Power consumption varies with the square of the voltage (p=v^2/r) while the power consumption varies linearly with the frequency, if it takes signicantly more voltage to over clock then it's no wonder the power usage is so high.
Lets generously assume that 1/10 flights has PED's on and that FTA there are 32000 flights per day and 75 actual PED incidents on 1/4 of the flights between 2003 and 2009. The probability that given an electronic device is on there will be an incident P(PED incident | PED on), is the probability that an incident happened and a PED was on divided by the probability a PED was on P(PED on ^ PED incident)/P(PED on)
(75 incidents/(32000flights*365days*7years*.25 of airlines surveyed))/(1/10 flights with PED on) = 0.003669% chance there will be an incident given that a PED is on
This is a gross understatement of the number of flights with PED's on my experience, in my opinion the claim that PED's will cause in interference is not borne out by the evidence presented.
We spend hundreds of millions to keep me from bringing a bottle of water on a plane, but we can't manage to get protection from terrorist magic rays that will take down a plane just like in the movies? I thought all of these guys went to the Jack Bauer school of counter terrorism.
The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters Beautiful is better than ugly. Explicit is better than implicit. Simple is better than complex. Complex is better than complicated. Flat is better than nested. Sparse is better than dense. Readability counts. Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules. Although practicality beats purity. Errors should never pass silently. Unless explicitly silenced. In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess. There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch. Now is better than never. Although never is often better than *right* now. If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea. If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.
Forget the getting out of the contract, sue in small claims for deceptive marketing tactics, ask for an injunction baring them from changing their TOS, and have the summons delivered to the local company store that way you will probably win a default judgment.
RIAA Says "Don't Expect DRMed Music To Work Forever" but not the way they meant. It all depends on your point of view, do you want to be able to play music or do you want to prevent it being played. Moores law and enough time ensures that I can decrypt or even recover the encryption key used for a large number of tracks. In the long run DRM is just an annoyance and I will be able do as I see fit with my files.
This is admittedly a gross over simplification aimed at somebody who doesn't know that much about circut design. Computer power supplies are of a much more complicated switching design, but the point here is to give the layman some rough idea why you would want to get a power supply that was rated far above your expected load.
Just because a device is rated for a load does not mean it will use that load. Because you have a 200A pannel does that mean that you use 200A all the time? No, you doen't even come close unless your elecric range, water heater, hot tub, and resistive heat are all going at the same time. The real reason to have a 1000W power supply is to get clean and stable power if you use 200W. For our purposes a power supply has a part (rectifier) that chops off the negative voltage leaving you with a bunch of pulses of voltage. There is a second component (capacitor) that stores energy at the peaks and delivers it during the valleys. There is a third component (added to the rectifier makes it a bridge rectifier) that will turn the negitive voltage into positive voltage that fits nicely in the spaces inbetween the existing positive pulses. This doubles you efficiency by giving you twice the power at the output from the same input. Everything is great untill you put a load on the power supply, then you start to actually use the power out of the capacitor, this leads to a dip in the voltage called ripple. The higher the max wattage for a power supply the more power you can use before the ripple becomes a problem. Ripple in a processor is bad, this is why you will notice capacitors all over your motherboard and on some chip packages. These capacitors help smooth out the ripple.
If you run a 200W load on a 250W power supply then you will have a great deal of ripple. If you run a 200W load on a 1kW power supply then you will have much less ripple. ripple == fluctuating voltage == unstable pc
Does it bother anybody that they are suggesting that they "poke your brain" with ultrasonics to elicit a response? Sounds like a psychiatric treatment from the 1950's.
Multiple points of failure are not necessarily bad it all depends on their failure rates.
** Probibility crash course **
when determining the probability that a system will fail is as easy as adding when you use the word or and multiplying when you use the word and
i.e. probability that system fails = (probability that pump one fails) * (Probability that pump two fails) = pump one and pump two have to fail for the system to fail
i.e. probability that system fails = (probability pipe one fails) +... + (probability that the pump fails) = the system fails if any component fails
so from this we see that if the one failure rate is significantly larger (i.e. the pump because it has moving parts as opposed to the pipeing) then the probability that the system will fail is the probability of the least reliable component failing given this you must decide if the expected failure rate is tollerable and this is easily determined by the Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) rating on the component most likely to fail, if you intend on replacing it well before the MTBF is up then you should have nothing to worry about
The Theora codec is a discrete consine transform, while dirac codec is a wavelet based. They are completely diffent ways of looking at video data and wavelett coding is showing promise as having higher compression rates and better quality.
