Good advice. If you have access to a scope, see if you have voltage ripple. If you're stressing your power supply you can get pretty big ripples. It's fun to take a marginal power supply and watch what happens as you connect more and more drain to it.
This is a good idea, and if/when computer tech stops advancing so fast it'll be possible. Right now, if you want 5 year data you're looking at 10GB drives using completely different technology than what is currently available. If I want to buy a 500GB SATA drive there simply isn't data going back very far. Once the data on 500GB SATA drives is collected, I'll be buying a 20TB QWERTY drive using holographic biostorage.
I suppose there might be a small amount of value in knowing how good each manufacturer's drives were 5 years ago, but I'd be surprised if they are even making drives in the same country now.
The studios don't let masters out of their touch. They make copies and ship them under guard to theaters. Theaters aren't willing to make duplicates since they'd stop getting new films when caught. The current system is already paranoid enough to work without copyright.
For DVDs, that's why I said physical extras. A nice cloth map of middle earth, for example. Or a t-shirt, or a free ticket to a special early showing of the sequel. A limited-run action figure, a unique case, an animation gel, the list is endless. I think studios should be doing this already.
The fund idea I think is brilliant, and could work without changing anything. Once people figured out it was real and possible it would allow a lot of movies to be made that are currently dismissed as unfeasable. If farscape or firefly or something had a fan-financed movie the whole thing could take off. I'd pay $20 apiece for dozens of film ideas, if the right people were on board. I'd pay $50 for some if it included 2 passes to the theatrical release and the dvd. It'd be a slam dunk to make once enough people paid in, studios would kill for actual proof of an interested audience. If it is a no-go for whatever reason, everyone could get their investment back, plus interest. Maybe if the film is a hit the investors could get a kickback.
Anyway, I think copyright is OK and would be happy with a short term copyright. It isn't necessary, though, and the current system is unacceptable. The current system also has perverse incentives that harm the film industry. You see lots of formulaic unoriginal "blockbusters" and there is no experimentation to draw an audience. I think it'd be great for consumers and the film industry if they had to really compete to stay solvent. Imagine all the cool things they could come up with - actors/directors at screenings, exhibits of props, raffles to view a shoot...
There are lots of ways to pay for big movies. People still like to go to the cinema, you can sell merchandise, sell DVDs with physical extras, set up a fund (as soon as 1 million people donate $10/each you'll make a specific film) If an actual marketing firm worked on the idea I'm sure they could do better than my ideas.
They already include provisions for smoking. Otherwise, the first time an electrical circuit caught fire everyone would die. The air is already filtered and co2 scrubbed. I don't know what else you'd need.
A large (such as a forest) fire will vaporize water before it ever gets near the fire, making water useless. A liquid fire (such as oil or gasoline) will simply float on top of the water, resulting in a larger fire - making water worse than useless. I suggest fighting fire with vacuum, or if that isn't feasable fight it with co2.
I can tell you're almost an MD. You are bad at listening, are condescending, think you know everything, are pompous, and an idiot.
OK, I feel better. Seriously, I actually like my current doctor. He is fairly knowledgable and is one of the rare doctors who is good at listening. We have serious problems with our healthcare system, though. Anecdotal and clinical evidence shows a high error rate, misdiagnosis, slow diagnosis, unnecessary repeated visits and referrals, etc. I don't know anyone who had a nontrivial chronic problem diagnosed properly within the first 3 visits. It's ridiculous.
Here's an article about the millions of medication errors made every year in the US. You can add all the other types of errors up and easily reach tens of millions. I question how good of an education you're getting if you're unaware of and defensive about the state of medicine in this country. I doubt you or anyone from your school are going to improve matters if you deny that there is a problem and insult those who claim otherwise.
You're right that IT can help in a multi-doctor hospital setting. At the very least better communication will help, and automated systems show promise as well.
You'll do better if you try to understand. Most people don't go to hospitals a lot, so their impression of the healthcare system is from a doctor's office. When they do go to hospitals, they see the disorganized and ineffecient ER and rarely come out with a good impression. You act as if going to the doctor's office doesn't count because it isn't life threatening. Am I supposed to withhold forming an opinion until my life is in danger?
Oh, and one final thing about back pain. Your first assumption is that I'm a pill junkie, just like any other doctor. I get occasional back pain, easily treated with tramadol or cyclobenzaprine. I gave up on trying to get it from doctors. They'd give me 5 pills, or they'd give me a prescription for ibuprofen. I don't want to go to the doctor every few months to get 5 pills. So now I just order a bottle online so they're handy and take them as needed without having to see a doctor. I'd heard that medical schools were changing their attitude about pain relief, both in end-of-life and in routine situations. I'm sad to find out this isn't true.
