The full tos for the games on demand system is available at: http://gamesondemand.yahoo.com/play/adtos_nl and doesn't contain the implied statement. Also, I can't find anywhere that offers a free play of Civ III. If I could, I'd be happy to install and play it on an otherwise empty system at home. I'll be quite happy to skew their results with a barebones system.
T*e atta** **ll *e at ******* on t*e World Trade Center
Several problems with that:
Each bit in a OTP is completely independent, therefore, were you actually able to get part of the phrase to show up, that doesn't mean the rest would.
By XORing against any possible combinations of bits of the same length, you'll get all possible strings of that length to come out. You're just as likely to get sonething with the world trade center mentioned as the entire alphabet repeated, etc...
Your attack is an attack against more common encryption methods that have a smaller possible keyset. Also, I'd expect that either you get the entire message correct, or none at all. Getting a partial message means you're probably using a bad key and the other stuff is just junk that happens to come out when that key is applied.
So far as I know, there is no valid plaintext attack on OTP. The problems with OTP are solely those in relying on the security of the keys. It must be certain that the sender gets the key to the recipient without any part of the pad being viewed or altered by a third party. The level of security required by the application dicates the level of transmission certainty required. Transmitting your grocery list? Probably okay to exchange the key in e-mail. Transmitting nuclear launch codes? Better do it from one secure facility to another with an armed guard and multiple people, none of which has all of the key and all of which see each other the entire time, and none of which trust each other.
No, a 'long ton' is not the same as a metric tonne.
My error, I'd made the mistake of trusting the terminology on a result from google...:)
So, then, there are in fact three tonnages, the short ton, which we tend to use, the long ton, which is somewhat irrelevant here, and the metric ton, which the poster I replied to was using.
You just nailed the major reason that we're all not driving electric cars right now on the head: Batteries.
Personally, I'd have to argue semantics here. The reason we're not driving electric cars right now is "storage". This problem can be solved with batteries, flywheels, pure hydrogen fuel cells, etc...
Fuel cells are on the way, and will probably be the ideal solution. The fuel cell will either run on pre-separated hydrogen, much like a battery stores pre-generated power, or it will run off enhanced liquid fuels. In the first form, it will be called a zero emmissions vehicle, the emmissions having been generated at a power plant somewhere else at an earlier time in a more controlled environment. The second form will be a low-emmissions form, but if proper fuels are chosen the emmissions should be negligible. For example, filling it with biodiesel (i.e., reformulated corn oil) should result in incredibly low emmissions.
The other advantage to fuel cells is size. The fuel cell system would probably use several large capacitors and batteries for short term boost accelleration, but overall the system would be much smaller and lighter than a comparable battery system.
You had to convert kilograms into pounds to figure out how many tons it weighed? Here's a hint: 1 ton is 1,000 kilogram. It's a lot faster to calculate that way.
In the US, one ton is 2000 lb (also called a short ton). One Metric ton is 1000 kg (also called a long ton, at 2204.6 lb). In the US, when you ask for one ton of material and don't specify long or short, the short ton is common usage and typically assumed.
One thing that could be improved on many of these quantitative reviews is if they quit relying upon surface temperature probes (which is HORRIBLY unreliable.
Power consumption doesn't directly relate to heat, since the use and dispersion patterns internal to the drive could make a world of difference. I'd suggest using something like these products, from Raytek, which take heat readings in a noncontact method from a distance. For example, this product has a ratio that indicates at 4" away it'll read a 1" area spot. (so, to read a 3.5" drive, you'd want it 14" away from the drive) There are also fixed-installation products more ideal for a testing environment, with a fixed probe and a remote or computer interfaced monitor.
On the THOMAS website, within Bill Number HR.3162.ENR, SEC. 215. ACCESS TO RECORDS AND OTHER ITEMS UNDER THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT, all replacement text for Title V of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, SEC. 501. ACCESS TO CERTAIN BUSINESS RECORDS FOR FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM INVESTIGATIONS.
All of the charges leveled against the PATRIOT Act in this case should be easily found within this section, my reading indicates they're present, and reports are doing an exceptional job of not blowing thing out of proportion. (All interest groups blow things out of proportion, but in this case reports are suprisingly accurate.)
The libraries are provided FREE of charge by the government. Therefore why shouldn't they be able to get the information on what books you have read.