What we really need is something that is scales with bandwidth, the more you receive the better your quality.
I would just like to point out that the current administration is not unelected, it was voted into office by the electorial college. There is no stipulation that have parity with the populus, so any way you cut it you can't call it unelected. Things you should have learned in your highschool government class in this federal republic of ours.
If you have managed switches (you do have switches in this day and age don't you?) then hit the SNMP stats to grab a large amount of info (collisions, errors, and such), also http://ntop.org has some nice general network stats type stuff with pretty graphs and integration with netflows, and of course the verable ethereal and tcpdump
I notice a number of people commenting on the balance of Microsoft's cash on hand. I believe that we will witness erosion of the giant rather than the instant destruction. A billion here five hundred million there, a few lost customers, a few governmental restrictions, pressure to give deep discounts they all add up and over time the surplus will erode away. How are they going to fight when they can't throw money at their problems, when they can't afford to take a loss in furtherance of their strangle hold?
The argument has been made that the money flowing into the US from India only benifits wealthy people. This agument is not valid because you cannot take one iteration of the money flows and declare a conclusion. A short example for you: CEO gets a bonus for cost reduction from moving a call center overseas. He puts the bonus in the bank, the bank must now loan out that sum minus the required reserve or loose money in the interest it must pay on the CEO's deposit. In order to make a loan it must be competitive in it's rates so it makes a low interest loan to build a new house for Joe Geek. Joe Geek gets a new house at lower cost, the tradesmen that build the house make a living, the building supply industry sees growth and expand production by capital expenditure and increased hiring. They get their new computers from the CEO's company at a lower cost making them more profitable and increasing their stock value, this in turn increases the value of Joe's retirement portfolio.
Nobody likes it but you have to compete for employment. You may not do the job that you want to do, but that is they way things go. In the medium and long run everybody is better off when the competitor with the relative advantage wins.
Slashdot Mirror
Have you looked at cable lacing? You could skip the trays and just suspend the laced bundle from the celing.
No need to call him Dr., he's been stripped of his medical license. http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/13/great-science-frauds/slide/andrew-wakefield/
You want to control a computer with your heart? Surely you mean an EEG.
Power consumption varies with the square of the voltage (p=v^2/r) while the power consumption varies linearly with the frequency, if it takes signicantly more voltage to over clock then it's no wonder the power usage is so high.
I was in the same boat 4 months ago, a nikon D7000 was the right choice for me.
Lets generously assume that 1/10 flights has PED's on and that FTA there are 32000 flights per day and 75 actual PED incidents on 1/4 of the flights between 2003 and 2009. The probability that given an electronic device is on there will be an incident P(PED incident | PED on), is the probability that an incident happened and a PED was on divided by the probability a PED was on P(PED on ^ PED incident)/P(PED on)
(75 incidents/(32000flights*365days*7years*.25 of airlines surveyed))/(1/10 flights with PED on) = 0.003669% chance there will be an incident given that a PED is on
This is a gross understatement of the number of flights with PED's on my experience, in my opinion the claim that PED's will cause in interference is not borne out by the evidence presented.
We spend hundreds of millions to keep me from bringing a bottle of water on a plane, but we can't manage to get protection from terrorist magic rays that will take down a plane just like in the movies? I thought all of these guys went to the Jack Bauer school of counter terrorism.
I think you are misinterpreting the meaning, look at http://artifex.org/~hblanks/talks/2011/pep20_by_example.html for concrete examples for each item
The Zen of Python, by Tim Peters
Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Although practicality beats purity.
Errors should never pass silently.
Unless explicitly silenced.
In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.
Now is better than never.
Although never is often better than *right* now.
If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea.
Forget the getting out of the contract, sue in small claims for deceptive marketing tactics, ask for an injunction baring them from changing their TOS, and have the summons delivered to the local company store that way you will probably win a default judgment.
RIAA Says "Don't Expect DRMed Music To Work Forever" but not the way they meant. It all depends on your point of view, do you want to be able to play music or do you want to prevent it being played. Moores law and enough time ensures that I can decrypt or even recover the encryption key used for a large number of tracks. In the long run DRM is just an annoyance and I will be able do as I see fit with my files.
Read you EULA, you can't sue your vendor either.
Well we certainly don't act like this is the home of the brave.
I wonder what the rental houses will say about Sony securing their customers safely away from them?
Where is the spam that goes along with this filter beating paragraph?
