexsively now turn off the sound during commercials. Instead of a net gain they have a total loss with me since no longer watch or listen to commercials ever. Same with on-line ads. If I notice one it's because it's being too obnoxious and I simply take note of the company, avoid buying from them if possible and switch to another web site. Gee and they wonder why ads are no longer effective? If you can't stand the ad you won't buy the product. Force feeding me advertising only turns me off of the company. Sadly a small percentage are swayed so the companies keep pushing harder but the falling numbers prove it isn't working.
We called them Clift Notes back in the day. Hey rent the movie and you get it in two hours or less. With the great works the story is secondary to the writing. Picking high notes in the great works renders them banal and pointless. Let's reduce Citizen Kane to "some rich ole dude croaks and his last words are the name of his sled he had as a kid, the end". Does it have the same impact?
Still it's nice to see them finally harnessing all the hot air for power. Shame to see it all go to waste. Adelaide is quite rich in some resources.
Actually the teeth were found some time ago. What's new is the dating information. Dogma claimed that they died out 500,000+ years ago. The new evidence brings the date up to 100,000 years ago. This will now become current dogma given this is not likely to be the date they actually died out. So few teeth and bones have been found it's impossible to even guess at an extinction date but until more bones are found it's the new hard ceiling and any more recent teeth found will be held to a high standard of evidence inorder to break through the entrenched dogma. It's amazing to me that an animals entire history is assumed based on a few bones. We know for a fact that T-Rexs died out 65,000,000 years ago. No in fact we don't know that it's simply that the most recent fossils found are 65 mill old. Very few T-Rex skeletons have been found so any dates given are wild guesses. The KT boundry exists based on a large number of fossils but few of them were Rex fossils. They probably did died out during that period there simply are no hard facts to support that and some dinosaurs are bound to have survived the KT barrier for a few million years we simply haven't found the fossils. Given the sparce nature of the record it's possible none of the fossils exist so true dates may never be known. The same situation exists with the ape fossils. The actual extinct probably occured more recently there simply aren't fossils to back it up yet. It's even possible a small number survived until historic times but that's unlikely. If they died out recently it's probable that bones would have been found unless they existed in very remote areas in small numbers. The irony is that if they were isolated the giant ape might have even lost much of it's size. The pygmy effect that happens to island bound animals can happen in isolated pockets in non island areas. There's obviously talk that they still survive and are the source of the Bigfoot legends. Highly unlikely given if they lived until modern times and actually managed to spread their range to North America there would have been bones to find. There hasn't been a single primate bone or fossil found in either Canada or the US. It sounds likely that like Pandas they were locked into a diet of Bamboo so it's probable that a bamboo die off ultimately killed them and probably not man. With a calorie intact like they had major die offs like we have today would have been devastating and probably kept their numbers low. I'm praying on a complete fossil to settle the upright or knuckle walk issue. The skull points to upright but most resist that idea so most recontructions still show knuckle walking. Dogma always supercedes evidence until it's impossible to ignore. Pterosaurs are still considered flying reptiles because of a dispute over leg orientation. Their skeletons were identical to small theropod dinosaurs but dogma still states that they somehow walked splay legged. People are slow to change. Remember that most still think of Europe as a continient inspite of having water on only three sides. The source of that was Victorian arrogance not scientific fact.
The largest crocodile fossils found so far have mostly been in South America, there have been large ones found in Texas as well. The biggest so far was around 50', at last word. That would dwarf the new find. I would have said the fish shaped tail made it unique but that's not the first time for that feature. Actually sounds fairly unexceptional so far. Have to check out the NG issue and see if there's more to it. 19' to 21' is the accepted high end for salt water Crocs but there have been larger ones found. I have heard reliable stories about one just under 30' which is possible but I think that would be an extreme high end and the animal would be over 100 years old. There was a Nile found recently that I saw film of that seemed to be north of 20', I believe they called it Gustav. I've seen film of 19' crocs and this one was considerably larger. Personally I think it was well north of 20', not 25' or 30' but definately bigger than 20'. At first they thought it was over 60 but later decided it was closer to 35 which gave it a lot of growth potential. It would seem to support the idea that the real high end is 25' to 30'. I doubt many ever reached that size given most simply don't live long enough. Even Gustav seems to have died around the time it was filmed and hasn't been seen since. The poor animal even had machine gun wounds on it's side. I'd be surprised if any currently alive were over 21'.
Seems like it would make more sense to manuver a smaller asteriod to accomplish the same task. The asteroid would end up a moon of the larger rock and be availible if further coarse corrections were they needed. Launching something of that mass, obviously a series of launchings, makes little sense.
By definition Intellegent Design is in no way a theory. Science is held to a high standard and religion is held to no standard. I'm not knocking religion it just has no place in science. The claim that there are unexplainable parts of evolution is untrue. More gaps are being filled in every day. The individual parts of a cell have been replicated using materials and processes availible in the early days of the planet. The effort now is to bring those elements together. The difference between science and religion is the story of how the world began is roughly 3 to 4 thousand years old and was originally Jewish not Christian, Christianity is less than two thousand years old. Science is a living breathing discipline that adapts as new information is found. Darwinianism hasn't been disproved it has been expanded on. The only things Darwin seemed to be wrong about were issues like speed of change. He thought it was a slow gradual process where as the fossil record seems to indicate sudden changes with long periods of minimal change. This is not disproving Darwinism it's simply refining the model using evidence not availible to Darwin. Religion demands blind faith and offers no proof. I don't want my children learning that the world is six thousand years old in Science class, there's a place for those beliefs and it's called church. There is a massive amount of evidence for the age of the planet and evolution and absolutely none for "Intellegent Design". Creationism is based on an oral tale that was written down on scrolls some three thousand years ago and recoppied countless times since. I've heard people claim the devil put fossils in the ground to confuse us. That is very scary thinking. I thought we got over that a few hundred years ago, guess not.If we head down this road we'll have people claiming once again that the earth is the center of the Universe and we should be teaching alternatives to astronomy. Think it can't happen? I personally think Intellegent Design is just as whacky. I've heard the religious right making nice with the UFO extremist inorder to legitize the "science" of intellegent design. Now there's desperate bedfellows.
"In a related story Kansas declares the world is in fact flat and people on the other side fall off."