Those libraries which are public are provided to all and funded primarily by the local taxpayer. Access to records, if kept, of who checked out which books should follow due process procedures. Prior to the patriot act, law enforcement would need to get a warrant (U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV) detailing what they were looking for on a basis of probable cause. The patriot act circumvents that. In addition, we are guaranteed a freedom of speech (U.S. Constitution, Amendment I) which would appear to be curtailed by these subpoenas, since people should now fear to check out books which the government might identify as somehow "subversive". Note also, "For the First Amendment does not speak equivocally. . . . It must be taken as a command of the broadest scope that explicit language, read in the context of a liberty-loving society, will allow." Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252, 263 (1941), which is to say, "Free speech carries with it some freedom to listen." Richmond Newspapers, Inc., et al. v. Virginia et al., 448 U.S. 555, 79-243 (1980).
So I think the response to your question is that libraries have to keep track of lending habits. They have no other option. They can't simply lend a book out without any record of it being checked out. (Why does this seem like it might be the germ for a Borges story?)
The library only needs to keep track of what's currently checked out, and to who. In your post, the card they took out of your book could easily be attached with a paperclip to an ID card with your name on it. Then, when you return it, the book's card goes back in the book and your ID card goes back in your file. Simple, easy to see when you're overdue, and never requires adding a record to a file.
Said impact ejecta would be thrown up and into the stratosphere, circle, and land somewhere opposite (say 3/4) around the globe. More impacts, more fire. Lots of soot to block out light.
Except that a fire that large would leave a layer of soot that could be detected, and no such soot has been detected (at least at the 35 million year climate disturbance).
the real question is, what happens when 2 different states give UUnet different rules?
One state say, you must filter XYZ, and onther states say you can not filter XYZ?
Configure all the routers you run in the one state to route XYZ as null. The rest of the internet should route around the "damage", seeing that they can't use that router to get to that destination.
Granted, my preferred method would to not do business in that state (or at least run routers), but that's an expensive proposition.
Assume $2 net per original, and $1 net per expansion. Without piracy, Blue Byte would have netted $650k. With piracy, Blue Byte netted $350k.
That's the other part of the fallacy he's trying to illustrate. You each made an assumption. The poster you replied to made the assumption that no pirate would've purchased the software in the first place, you made the assumption that all pirates would've purchased the software had it not been available in warez form.
Using your numbers, out example nets an actual:
$2*100,000 orig+$1*150,000 expansion = $350,000
If it was unpiratable, but with the assumption that pirates would've purchased it if they couldn't pirate it, our example nets: $2*250,000 + $1*150,000 = $650,000.
Using your numbers, but with the assumption that pirates wouldn't've purchased it, regardless. $2*100,000 orig + $1*60,000 (60% penetration) = $260,000
Thus, you each made an assumption and came up with different results. With the previous poster's assumption, his result is indeed correct. More money was made with piracy than without. With your assumption, you are correct, more money would've been made with no piracy. The net result? I tend to think its somewhere in the middle... some pirates would've paid for it. Only question there is where between $260 and $650k it would've been. If its close to $350k, then piracy really didn't matter much.
Um, no. If I go to a newsgroup and download software, it's stealing. I took something that didn't belong to me. At no point during the process did I falsify who I was so how is it fraud?
No, it isn't, its copyright infringment. It isn't fraud, as you haven't misrepresented something. It isn't stealing, since the original exists and is held by the same person that held it before in an unaltered form. It is however copyright infringement, since the person who holds the rights to distribute copies did not give you or the person holding the original permission to distribute a fresh copy.
That's pretty ignorant, man. Those bits might've taken a company 2 years and 10 million dollars to develop. You seem to think the entire cost of a software manufacturer is whatever printing the cd and jewel case cost them.
Their are a TON of ways you can steal without it being a physical good. If I hack a university and enroll myself classes, free of charge, I would consider that stealing.
Physical theft is not the same as copyright infringement or trespass. The manufacturer's cost of creating the disk is indeed the cost of printing the cd and jewelbox. However, they also require compensation for what they created to put on the disk, independently of the disk itself. If I purchase a piece of software and hack it so I can run a backup copy when someone's kid breaks the original, that should be legal. That's covered under copyright fair use (barring DMCA, of course). If, however, I then give someone else a copy of my cd, I've just committed the crime of copyright infringement. Note that this crime has its own name, since it is separate and distinct from theft.