Why are we punishing 98% of patients by withholding beneficial meds in order to punish the 2% who are prone to abuse? The abusers are abusing anyway, with street drugs or black market pharmaceuticals. It hurts many people and doesn't stop what it's designed to prevent. Watching my 4 grandparents die in hospital (over a span of 2 decades) was most instructive. They were given minimal pain medication and all died in horrible agony. Think of all the liver damage done by overuse of acetaminophen and ibuprofen instead of using more appropriate medication. It's barbaric.
Oh well. Right now the system has a disincentive for fast and correct diagnosis. A strong incentive for multiple unnecessary visits. No difference between fixing the problem and not. I don't think change is possible unless we change the system. The people in health care aren't really the problem, they're victims of the system just like us patients.
You hit on the one thing I think our doctors are good at: critical care. If you have a broken something or a leaking something they can fix you up amazingly. I know there are good doctors, I just think they are rare and subject to burnout. It's the little things that leave me feeling cheated. I shouldn't have to explain how the common cold works to a doctor.
You're wrong about the error rate. According to the FDA medical errors in hospitals kill 50k-100k Americans per year, and are the 8th largest cause of death. Not all of these errors are caused by doctors, but I think it's fair to mix doctors and the health care system up. This doesn't even begin to cover the millions of less critical errors made on an outpatient, office, or long term care facility. The linked document (from 2000) outlines an ambitious program to reduce medical errors. The results so far are hardly impressive.
I don't think minimizing the error rate and huge financial and human cost are helpful. I have respect for people in the health care field, but we need to be honest about the problems.
Where do you get your insurance?!? I'm paying over $100/month just on my shitty policy. Copays, deductable, etc. add up to about another $1000/year. Plus, my employer kicks in another $100/month.
If your plumber fucks up the pipes, he has to come back out and fix the leak. If your doctor fucks up *your* pipes you're dead.
I don't have a problem with how much doctors make, just a problem with our entire healthcare system. This quote caught my interest, however. Doctors make mistakes all the time. Millions of serious mistakes every year. Many tens of thousands of these mistakes result in someone dying. Hundreds of thousands result in serious harm. Please don't imply that doctors have higher standards than plumbers. It's a more difficult job, but plumbing mistakes are pretty rare in comparison to medical mistakes.
I have been fairly lucky, no major medical fuckups. I still have the impression that doctors are largely quacks. Even a simple problem takes multiple visits and the trial and error approach. I cringe for those whose life is on the line. I've had doctors force antibiotics on me for a cold, withhold pain medication with a back injury, suggest expensive and meaningless tests, and so forth. A few minutes on google before my visit and I generally know more about my condition, related tests, accepted treatment than my doctor does. The only reason I go to the doctor is the prescription pad. If it weren't for that, I'd go to the doctor very rarely.
All of your suggestions to improve healthcare will raise the cost even further. Do you have any suggestions about lowering the cost or how to deal with uninsured people? I suspect those are the types of problems the GP was referring to, not barriers to selling drugs more easily.
Sadly, that isn't true. The terrorist only needs enough accomplices to make policies opressive, paranoid and idiotic. Say 30%. Then the other 70% can be terrified of their government. It's like the domino theory of stupidity.
Seriously? You think we should arrange our society so that people can't drop off packages on the side of the road? Fucking martial law, tanks, checkpoints can't stop that. You can't be 100% safe. Trying makes things horrible. Please stop.
I think it's different now. We weren't taking our shoes off and banning chapstick on planes. During the red scare at least people smoked, drove drunk without seatbelts, took lots of uppers and tranquilizers, and never ever thought of the children.
It makes me sad that our culture has become so very risk averse, at any cost, in irrational ways. I'm definitely not idolizing our past. I would not have enjoyed how little room for nonconformists there was in the 50s.
It is strange. Kids don't grow up running around and playing like I did in the 70s. I'd blow things up, go for 10 mile hikes, explore sewers, break into churches, never wore a helmet, and took candy from strangers. The 60s-80s seemed to have fears focused outside onto vague distant threats, rather than inside, a constant suspicious gnawing.
I don't know why it happened. Maybe living in this constant fake fear of getting nuked during the cold war made people afraid of life in general. Something made Americans afraid of everything.
Please don't try to justify this pathetic overreaction. We've become a nation of fearful neurotic idiots.