This is admittedly a gross over simplification aimed at somebody who doesn't know that much about circut design. Computer power supplies are of a much more complicated switching design, but the point here is to give the layman some rough idea why you would want to get a power supply that was rated far above your expected load.
Just because a device is rated for a load does not mean it will use that load. Because you have a 200A pannel does that mean that you use 200A all the time? No, you doen't even come close unless your elecric range, water heater, hot tub, and resistive heat are all going at the same time. The real reason to have a 1000W power supply is to get clean and stable power if you use 200W. For our purposes a power supply has a part (rectifier) that chops off the negative voltage leaving you with a bunch of pulses of voltage. There is a second component (capacitor) that stores energy at the peaks and delivers it during the valleys. There is a third component (added to the rectifier makes it a bridge rectifier) that will turn the negitive voltage into positive voltage that fits nicely in the spaces inbetween the existing positive pulses. This doubles you efficiency by giving you twice the power at the output from the same input. Everything is great untill you put a load on the power supply, then you start to actually use the power out of the capacitor, this leads to a dip in the voltage called ripple. The higher the max wattage for a power supply the more power you can use before the ripple becomes a problem. Ripple in a processor is bad, this is why you will notice capacitors all over your motherboard and on some chip packages. These capacitors help smooth out the ripple.
If you run a 200W load on a 250W power supply then you will have a great deal of ripple. If you run a 200W load on a 1kW power supply then you will have much less ripple. ripple == fluctuating voltage == unstable pc
Does it bother anybody that they are suggesting that they "poke your brain" with ultrasonics to elicit a response? Sounds like a psychiatric treatment from the 1950's.
Wonder what it will look like to dd-rescue? How about cdparanoia?
Multiple points of failure are not necessarily bad it all depends on their failure rates.
... + (probability that the pump fails) = the system fails if any component fails
** Probibility crash course **
when determining the probability that a system will fail is as easy as adding when you use the word or and multiplying when you use the word and
i.e. probability that system fails = (probability that pump one fails) * (Probability that pump two fails) = pump one and pump two have to fail for the system to fail
i.e. probability that system fails = (probability pipe one fails) +
so from this we see that if the one failure rate is significantly larger (i.e. the pump because it has moving parts as opposed to the pipeing) then the probability that the system will fail is the probability of the least reliable component failing given this you must decide if the expected failure rate is tollerable and this is easily determined by the Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) rating on the component most likely to fail, if you intend on replacing it well before the MTBF is up then you should have nothing to worry about
The Theora codec is a discrete consine transform, while dirac codec is a wavelet based. They are completely diffent ways of looking at video data and wavelett coding is showing promise as having higher compression rates and better quality.
What we really need is something that is scales with bandwidth, the more you receive the better your quality.
I would just like to point out that the current administration is not unelected, it was voted into office by the electorial college. There is no stipulation that have parity with the populus, so any way you cut it you can't call it unelected. Things you should have learned in your highschool government class in this federal republic of ours.
If you have managed switches (you do have switches in this day and age don't you?) then hit the SNMP stats to grab a large amount of info (collisions, errors, and such), also http://ntop.org has some nice general network stats type stuff with pretty graphs and integration with netflows, and of course the verable ethereal and tcpdump
I notice a number of people commenting on the balance of Microsoft's cash on hand. I believe that we will witness erosion of the giant rather than the instant destruction. A billion here five hundred million there, a few lost customers, a few governmental restrictions, pressure to give deep discounts they all add up and over time the surplus will erode away. How are they going to fight when they can't throw money at their problems, when they can't afford to take a loss in furtherance of their strangle hold?
The argument has been made that the money flowing into the US from India only benifits wealthy people. This agument is not valid because you cannot take one iteration of the money flows and declare a conclusion. A short example for you: CEO gets a bonus for cost reduction from moving a call center overseas. He puts the bonus in the bank, the bank must now loan out that sum minus the required reserve or loose money in the interest it must pay on the CEO's deposit. In order to make a loan it must be competitive in it's rates so it makes a low interest loan to build a new house for Joe Geek. Joe Geek gets a new house at lower cost, the tradesmen that build the house make a living, the building supply industry sees growth and expand production by capital expenditure and increased hiring. They get their new computers from the CEO's company at a lower cost making them more profitable and increasing their stock value, this in turn increases the value of Joe's retirement portfolio.
Nobody likes it but you have to compete for employment. You may not do the job that you want to do, but that is they way things go. In the medium and long run everybody is better off when the competitor with the relative advantage wins.