In your analogy above, you wouldn't have committed theft. You would've committed trespass. Multiple times, in fact. The first time through unauthorised access to their systems, and the rest by showing up to a class when you're not authorised by the property owner to be there. The first case of trespass, of course, might be debatable in this form, but I'd say it is an accurate description.
They'd have to spend many billions of dollars developing new cars if a switch to fuel cells really happened.
They do that every few years already. Designing new cars is nothing new. Particularly in the US the model year seems to matter to people, so every few years they actually try to make a car that appears new so more people will buy it.
Auto mechanics would have to retrain,
They have to retrain for all the new electronic controlled engines anyways.
the tow truck drivers would need to add gear to tow the new cars, full cell stations would have to be set up nationwide.
Tow truck gear is pretty universal. As long as the car designer keeps the wheels an appropriate distance from the front bumper, the basic wheel straps currently in use will work fine. In a new chassis design, it would also be pretty easy to include hardware compatible with major current tow hooks. As for fuel cell stations, that really depends on the fuel cell type used. Some fuel cells can take gasoline after its passed through a reformer, thus you could include a reformer between the fuel tank and the fuel cell and require no new infrastructure.
Factories would have to be retooled to manufacture the new cars. They'd have to bid out a whole slew of contracts to manufacture the outsourced components.
Factories would need to be retooled anyways, though I'll agree this is a much more major retooling. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if entire new factories were built expressly for the purpose of constructing these chassis.
The sentence is poorly constructed, but I think they mean that it can function as a generator, not that it can power a pocket-sized ant farm sitting on the seat:-p
It does seem ambitious to say that you could run a farm on it though. It would take 18-wheeler sized horsepower to do it.
Don't be so sure. "An electric car can have anywhere from 96V to over 300V of batteries. During cruising, the car will draw up to 200 amps, and up to 400-500 amps for acceleration." Note that in the US power to the home is about 115 VAC and 100-200 Amps. It takes a tremendous amount of power to accellerate and decelerate a car. Granted, a lot of power can be recaptured regeneratively, but cruising and starting power has to come from somewhere. That's an average car. If you design a chassis for small bus/tractor/hay wagon use, you could easily power 8 first-world homes off of it. You could probably power most of a small third-world town with it.
If it isn't truly extra effort (i.e., you'd have been taking 3 classes anyways), definitely go for it. Despite what some may say, there will be jobs that will be impressed by a double-major. Even if you're applying for a stock CS job, that extra major can, in the first 5 years or so of your career, mark a difference between you and the other interviewees. CS jobs aren't as easy to come by as they were 2 years ago, so the edge will really help.
Look, all you need is a paper ballot. The type where you take a pencil and complete the arrow to point to the name of the candidate you wish to vote for.
...
They are tried and true, and accuracy is very high, in most places 98% or higher.
Just to note... in Florida the election was within 99.98%. It better be a LOT higher than 98%.
Ok, lets try running some harder numbers. Lets say we RAID a set of RAID arrays. Not terribly efficient, but we're going on the cheap here.
A Promise Ultratrak RM8000 8-CHANNEL External Raid with a SCSI interface is priced at $2400 ea and can handle 8 drives. For this I'll assume the cheap configuration of 6 data drives, a raid 5 parity drive, and a hot spare. I'll also assume that we'll use the yet-to-be-released 320 GB IDE HDD at $300/ea. Given that, we'll need 26 arrays (for a total of 49.9TB). Add in a pair of spare arrays, and we have 28 arrays. (Hot spares in the raid configuration, though I'm not setting up a parity array in this case. The arrays should be sufficiently stable already.) That said, we have 28*8=224 drives @ $300 ea for a total of $67,200. 28 arrays is, oddly enough $67,200 as well.
Now, those 28 drives will need to be attached to something. Maybe an Adaptec SCSI RAID 5400S, which is a four channel card that can accept up to 60 drives and is priced at about $900. Add to that a machine to put the RAID card in with at least GB ethernet, at around $6000, 3 40U racks at $2000 each and a UPS for each rack at $2500 each.
All told, that's $67,200 each for drives and arrays, $900 for the SCSI RAID, $6000 for a single box, $6000 for racks, $7500 for UPS's, at a sum total of $154,800 for a single 50TB array. Primary point of failure is the single box running it. For a backup system, running a full second array as redundancy would cost a net $309,600. All of this is not inclusive of labor, which for setup might run easily $100k. Thus, a redundant reliable RAID solution would run you $400,000. All that's once the 320GB IDE drive is released by maxtor.
