Because from TypoNAM's post:
Now if you hook up LEDs in a series make sure that the cathods ends connect to the non-cathods ends which I hope nobody is actually doing a series of LEDs instead of parallel because if you have say three LEDs and they consume 3 volts each, you'll need 9 volts to power them to get full light output.
I was just providing another reason why series circuits are evil:)
And making things worse, unless your inverter and the grid are phase locked, it's guaranteed that your inverter and the grid will drift with each other in terms of phase. That is, while the frequency is specified as 60Hz, that's an approximation. One might be 60.01Hz, while the other is 59.99Hz. When frequencies drift, for a while the phases are (mostly) the same, but also for a while, the phases are (mostly) 180 degrees off.
This means that even if you managed to jury rig something so that your inverter didn't come on until it matched the phase of the grid, it will drift out of phase over time.
This is a common mistake and is only good for very low power stuff...At the same current you still have a 6 volt drop with the 10X larger wire but you now lost 50% of your power in the wire...Do the math.
I didn't believe you, so I did the math, and you were right. Executive summary: I got a 4V drop on the DC circuit rather than 6V as he says, but that's still a very significant loss. Here's the full calculations (corrections welcome, since I'm a hobbyist, not an electrical engineer):
For 60 watt lightbulb, 120VAC supply:
P=I x E, so 60W = I x 120V, therefore I = 60W / 120V = 0.5A
E = I x R, so a 6V loss at 0.5A is 6V = 0.5A x R, and R = 6V / 0.5A = 12 ohms
Therefore, the electrical wiring has a resistance of 12 ohms.
For a 4W light bulb, 12VDC supply, assuming wiring with the same resistance as 120VAC:
P = I x E, so 4W = I X 12V, therefore I = 4W / 12V = 0.34A (nearly the same as the 120V!)
E = I x R, so voltage drop is E = 0.34A x 12 ohms = 4V (again, nearly the same as 120V!)
The DC calculations are based on a bulb found at http://www.superbrightleds.com/bi-pin.html -- which I found using a google search; I have no affiliation with this company.
It kind of seems to me like we're the folks on the wrong side of town. If you were an advanced race of creatures, would you really want to drop in and say "hi" to the species that has nuclear capability, but just barely the restraint not to exercise it, and that thinks that pumping noxious chemicals into the environment is a good thing?
I'd wait until the human race grows up a little before I came knocking on the door...that is, if I didn't already live here myself.
chroot isn't a way to access a system remotely, but if he has physical access to the system (as the summary for this story suggests), then after booting with a live CD or floppy, chroot would be the next step that would allow you to change the root password.
So you're right that chroot won't get him access to the laptop, but once he's in, chroot will let him change the password so he can get in next time.
Now I have to leave everything unlocked.
No you don't, as long as you don't mind buying new locks every time you go somewhere. I have considered, when traveling, locking all of my belongings with non-TSA approved locks just to make them go to the effort of breaking the locks. 'Course I'm just ornery:)
There's an implied "as long as you don't abuse the system" in that statement, and if you read through their policies and guidelines, you find that implication become fleshed out in more detail.
That's a necessary "evil" when running any kind of on-line forum, unless you want it to become a haven for spammers and other low-life.
I spent eleven months on public assistance due to health problems when I was 24. My wife has seen hard times, too. Before she met me, she was a struggling single mom trying to raise her daughter after her cretin ex-husband decided he had better things to do than be a dad. When she met me, I was making $11.25 an hour and pulling myself out of the debt that a year of health problems and no health insurance cause. I'm now 37, and I make easily enough money to support my family in a comfortable lifestyle, and my wife makes almost as much as I do. We aren't rich by any means, but we are well within the middle to upper middle class income bracket.
Yes, you can pull yourself up by your bootstraps, if you make an effort and refuse to quit. No, it isn't easy, but being a parent -- actually, just being an adult -- never is.
And YOU, on the other hand, are a 19-year-old emo brat, whining about how unfair the world is, aren't you?
