He could have have covered 90% of the bands he'd legally be allowed to transmit on with one Icom IC-706 Mk IIG that's about the size of a thick paperback book. Add on a cell phone and a CB transceiver and he'd pretty much have all covered while still being able to fit it into a standard double DIN radio slot.
Besides, there's no way he'd be able to put enough antennas on a car that size to be able to use more than a couple pieces of that gear at one time.
Ink made out of carbon nanotubes and silver nanowires? That will be almost as expensive as inkjet ink.
No doubt that, if these paper batteries are ever used power cars, the manufacturers will practically give the cars away and make up the cost by selling consumables.
Hands-free devices do little to reduce accidents. The big thing that causes accidents while using cell phones is the fact that most people devote most of their attention to the conversation
Yep, agreed. Which why I mentioned that exact same thing in my post.
Have they tried educating rather than penalising? Strange as it may see, most of us respond positively to scientific fact rather than an impersonal fine. Who can say why this takes place?
Man, what alternate universe do you live in? Whichever it is, I want to go there--a large percentage of the people in my universe don't seem to respond to any sort of fact, scientific or otherwise. Only a cold, hard dose of reality (such as running their car into a fire hydrant at the end of their driveway) ever gets through to them.
A law requiring the use of a hands-free device when using a cell phone while driving went into effect last year. For the first few months, there was a noticeable drop in the number of people seen with a phone held up to their ear as the Highway Patrol was concentrating on writing tickets for people caught doing that. Now that the CHP is no longer making a concerted effort to ticket phone users, the numbers are right back up to their old levels and I'm still getting cut off on the freeway by people paying more attention to their phone conversation than their driving.
Of course, it could be argued that the law was pointless in the first place since scientific studies have shown that using a hands-free device doesn't actually help prevent accidents caused by distracted drivers.
My main gripe? Scrolling smoothness. It's a small thing... but the jarring scrolling of Chrome is enough to keep me on Safari.
I'm trying out Chrome OS X right now and I've noticed the same problem. In Safari, I tend to read as I scroll but I can't do that with Chrome--it would give me a headache. Otherwise, it seems okay.
There was nothing in my original comment that says anything except that the attack on Perl Harbor was a long-term strategic blunder. Did the U.S. commit acts of war against Japan? Probably, depending on how want to define it.
Perhaps I should have expanded my comment a bit and stated "it was a strategic disaster for Japan and it's people over the long run."
I've got to disagree with you almost completely on this one. Japan made a slick tactical maneuver with their attack on Pearl Harbor but a huge strategical blunder. If Japanese war planners had paid any attention to their own intelligence, they would have realized that even if they had succeeded in knocking out the American Pacific fleet, all that would have accomplished was delaying the inevitable.
As it was, all the Pearl Harbor attack accomplished was to give the Imperial Japanese Navy six months of free reign in the western Pacific. It wasn't enough. The industrial capacity of the U.S. dwarfed that of Japan, which the Japanese military had known but chosen to ignore. The reasons given for that vary--perhaps arrogance, possibly belief in a divine destiny but no matter how you spin it, it was a strategic mistake.
And, by the way, the U.S. was not actively involved in the war in Europe at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, although it was supplying weapons and materials to Great Britain to help them in their fight against Germany.
I think the outcome of World War II demonstrates that it was not the right move strategically. Tactically, perhaps, if the Japanese military planners were expecting the U.S. to enter into war, but it was a strategic disaster for them over the long run.
how come Google's own Google Maps works better on the iPhone than Android phones?
Because Apple developed the iPhone Maps app, not Google. I read somewhere that Google's engineers were pretty impressed when the first saw it, although I can't find the article at the moment.
Slashdot Mirror
There are no such women.
Yes there are. I'm married to one. Talk about geek heaven...
Will the executive anonymously quoted in the article be leaving soon [...]?
Let's just say he's singing soprano now.
Steve J.
There was some work on electrical stimulation on spinal injury patients, and one slightly wrong setting would give women orgasms. Oops.
I believe that there are a whole lot of people who would not consider this an "oops" by any means.
When was the last time we had a story about Linus or RMS sneezing? See what I mean?
That's because Linus and RMS are both a little bit wack while Steve Jobs...oh, wait a minute...never mind...
At least, not unless the giant beer cans actually contain beer.
Ah, but if that were the case, what you'd want in your hand would be a giant can opener, not a wrench.
Yeah, but the beer will be warm.