Does that answer your question?
Please note, this won't be the best array money can buy, just a large array on the cheap. (what RAID was intended for)
In order for the US to match the Danish goal, approximately 250 billion kilowatt hours would have to be produced for half the 100 million (approximate) US homes occupied today.
Not sure I understand the math on this, but here goes. From this 1997 report I see that the US used 94063.6 Trillion BTU's in 1997. That's not a very useful page, but this conversion page leads me to believe that I can convert that at a rate of 10,280 Btu/kWh. That gets me a total usage of 9.15 trillion kWh for 1997, which would mean about 4.6 trillion kWh would be needed to match the Danish goal.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, since I'm not entirely familiar with the conversions and estimates I was working with here.
Oh, and by the way, that would mean installing about 105,000 5MW wind turbines.
Looking at my home state of NY, using the same numbers, NY would require 4,545 5MW wind turbines.
If Santa Clara wanted to build its own turbines, it could probably enter a joint agreement with nearby Santa Cruz county to build turbines on the western ridge that separates the valley from the Pacific Ocean
Heh, you haven't lived in Santa Cruz, have you? The environmentalists would have a heart attack at having the western face of those hills scarred by modern man. Its difficult enough already to get a building permit for a home facing the ocean there, I seriously doubt a large wind farm would make them anything but livid.
Looking at a wind map, I see that the highest wind power density local to Santa Clara is not costal but within hills separating San Jose from the Sacramento Valley. The Carquinez Straits north of Oakland appears to be good location, as is Altamont Pass (yes, already utilised). In addition, Pacheco Pass to the southeast is comparable to the coast, and probably would make environmentalists happier. The most outstanding sites in California actually appear to be in the mountains on the eastern border, with many category 6 sites. The problem with those sites is complete inaccessibility during the winter, which begins early and ends late there. (Data from the northern california wind power map and generally from the Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States.
As far as them spoiling the landscape, I personally find most large wind installations to be quite beautiful, but I'm wierd that way. There are places I wouldn't want them that way, mainly because I appreciate a particular inherent beauty in those areas that would be marred by the lines of windmills.
Also, I currently live in upstate NY. Personally, if wind power were able to be installed and serve at least 60% of New York's power needs, I'd have to think long and hard. There are some ridges in the Catskills which would produce an amazing amount of power, as well as some points in the waters off Long Island which wouldn't be half bad either.
Would it not be a better idea to allow the participants to become familiar with the original, source audio, and then get them to rate the various compressed formats (without them knowing which is which) as to how much the sound like the original?
Surely "How much does this sound like the original?" is a better test than "Which sounds best?"
I'm not able to babel it here from work (they block babel and the block isn't worth getting around this morning...) but a proper test of this sort doesn't ask either question. A proper test of this sort plays two tracks one after the other and asks the listener "are these the same or different". The tracks would be chosen randomly from all the formats, and the ratio of same to different tracks would probably be about 50/50. From this data you can determine how similar the tracks sound, and thus formulate a chart of how the tracks sound relative to each other. Alternatively, you could ask "which sounds better", and compare the tracks more dynamically, with an occasional playback of two tracks that are the same. This would give you a more subjective data set, though.
Re:20cm? at that distance? while driving?
on
Rear View LCD?
·
· Score: 2
I can't read 20cm letters at that distance in the rearview on my car unless I hold the damn thing still.
That's probably the fault of the mirror, not the concept. Most rear view mirrors are mounted on stems which have a tendency to amplify vibrations in the car.
So lets go over the needs for a moment....2m @ 15m at about 6 pixels of resolution (the minimum I'd need to make out a letter). That's.033333m per pixel @ 15m, which is.1273 degrees (or about 7.6 arc-minutes). Looking at some pinhole spycams, I see 400, 420, and 430 line resolutions commonly. At those resolutions, you'd need at most a 50, 54, and 55 degree lens, respectively, to make out the letters at that distance. Absent from the requirements is an indication of what angle the lens needs to view.
Thus, from a basic spycam with good resolution hooked up to a standard lcd pocket tv you should be able to get what you need. A digital webcam is probably far more than you need, in this case.