If someone wants to blow up a bridge, they will blow it up. They can strap dynamite to their torso and hug support beams. They can drive an explosive-filled car into a stanchion. They can fill a boat with fertilizer and float underneath. No matter how much we freak out over nothing, no matter how many times we give up our rights, take off our shoes, and do other retarded inappropriate useless things.
Even if we were dealing with a coward terrorist who wasn't willing to commit his life, you wouldn't see something with wires and batteries sticking out. It'd be out of sight, or look like garbage.
It's such an irrational fear. How many people have been killed in the past hundred years in the US by little boxes with wires and batteries sticking out? How many have been killed by auto wrecks? It's jaw-droppingly lame, and it's getting worse. We'd be better off panicking about ceiling fans, lightning bolts, or bunions.
We don't even need terrorists anymore. All it takes to shut down a city is cowering, whimpering, losers afraid of their own shadow.
Oh, that's easy. Just put 10 amp breakers on each cube. With a pc, lamp, etc. they will blow the breaker if their 1000W heater kicks on. Act worried when they wonder why their pc shut down. Mutter about fire risk and overloading the circuits.
Or maybe put a small rack of servers blowing nice hot air under the cubes?
LED lamp assemblies have a power supply, probably one that rectifies the current, converts the voltage to something suitable, and smooths out the fluctuation in voltage. If you put 120VAC through any LED you'd have light one time only, just for a moment.
The power supply has to be designed specially to deal with a dimmer switch. Some dimmer switches work differently than others, and the power supply may not deal with it effectively.
OK, if you can boot from a thumb drive but not your external hdd it is a formatting problem. Take a look at this and try the hp usb image tool. I think that's what I used when I formatted my external hdd to be bootable.
I boot from external drives to do troubleshooting. You need to enable USB and make it first in BIOS. Then, attach your external drive and boot. Here is some more info. It talks about thumb drives but I don't see anything different than what you do for an external drive.
Are you thinking of Crimea?
on
Water From Wind
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
There are some ancient dew collectors. Check this one.
It doesn't have to be zero sum
on
Water From Wind
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If you put the condensors where moist air usually flows out to sea or over a lake it will just suck up moisture from the body of water, resulting in no reduced rainfall over land. Places with high humidity might see no difference in rainfall, since it'd be hard to extract water faster than water gets added naturally.
Slashdot Mirror
Good advice. If you have access to a scope, see if you have voltage ripple. If you're stressing your power supply you can get pretty big ripples. It's fun to take a marginal power supply and watch what happens as you connect more and more drain to it.
This is a good idea, and if/when computer tech stops advancing so fast it'll be possible. Right now, if you want 5 year data you're looking at 10GB drives using completely different technology than what is currently available. If I want to buy a 500GB SATA drive there simply isn't data going back very far. Once the data on 500GB SATA drives is collected, I'll be buying a 20TB QWERTY drive using holographic biostorage.
I suppose there might be a small amount of value in knowing how good each manufacturer's drives were 5 years ago, but I'd be surprised if they are even making drives in the same country now.
The studios don't let masters out of their touch. They make copies and ship them under guard to theaters. Theaters aren't willing to make duplicates since they'd stop getting new films when caught. The current system is already paranoid enough to work without copyright.
For DVDs, that's why I said physical extras. A nice cloth map of middle earth, for example. Or a t-shirt, or a free ticket to a special early showing of the sequel. A limited-run action figure, a unique case, an animation gel, the list is endless. I think studios should be doing this already.
The fund idea I think is brilliant, and could work without changing anything. Once people figured out it was real and possible it would allow a lot of movies to be made that are currently dismissed as unfeasable. If farscape or firefly or something had a fan-financed movie the whole thing could take off. I'd pay $20 apiece for dozens of film ideas, if the right people were on board. I'd pay $50 for some if it included 2 passes to the theatrical release and the dvd. It'd be a slam dunk to make once enough people paid in, studios would kill for actual proof of an interested audience. If it is a no-go for whatever reason, everyone could get their investment back, plus interest. Maybe if the film is a hit the investors could get a kickback.
Anyway, I think copyright is OK and would be happy with a short term copyright. It isn't necessary, though, and the current system is unacceptable. The current system also has perverse incentives that harm the film industry. You see lots of formulaic unoriginal "blockbusters" and there is no experimentation to draw an audience. I think it'd be great for consumers and the film industry if they had to really compete to stay solvent. Imagine all the cool things they could come up with - actors/directors at screenings, exhibits of props, raffles to view a shoot...
Bravo, sir. You quoted a popular urban legend verbatim without going to the trouble to attribute it.