Who'se with me, capturing this thing, and turning it into a gigantic orbiting factory?
I'm with you. Now all we need is to get someone on board who has access to a whole lot of bungee cords.
I thought about the Primus CD: "Sailing the Sea of Cheese."
It's all for show
He could have have covered 90% of the bands he'd legally be allowed to transmit on with one Icom IC-706 Mk IIG that's about the size of a thick paperback book. Add on a cell phone and a CB transceiver and he'd pretty much have all covered while still being able to fit it into a standard double DIN radio slot.
Besides, there's no way he'd be able to put enough antennas on a car that size to be able to use more than a couple pieces of that gear at one time.
KJ6BSO
I've got just the thing for you.
Although it might be more like "Windows V**** Is Freaking Awesome And Never Crashes! I'm NOT buying a M******!"
Yeah. Copulate that excrement!
Ink made out of carbon nanotubes and silver nanowires? That will be almost as expensive as inkjet ink.
No doubt that, if these paper batteries are ever used power cars, the manufacturers will practically give the cars away and make up the cost by selling consumables.
Hands-free devices do little to reduce accidents. The big thing that causes accidents while using cell phones is the fact that most people devote most of their attention to the conversation
Yep, agreed. Which why I mentioned that exact same thing in my post.
Have they tried educating rather than penalising? Strange as it may see, most of us respond positively to scientific fact rather than an impersonal fine. Who can say why this takes place?
Man, what alternate universe do you live in? Whichever it is, I want to go there--a large percentage of the people in my universe don't seem to respond to any sort of fact, scientific or otherwise. Only a cold, hard dose of reality (such as running their car into a fire hydrant at the end of their driveway) ever gets through to them.
A law requiring the use of a hands-free device when using a cell phone while driving went into effect last year. For the first few months, there was a noticeable drop in the number of people seen with a phone held up to their ear as the Highway Patrol was concentrating on writing tickets for people caught doing that. Now that the CHP is no longer making a concerted effort to ticket phone users, the numbers are right back up to their old levels and I'm still getting cut off on the freeway by people paying more attention to their phone conversation than their driving.
Of course, it could be argued that the law was pointless in the first place since scientific studies have shown that using a hands-free device doesn't actually help prevent accidents caused by distracted drivers.
Sounds like the ethics of your typical politician.
The reason nobody's mentioned UFOs yet is because whatever it was originated from the Earth.
No, the reason nobody's mentioned UFOs yet is because this phenomenon was spotted over Norway, not Arkansas.
My main gripe? Scrolling smoothness. It's a small thing... but the jarring scrolling of Chrome is enough to keep me on Safari.
I'm trying out Chrome OS X right now and I've noticed the same problem. In Safari, I tend to read as I scroll but I can't do that with Chrome--it would give me a headache. Otherwise, it seems okay.
There was nothing in my original comment that says anything except that the attack on Perl Harbor was a long-term strategic blunder. Did the U.S. commit acts of war against Japan? Probably, depending on how want to define it.
Perhaps I should have expanded my comment a bit and stated "it was a strategic disaster for Japan and it's people over the long run."
I've got to disagree with you almost completely on this one. Japan made a slick tactical maneuver with their attack on Pearl Harbor but a huge strategical blunder. If Japanese war planners had paid any attention to their own intelligence, they would have realized that even if they had succeeded in knocking out the American Pacific fleet, all that would have accomplished was delaying the inevitable.
As it was, all the Pearl Harbor attack accomplished was to give the Imperial Japanese Navy six months of free reign in the western Pacific. It wasn't enough. The industrial capacity of the U.S. dwarfed that of Japan, which the Japanese military had known but chosen to ignore. The reasons given for that vary--perhaps arrogance, possibly belief in a divine destiny but no matter how you spin it, it was a strategic mistake.
And, by the way, the U.S. was not actively involved in the war in Europe at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, although it was supplying weapons and materials to Great Britain to help them in their fight against Germany.
It was strategically the right move.
I think the outcome of World War II demonstrates that it was not the right move strategically. Tactically, perhaps, if the Japanese military planners were expecting the U.S. to enter into war, but it was a strategic disaster for them over the long run.
how come Google's own Google Maps works better on the iPhone than Android phones?
Because Apple developed the iPhone Maps app, not Google. I read somewhere that Google's engineers were pretty impressed when the first saw it, although I can't find the article at the moment.
"Consult your doctor if you have an erection lasting more than 125 years..."
Yeah, I agree. Alas.