The airplane is already a faraday cage. That's why people aren't killed by lightning whily flying.
The airplane is a faraday cage at the frequencies lightning affects, not at microwave frequencies. The airplane faraday cage is very leaky at microwave frequencies. The equipment affected by the interference created by UWB is inside the same faraday cage that the UWB is in. Partition the faraday cage so the passengers are all in one cage and the aircraft's electrical equipment is in another and you should be ok.
You just hit upon the problem. A faraday cage just routes the signal around. When it comes to radio signals, it's just a big antenna. Of course, the way around that is to ground the cage. The problem is that the plane is about a mile about ground.
Ground is relative. You don't have to store the random frequencies, just disperse them. Drop the random frequencies into a dummy load (common radio apparatus, pretty much an antenna in a can, though it'll get warm) and again, you should be ok.
Slashdot Mirror
The full tos for the games on demand system is available at: http://gamesondemand.yahoo.com/play/adtos_nl and doesn't contain the implied statement. Also, I can't find anywhere that offers a free play of Civ III. If I could, I'd be happy to install and play it on an otherwise empty system at home. I'll be quite happy to skew their results with a barebones system.
My error, I'd made the mistake of trusting the terminology on a result from google... :)
So, then, there are in fact three tonnages, the short ton, which we tend to use, the long ton, which is somewhat irrelevant here, and the metric ton, which the poster I replied to was using.
Personally, I'd have to argue semantics here. The reason we're not driving electric cars right now is "storage". This problem can be solved with batteries, flywheels, pure hydrogen fuel cells, etc...
Fuel cells are on the way, and will probably be the ideal solution. The fuel cell will either run on pre-separated hydrogen, much like a battery stores pre-generated power, or it will run off enhanced liquid fuels. In the first form, it will be called a zero emmissions vehicle, the emmissions having been generated at a power plant somewhere else at an earlier time in a more controlled environment. The second form will be a low-emmissions form, but if proper fuels are chosen the emmissions should be negligible. For example, filling it with biodiesel (i.e., reformulated corn oil) should result in incredibly low emmissions.
The other advantage to fuel cells is size. The fuel cell system would probably use several large capacitors and batteries for short term boost accelleration, but overall the system would be much smaller and lighter than a comparable battery system.
In the US, one ton is 2000 lb (also called a short ton). One Metric ton is 1000 kg (also called a long ton, at 2204.6 lb). In the US, when you ask for one ton of material and don't specify long or short, the short ton is common usage and typically assumed.
One thing that could be improved on many of these quantitative reviews is if they quit relying upon surface temperature probes (which is HORRIBLY unreliable.
Power consumption doesn't directly relate to heat, since the use and dispersion patterns internal to the drive could make a world of difference. I'd suggest using something like these products, from Raytek, which take heat readings in a noncontact method from a distance. For example, this product has a ratio that indicates at 4" away it'll read a 1" area spot. (so, to read a 3.5" drive, you'd want it 14" away from the drive) There are also fixed-installation products more ideal for a testing environment, with a fixed probe and a remote or computer interfaced monitor.On the THOMAS website, within Bill Number HR.3162.ENR, SEC. 215. ACCESS TO RECORDS AND OTHER ITEMS UNDER THE FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT, all replacement text for Title V of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, SEC. 501. ACCESS TO CERTAIN BUSINESS RECORDS FOR FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE AND INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM INVESTIGATIONS.
All of the charges leveled against the PATRIOT Act in this case should be easily found within this section, my reading indicates they're present, and reports are doing an exceptional job of not blowing thing out of proportion. (All interest groups blow things out of proportion, but in this case reports are suprisingly accurate.)
Those libraries which are public are provided to all and funded primarily by the local taxpayer. Access to records, if kept, of who checked out which books should follow due process procedures. Prior to the patriot act, law enforcement would need to get a warrant (U.S. Constitution, Amendment IV) detailing what they were looking for on a basis of probable cause. The patriot act circumvents that. In addition, we are guaranteed a freedom of speech (U.S. Constitution, Amendment I) which would appear to be curtailed by these subpoenas, since people should now fear to check out books which the government might identify as somehow "subversive". Note also, "For the First Amendment does not speak equivocally. . . . It must be taken as a command of the broadest scope that explicit language, read in the context of a liberty-loving society, will allow." Bridges v. California, 314 U.S. 252, 263 (1941), which is to say, "Free speech carries with it some freedom to listen." Richmond Newspapers, Inc., et al. v. Virginia et al., 448 U.S. 555, 79-243 (1980).