OP is saying that you can still have a life after having kids, with which I most emphatically agree. My daughter is the highlight of my life, and sharing the things I love with her -- music, computers, rock climbing, hiking -- makes every sacrifice I have ever made worthwhile. It means I can't always take these things to the extreme I used to -- for example, when I take her rock climbing, she does most of the climbing while I mostly act as a spotter for her -- but I haven't given those things up.
Professionally, I have a job I like, even though there might be other jobs I would like better that don't pay as well. But if I had a job I hated, I would quit in a heartbeat, because I have found through my experience that coming home in a piss-poor mood because your job sucks is a far worse choice than cutting back on expenses and living a little leaner while working in a much more pleasant environment.
If you disagree, that's fine, but pretending to be a victim of the big, bad world is just self-delusion.
Incidentally, I don't know about OP, but while I probably am middle to upper middle class (though definitely not rich), I have a Bachelor's degree rather than a Master's degree, and while I like my job enough to be reasonably good at it, it is *not* my dream job. It's a compromise job between starving artist and filthy-rich-but-miserable-type-A-personality-stress-freak.
but it's one of the most important measures of success
No, it isn't. How well I raise my daughter is the most important measure of success. I am not any better a dad because my salary is $X more than the guy down the street; I am a better dad because my daughter knows deep down in the core of her being that I love her more than anything else in the world. I am a better dad because I teach her right from wrong and love her enough to make sure she understands why choice "a" is right and choice "b" is wrong. I am a better dad because I take time from things that I would really like to be doing to do things with her, instead -- and most of the time, what I do with her is a lot more fun than what I would have been doing, anyway. As long as I am providing enough food, shelter, and a reasonably safe environment, then it doesn't matter if I make $40,000, $80,000 or $4,000,000 per year.
The moment you have kids, what you love no longer matters anymore.
That's a recipe for depression and resentment that will make the household a living hell for those kids. Like everything else in life, the secret is finding a balance between taking care of yourself and taking care of your family.
If you hate your job, but think you need to stick with it so you can take care of your family, get out NOW. I made that mistake, and in hindsight, I can't believe how stupid it was.
I would get up every morning, pissed off before I even locked the front door because I hated going to that job. I was in a bad mood all day long, which didn't endear me to my coworkers or the company's customers. I worked long, long hours because that was what was required of me at the time, and the resulting fatigue made everything else all the worse. In the end, I got fired (rightfully so, I have to admit -- by that point, I wasn't a good employee anymore), which did nothing to improve my employment prospects after that.
No, you probably shouldn't quit a decent, well-paying job to go be unemployed for the next three years while you "find yourself" if you have a family to support. But if a cut in pay gives you either more time or more energy for your family *and* still pays the bills -- even with some cutbacks in your standard of living -- then it's probably worth it. But that's just my opinion and YMMV, etc., etc.
It's much easier to add fun things to your life with money than to dump your career for a 'fun' one with a big pay cut.
Maybe, but then again, maybe not.
Before I finally got started in IT, I learned to rock climb. After a few years in IT, I took an evening job teaching rock climbing to kids, but it only lasted about three months because I found that even though I enjoyed teaching people to climb, adding a second job to my 9-5 was causing a lot more stress in my life.
But don't take my word for it, 'cause I don't practice what I preach. Even though I still have an IT 9-5, I'm about to start flight instructing again after a 9-year hiatus. We'll see if flight instructing lasts any longer than teaching people to rock climb did:)
With all due respect, I call B.S., and your last sentence shows why:
Correlation isn't proof but it is better than nothing.
On the contrary, correlation is worse than nothing, because it encourages people to buy into arguments that haven't been legitimately proven.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not advocating rape porn, violent porn, or any other kind of porn, but I think your reasoning is somewhat flawed.
