what i mean by the quote is that "the box" (the computer) has a fixed set of rules that any solution must adhere to. in that sense, excelling in computer science and/or software engineering is about how well you think "inside the box".
you don't want the tanks insulated! you want them to communicate heat/coldness with the atomosphere in the data center. no specialized equipment needed. the vats just slow the rate at which temperature rises/falls.
i bet what you mean by "electric heat" is a heat pump. a heat pump is about 2.5 times more efficient for heating your house than just running electricity through resistive coils (as with a space heater, for example).
the reason is that the vast majority of the heat coming from the heat pump comes from cooling the outside air. imagine opening the door to your refrigerator to the outside and letting the fluid coils in the back heat up the inside air.
AMD beats Intel in... power use and runs cooler as well.
when i read "runs cooler" i was thinking "no sh**t! you just said that! redundant!" and then i considered some readers might have power use and heat dissipation as separate entities in their mind. their inherent, direct correlation kinda makes them run together in my mind.:)
(some will point out that congress doesn't stop people from publishing libellous documents, just punishes them afterwards... personally I consider that if a man tells me "if you say this you'll be fined $1000", he is abridging my freedome of speech,...).
It's not the government ("the people") who bring to court a case of libel. Libel is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Congress doesn't abridge speech/press, it just recognizes that such can carry civil liability.
I suppose, however, there are rare cases in which criminal liability also applies, such as ordering a "hit", but defamation is not criminal. (nor am I a lawyer!)
NTSC broadcasts are supposedly dying soon, so why don't they offer HDTV-capable cards yet?
...and that is why this review was crappy. they kept saying "IT DOES TV! OH JESUS! YOU CAN WATCH TV!" "TV" is a completely ambiguous term these days. they only barely mention at the end, "oh wait. it only does the archaic, crappy kind of TV."--the kind i can get on a $20 used hauppage card.
I have thought it would be great to run an online dating service as a non-profit. You do not charge people for the service, but accept tax-deductable donations. I imagine people who have success with the site would give generously to help make the service available to others. Also, you wouldn't have to worry about the site having ulterior motives.
I don't care what you guys think. I liked Episode 1--much more than episode 2 and about the same as episode 3. So far, Phantom Menace is the only one I own.
As someone already pointed out, it's effectively 2 x 56 = 112. "Triple DES" only uses (effectively) two DES keys, so that it would be to be able to talk to "Single DES" applications by giving it two copies of a single DES key. In that case, the three rounds are encryption+decryption+encryption all with the same key, which is equivalent to just encryption.
If the two keys are different, you the encryption phases are encryption + a "wrong" decryption (different key) + encryption again, which is much better than just a single encryption.
advantage of hydrogen's density, it's arguably safer than gasoline
are you smoking crack? at standard pressure, hydrogen is the least dense substance there is! to get any density from it, you need enormous pressure, which carries inherent risk. i don't have to worry about my gasoline tank randomly exploding due to metal fatigue while it's parked and off.
of course, it could rot out and spill toxic, flammable gasoline everywhere.
the risks with hydrogen are different and unfamiliar.
i get the feeling that such unscientific articles (although i haven't read it; it's offline now) are intented to get the scientifically unenlightened but economically endowed to pump money into their company. it sounds good, buy Canon!
and those of us familiar with the laws of thermodynamics probably won't penalize them when it comes time to buy a new camera. alas.
owing to many recent less-than-science articles, it would be fun if the community could collectively evaluate articles in terms of merit/originality, placing them into single-word/phrase categories such as "lies" or "propaganda" or "dog poop" or "good stuff" or "the holy grail"...
> If I give you another stick (6), how can you make 4 triangles?
silly, you should have asked one that requires 4 dimensions! (too lazy to come up with one myself)
>Create a super-duper bigass tunnel made with the best sound insulation money and indentured servitude can buy, make it long enough for the jet to be able to (with the help of high-tech japanese chip technology) accelerate across the sound barrier while in the tunnel
No, that's a really stupid idea. A related and much better idea i have seen proposed would be a mag-lev train tunnel that's drawn to a vacuum. I think they were estimating speeds peaking at about mach 15 for underwater transcontinental travel.
But this brings up another important point. Supersonic flight through air is horribly inefficient when compared to subsonic flight through air (or flight through a vacuum). The fuel and wear&tear costs of supersonic flight are a much larger hurdle than public policy.