The library only needs to keep track of what's currently checked out, and to who. In your post, the card they took out of your book could easily be attached with a paperclip to an ID card with your name on it. Then, when you return it, the book's card goes back in the book and your ID card goes back in your file. Simple, easy to see when you're overdue, and never requires adding a record to a file.
Except that a fire that large would leave a layer of soot that could be detected, and no such soot has been detected (at least at the 35 million year climate disturbance).
Configure all the routers you run in the one state to route XYZ as null. The rest of the internet should route around the "damage", seeing that they can't use that router to get to that destination.
Granted, my preferred method would to not do business in that state (or at least run routers), but that's an expensive proposition.
That's the other part of the fallacy he's trying to illustrate. You each made an assumption. The poster you replied to made the assumption that no pirate would've purchased the software in the first place, you made the assumption that all pirates would've purchased the software had it not been available in warez form.
Using your numbers, out example nets an actual: $2*100,000 orig+$1*150,000 expansion = $350,000
If it was unpiratable, but with the assumption that pirates would've purchased it if they couldn't pirate it, our example nets: $2*250,000 + $1*150,000 = $650,000.
Using your numbers, but with the assumption that pirates wouldn't've purchased it, regardless. $2*100,000 orig + $1*60,000 (60% penetration) = $260,000
Thus, you each made an assumption and came up with different results. With the previous poster's assumption, his result is indeed correct. More money was made with piracy than without. With your assumption, you are correct, more money would've been made with no piracy. The net result? I tend to think its somewhere in the middle... some pirates would've paid for it. Only question there is where between $260 and $650k it would've been. If its close to $350k, then piracy really didn't matter much.
No, it isn't, its copyright infringment. It isn't fraud, as you haven't misrepresented something. It isn't stealing, since the original exists and is held by the same person that held it before in an unaltered form. It is however copyright infringement, since the person who holds the rights to distribute copies did not give you or the person holding the original permission to distribute a fresh copy.
In your analogy above, you wouldn't have committed theft. You would've committed trespass. Multiple times, in fact. The first time through unauthorised access to their systems, and the rest by showing up to a class when you're not authorised by the property owner to be there. The first case of trespass, of course, might be debatable in this form, but I'd say it is an accurate description.
They do that every few years already. Designing new cars is nothing new. Particularly in the US the model year seems to matter to people, so every few years they actually try to make a car that appears new so more people will buy it.
They have to retrain for all the new electronic controlled engines anyways.
Tow truck gear is pretty universal. As long as the car designer keeps the wheels an appropriate distance from the front bumper, the basic wheel straps currently in use will work fine. In a new chassis design, it would also be pretty easy to include hardware compatible with major current tow hooks. As for fuel cell stations, that really depends on the fuel cell type used. Some fuel cells can take gasoline after its passed through a reformer, thus you could include a reformer between the fuel tank and the fuel cell and require no new infrastructure.
Factories would need to be retooled anyways, though I'll agree this is a much more major retooling. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if entire new factories were built expressly for the purpose of constructing these chassis.
Don't be so sure. "An electric car can have anywhere from 96V to over 300V of batteries. During cruising, the car will draw up to 200 amps, and up to 400-500 amps for acceleration." Note that in the US power to the home is about 115 VAC and 100-200 Amps. It takes a tremendous amount of power to accellerate and decelerate a car. Granted, a lot of power can be recaptured regeneratively, but cruising and starting power has to come from somewhere. That's an average car. If you design a chassis for small bus/tractor/hay wagon use, you could easily power 8 first-world homes off of it. You could probably power most of a small third-world town with it.
If it isn't truly extra effort (i.e., you'd have been taking 3 classes anyways), definitely go for it. Despite what some may say, there will be jobs that will be impressed by a double-major. Even if you're applying for a stock CS job, that extra major can, in the first 5 years or so of your career, mark a difference between you and the other interviewees. CS jobs aren't as easy to come by as they were 2 years ago, so the edge will really help.
Just to note... in Florida the election was within 99.98%. It better be a LOT higher than 98%.