And, you're wrong
There are lots of ways to pay for big movies. People still like to go to the cinema, you can sell merchandise, sell DVDs with physical extras, set up a fund (as soon as 1 million people donate $10/each you'll make a specific film) If an actual marketing firm worked on the idea I'm sure they could do better than my ideas.
Think of the workers. 8 hours a day of that. You'd have to drop acid on your days off to avoid going postal.
They already include provisions for smoking. Otherwise, the first time an electrical circuit caught fire everyone would die. The air is already filtered and co2 scrubbed. I don't know what else you'd need.
A large (such as a forest) fire will vaporize water before it ever gets near the fire, making water useless. A liquid fire (such as oil or gasoline) will simply float on top of the water, resulting in a larger fire - making water worse than useless. I suggest fighting fire with vacuum, or if that isn't feasable fight it with co2.
I can tell you're almost an MD. You are bad at listening, are condescending, think you know everything, are pompous, and an idiot.
OK, I feel better. Seriously, I actually like my current doctor. He is fairly knowledgable and is one of the rare doctors who is good at listening. We have serious problems with our healthcare system, though. Anecdotal and clinical evidence shows a high error rate, misdiagnosis, slow diagnosis, unnecessary repeated visits and referrals, etc. I don't know anyone who had a nontrivial chronic problem diagnosed properly within the first 3 visits. It's ridiculous.
Here's an article about the millions of medication errors made every year in the US. You can add all the other types of errors up and easily reach tens of millions. I question how good of an education you're getting if you're unaware of and defensive about the state of medicine in this country. I doubt you or anyone from your school are going to improve matters if you deny that there is a problem and insult those who claim otherwise.
You're right that IT can help in a multi-doctor hospital setting. At the very least better communication will help, and automated systems show promise as well.
You'll do better if you try to understand. Most people don't go to hospitals a lot, so their impression of the healthcare system is from a doctor's office. When they do go to hospitals, they see the disorganized and ineffecient ER and rarely come out with a good impression. You act as if going to the doctor's office doesn't count because it isn't life threatening. Am I supposed to withhold forming an opinion until my life is in danger?
Oh, and one final thing about back pain. Your first assumption is that I'm a pill junkie, just like any other doctor. I get occasional back pain, easily treated with tramadol or cyclobenzaprine. I gave up on trying to get it from doctors. They'd give me 5 pills, or they'd give me a prescription for ibuprofen. I don't want to go to the doctor every few months to get 5 pills. So now I just order a bottle online so they're handy and take them as needed without having to see a doctor. I'd heard that medical schools were changing their attitude about pain relief, both in end-of-life and in routine situations. I'm sad to find out this isn't true.
Why are we punishing 98% of patients by withholding beneficial meds in order to punish the 2% who are prone to abuse? The abusers are abusing anyway, with street drugs or black market pharmaceuticals. It hurts many people and doesn't stop what it's designed to prevent. Watching my 4 grandparents die in hospital (over a span of 2 decades) was most instructive. They were given minimal pain medication and all died in horrible agony. Think of all the liver damage done by overuse of acetaminophen and ibuprofen instead of using more appropriate medication. It's barbaric.
Oh well. Right now the system has a disincentive for fast and correct diagnosis. A strong incentive for multiple unnecessary visits. No difference between fixing the problem and not. I don't think change is possible unless we change the system. The people in health care aren't really the problem, they're victims of the system just like us patients.
You hit on the one thing I think our doctors are good at: critical care. If you have a broken something or a leaking something they can fix you up amazingly. I know there are good doctors, I just think they are rare and subject to burnout. It's the little things that leave me feeling cheated. I shouldn't have to explain how the common cold works to a doctor.
You're wrong about the error rate. According to the FDA medical errors in hospitals kill 50k-100k Americans per year, and are the 8th largest cause of death. Not all of these errors are caused by doctors, but I think it's fair to mix doctors and the health care system up. This doesn't even begin to cover the millions of less critical errors made on an outpatient, office, or long term care facility. The linked document (from 2000) outlines an ambitious program to reduce medical errors. The results so far are hardly impressive.
I don't think minimizing the error rate and huge financial and human cost are helpful. I have respect for people in the health care field, but we need to be honest about the problems.
Where do you get your insurance?!? I'm paying over $100/month just on my shitty policy. Copays, deductable, etc. add up to about another $1000/year. Plus, my employer kicks in another $100/month.
I don't have a problem with how much doctors make, just a problem with our entire healthcare system. This quote caught my interest, however. Doctors make mistakes all the time. Millions of serious mistakes every year. Many tens of thousands of these mistakes result in someone dying. Hundreds of thousands result in serious harm. Please don't imply that doctors have higher standards than plumbers. It's a more difficult job, but plumbing mistakes are pretty rare in comparison to medical mistakes.