Slashdot Mirror
Your choice of word ordering is interesting. The article is not about making software more dependable; it's about making more dependable software!
what i mean by the quote is that "the box" (the computer) has a fixed set of rules that any solution must adhere to. in that sense, excelling in computer science and/or software engineering is about how well you think "inside the box".
I have been quoted as saying, "Thinking `outside the box' doesn't help you in computer science."
I think we're encouraged to avoid thinking in our free time.
dude, go to grad school. do research. it gets you thinking 24/7. yes, even in your sleep.
me@host:~$ cat << EOF | wc -c /bin/sh
> #!
> dd if=/dev/zero bs=1M count=1M
> EOF
42
sweeet.
i'm shocked i had to read this far down to see someone invalidate his math. maybe "Baldrson," "Zonk," and all those fools above went to school in UK!
wait, that was lame. oh well. i'm just a dork.
it doesn't have to be open (which would be the only condensation issue). sealed metal would be ideal, for heat transmission.
you don't want the tanks insulated! you want them to communicate heat/coldness with the atomosphere in the data center. no specialized equipment needed. the vats just slow the rate at which temperature rises/falls.
the reason is that the vast majority of the heat coming from the heat pump comes from cooling the outside air. imagine opening the door to your refrigerator to the outside and letting the fluid coils in the back heat up the inside air.
when i read "runs cooler" i was thinking "no sh**t! you just said that! redundant!" and then i considered some readers might have power use and heat dissipation as separate entities in their mind. their inherent, direct correlation kinda makes them run together in my mind. :)
It's not the government ("the people") who bring to court a case of libel. Libel is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Congress doesn't abridge speech/press, it just recognizes that such can carry civil liability.
I suppose, however, there are rare cases in which criminal liability also applies, such as ordering a "hit", but defamation is not criminal. (nor am I a lawyer!)
that would RULE! fill that trough with soil!
I have thought it would be great to run an online dating service as a non-profit. You do not charge people for the service, but accept tax-deductable donations. I imagine people who have success with the site would give generously to help make the service available to others. Also, you wouldn't have to worry about the site having ulterior motives.
Jar-jar doesn't bother me and Padme is HOT.
i guess i better change my work so i can remain a scientist. :)
Someone needs to check his sarcasm detector.
heh, with a sledge hammer i can crack them in about 3 seconds.
If the two keys are different, you the encryption phases are encryption + a "wrong" decryption (different key) + encryption again, which is much better than just a single encryption.
Details, of course here.
are you smoking crack? at standard pressure, hydrogen is the least dense substance there is! to get any density from it, you need enormous pressure, which carries inherent risk. i don't have to worry about my gasoline tank randomly exploding due to metal fatigue while it's parked and off.
of course, it could rot out and spill toxic, flammable gasoline everywhere.
the risks with hydrogen are different and unfamiliar.
i get the feeling that such unscientific articles (although i haven't read it; it's offline now) are intented to get the scientifically unenlightened but economically endowed to pump money into their company. it sounds good, buy Canon!
and those of us familiar with the laws of thermodynamics probably won't penalize them when it comes time to buy a new camera. alas.
owing to many recent less-than-science articles, it would be fun if the community could collectively evaluate articles in terms of merit/originality, placing them into single-word/phrase categories such as "lies" or "propaganda" or "dog poop" or "good stuff" or "the holy grail"...
> If I give you another stick (6), how can you make 4 triangles? silly, you should have asked one that requires 4 dimensions! (too lazy to come up with one myself)
You need to read books by Raymond Smullyan. This problem is child's play...
The first supersonic rocket plane was launched almost 60 years ago. It's taken this long for jets to do the same?
Or maybe you should just mention commercial aviation in the title or first half of the abstract.
>Create a super-duper bigass tunnel made with the best sound insulation money and indentured servitude can buy, make it long enough for the jet to be able to (with the help of high-tech japanese chip technology) accelerate across the sound barrier while in the tunnel
No, that's a really stupid idea. A related and much better idea i have seen proposed would be a mag-lev train tunnel that's drawn to a vacuum. I think they were estimating speeds peaking at about mach 15 for underwater transcontinental travel.
But this brings up another important point. Supersonic flight through air is horribly inefficient when compared to subsonic flight through air (or flight through a vacuum). The fuel and wear&tear costs of supersonic flight are a much larger hurdle than public policy.