Now, those 28 drives will need to be attached to something. Maybe an Adaptec SCSI RAID 5400S, which is a four channel card that can accept up to 60 drives and is priced at about $900. Add to that a machine to put the RAID card in with at least GB ethernet, at around $6000, 3 40U racks at $2000 each and a UPS for each rack at $2500 each.
All told, that's $67,200 each for drives and arrays, $900 for the SCSI RAID, $6000 for a single box, $6000 for racks, $7500 for UPS's, at a sum total of $154,800 for a single 50TB array. Primary point of failure is the single box running it. For a backup system, running a full second array as redundancy would cost a net $309,600. All of this is not inclusive of labor, which for setup might run easily $100k. Thus, a redundant reliable RAID solution would run you $400,000. All that's once the 320GB IDE drive is released by maxtor.
Does that answer your question?
Please note, this won't be the best array money can buy, just a large array on the cheap. (what RAID was intended for)
Not sure I understand the math on this, but here goes. From this 1997 report I see that the US used 94063.6 Trillion BTU's in 1997. That's not a very useful page, but this conversion page leads me to believe that I can convert that at a rate of 10,280 Btu/kWh. That gets me a total usage of 9.15 trillion kWh for 1997, which would mean about 4.6 trillion kWh would be needed to match the Danish goal.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, since I'm not entirely familiar with the conversions and estimates I was working with here.
Oh, and by the way, that would mean installing about 105,000 5MW wind turbines.
Looking at my home state of NY, using the same numbers, NY would require 4,545 5MW wind turbines.
Heh, you haven't lived in Santa Cruz, have you? The environmentalists would have a heart attack at having the western face of those hills scarred by modern man. Its difficult enough already to get a building permit for a home facing the ocean there, I seriously doubt a large wind farm would make them anything but livid.
Looking at a wind map, I see that the highest wind power density local to Santa Clara is not costal but within hills separating San Jose from the Sacramento Valley. The Carquinez Straits north of Oakland appears to be good location, as is Altamont Pass (yes, already utilised). In addition, Pacheco Pass to the southeast is comparable to the coast, and probably would make environmentalists happier. The most outstanding sites in California actually appear to be in the mountains on the eastern border, with many category 6 sites. The problem with those sites is complete inaccessibility during the winter, which begins early and ends late there. (Data from the northern california wind power map and generally from the Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States.
As far as them spoiling the landscape, I personally find most large wind installations to be quite beautiful, but I'm wierd that way. There are places I wouldn't want them that way, mainly because I appreciate a particular inherent beauty in those areas that would be marred by the lines of windmills.
Also, I currently live in upstate NY. Personally, if wind power were able to be installed and serve at least 60% of New York's power needs, I'd have to think long and hard. There are some ridges in the Catskills which would produce an amazing amount of power, as well as some points in the waters off Long Island which wouldn't be half bad either.
I'm not able to babel it here from work (they block babel and the block isn't worth getting around this morning...) but a proper test of this sort doesn't ask either question. A proper test of this sort plays two tracks one after the other and asks the listener "are these the same or different". The tracks would be chosen randomly from all the formats, and the ratio of same to different tracks would probably be about 50/50. From this data you can determine how similar the tracks sound, and thus formulate a chart of how the tracks sound relative to each other. Alternatively, you could ask "which sounds better", and compare the tracks more dynamically, with an occasional playback of two tracks that are the same. This would give you a more subjective data set, though.
That's probably the fault of the mirror, not the concept. Most rear view mirrors are mounted on stems which have a tendency to amplify vibrations in the car.
So lets go over the needs for a moment... .2m @ 15m at about 6 pixels of resolution (the minimum I'd need to make out a letter). That's .033333m per pixel @ 15m, which is .1273 degrees (or about 7.6 arc-minutes). Looking at some pinhole spycams, I see 400, 420, and 430 line resolutions commonly. At those resolutions, you'd need at most a 50, 54, and 55 degree lens, respectively, to make out the letters at that distance. Absent from the requirements is an indication of what angle the lens needs to view.
Thus, from a basic spycam with good resolution hooked up to a standard lcd pocket tv you should be able to get what you need. A digital webcam is probably far more than you need, in this case.
What, you mean something like this patent?
Ground is relative. You don't have to store the random frequencies, just disperse them. Drop the random frequencies into a dummy load (common radio apparatus, pretty much an antenna in a can, though it'll get warm) and again, you should be ok.