I have been fairly lucky, no major medical fuckups. I still have the impression that doctors are largely quacks. Even a simple problem takes multiple visits and the trial and error approach. I cringe for those whose life is on the line. I've had doctors force antibiotics on me for a cold, withhold pain medication with a back injury, suggest expensive and meaningless tests, and so forth. A few minutes on google before my visit and I generally know more about my condition, related tests, accepted treatment than my doctor does. The only reason I go to the doctor is the prescription pad. If it weren't for that, I'd go to the doctor very rarely.
All of your suggestions to improve healthcare will raise the cost even further. Do you have any suggestions about lowering the cost or how to deal with uninsured people? I suspect those are the types of problems the GP was referring to, not barriers to selling drugs more easily.
Sadly, that isn't true. The terrorist only needs enough accomplices to make policies opressive, paranoid and idiotic. Say 30%. Then the other 70% can be terrified of their government. It's like the domino theory of stupidity.
Seriously? You think we should arrange our society so that people can't drop off packages on the side of the road? Fucking martial law, tanks, checkpoints can't stop that. You can't be 100% safe. Trying makes things horrible. Please stop.
I think it's different now. We weren't taking our shoes off and banning chapstick on planes. During the red scare at least people smoked, drove drunk without seatbelts, took lots of uppers and tranquilizers, and never ever thought of the children.
It makes me sad that our culture has become so very risk averse, at any cost, in irrational ways. I'm definitely not idolizing our past. I would not have enjoyed how little room for nonconformists there was in the 50s.
It is strange. Kids don't grow up running around and playing like I did in the 70s. I'd blow things up, go for 10 mile hikes, explore sewers, break into churches, never wore a helmet, and took candy from strangers. The 60s-80s seemed to have fears focused outside onto vague distant threats, rather than inside, a constant suspicious gnawing.
I don't know why it happened. Maybe living in this constant fake fear of getting nuked during the cold war made people afraid of life in general. Something made Americans afraid of everything.
Please don't try to justify this pathetic overreaction. We've become a nation of fearful neurotic idiots.
If someone wants to blow up a bridge, they will blow it up. They can strap dynamite to their torso and hug support beams. They can drive an explosive-filled car into a stanchion. They can fill a boat with fertilizer and float underneath. No matter how much we freak out over nothing, no matter how many times we give up our rights, take off our shoes, and do other retarded inappropriate useless things.
Even if we were dealing with a coward terrorist who wasn't willing to commit his life, you wouldn't see something with wires and batteries sticking out. It'd be out of sight, or look like garbage.
It's such an irrational fear. How many people have been killed in the past hundred years in the US by little boxes with wires and batteries sticking out? How many have been killed by auto wrecks? It's jaw-droppingly lame, and it's getting worse. We'd be better off panicking about ceiling fans, lightning bolts, or bunions.
We don't even need terrorists anymore. All it takes to shut down a city is cowering, whimpering, losers afraid of their own shadow.
Oh, that's easy. Just put 10 amp breakers on each cube. With a pc, lamp, etc. they will blow the breaker if their 1000W heater kicks on. Act worried when they wonder why their pc shut down. Mutter about fire risk and overloading the circuits.
Or maybe put a small rack of servers blowing nice hot air under the cubes?
LED lamp assemblies have a power supply, probably one that rectifies the current, converts the voltage to something suitable, and smooths out the fluctuation in voltage. If you put 120VAC through any LED you'd have light one time only, just for a moment.
The power supply has to be designed specially to deal with a dimmer switch. Some dimmer switches work differently than others, and the power supply may not deal with it effectively.
I know it's bad to be called a spammer, but I can't even begin to imagine what it's like to have someone think you're a spammer.
I bet I got some of it wrong.
OK, if you can boot from a thumb drive but not your external hdd it is a formatting problem. Take a look at this and try the hp usb image tool. I think that's what I used when I formatted my external hdd to be bootable.
How do they keep flash drives out? Most phones, mp3 players, cameras, etc. are flash drives.
I boot from external drives to do troubleshooting. You need to enable USB and make it first in BIOS. Then, attach your external drive and boot. Here is some more info. It talks about thumb drives but I don't see anything different than what you do for an external drive.
There are some ancient dew collectors. Check this one.
If you put the condensors where moist air usually flows out to sea or over a lake it will just suck up moisture from the body of water, resulting in no reduced rainfall over land. Places with high humidity might see no difference in rainfall, since it'd be hard to extract water faster than water gets added naturally.