When you want to violate the rights I am guaranteed -- yes, guaranteed -- by the Constitution, you'd better believe I will obstruct "justice". It may make your job more difficult, but that's not really my problem, is it? Because whether or not I actually committed a crime, whether or not I deserve to go to jail, I believe that the Constitution is more than ink on paper, and I will fight in any way I know how to protect those freedoms for myself, for my offspring and for everyone else in this country -- even if they think I'm wrong for not just rolling over when you flash your badge.
And if you think charging someone with obstruction of justice for standing up for their rights is a reason to send someone to jail, you should revisit that oath you took when you became a uniformed officer, dude.
Even boot up BIOS passwords will not suffice.
There, fixed that for you.
I've had to reset BIOS passwords to reinstall an OS on computers before. AFAIK, most mobos have a way to reset the BIOS for this very reason. If not, then in the worst case, you remove the hard drive and install it in another computer from which you do have the ability to boot.
You set of the thermite charge, ignite your desktop, which then ignites the whole room. The door locks automatically when the thermite charge goes off, and therefore the snoop who tried to get into your computer never hacks another computer again.
Even if you protect the boot loader with a password, you can still break into the system by using a boot floppy or CD if you can get into the BIOS.
At a place where I used to work, I had a Slackware desktop where I left Lilo unprotected by a password, just in case one of the other admins needed access for some reason. I came to work one Saturday morning, and found that my prompt had been changed to "hacked by RackGnome" (an inside joke there). This told me that 1) one of my coworkers had hacked my box, 2) they didn't care if I knew, and 3) therefore, it was a practical joke, and not due to anything work-related. I promptly rebuilt my box (since I didn't know what else they had done -- there were a lot of very creative people there...), reinstalled Lilo with password protection, edited my BIOS to remove the ability to boot from CD or floppy then password protected my BIOS. This closed all of the security holes I knew about, and my desktop was never hacked again (well, AFAIK anyway). Unfortunately, if someone had wanted in bad enough, they could have completely cleared and reset the BIOS, but doing that was a pain. I know, because I had to do it later, when I forgot the BIOS password...:(
IIRC, when you set up and configure Windows 2000, you can specify whether encrypted files will be recoverable by the administrator or not.
I don't know if that's been changed in XP or Vista, and it's been long enough since I studied for the W2K Pro MCP that I could be confusing encrypted files with something else on 2K as well;)
Slashdot Mirror
Now if you hook up LEDs in a series make sure that the cathods ends connect to the non-cathods ends which I hope nobody is actually doing a series of LEDs instead of parallel because if you have say three LEDs and they consume 3 volts each, you'll need 9 volts to power them to get full light output.
I was just providing another reason why series circuits are evil
And making things worse, unless your inverter and the grid are phase locked, it's guaranteed that your inverter and the grid will drift with each other in terms of phase. That is, while the frequency is specified as 60Hz, that's an approximation. One might be 60.01Hz, while the other is 59.99Hz. When frequencies drift, for a while the phases are (mostly) the same, but also for a while, the phases are (mostly) 180 degrees off.
This means that even if you managed to jury rig something so that your inverter didn't come on until it matched the phase of the grid, it will drift out of phase over time.
I didn't believe you, so I did the math, and you were right. Executive summary: I got a 4V drop on the DC circuit rather than 6V as he says, but that's still a very significant loss. Here's the full calculations (corrections welcome, since I'm a hobbyist, not an electrical engineer):
For 60 watt lightbulb, 120VAC supply:
P=I x E, so 60W = I x 120V, therefore I = 60W / 120V = 0.5A
E = I x R, so a 6V loss at 0.5A is 6V = 0.5A x R, and R = 6V / 0.5A = 12 ohms
Therefore, the electrical wiring has a resistance of 12 ohms.
For a 4W light bulb, 12VDC supply, assuming wiring with the same resistance as 120VAC:
P = I x E, so 4W = I X 12V, therefore I = 4W / 12V = 0.34A (nearly the same as the 120V!)
E = I x R, so voltage drop is E = 0.34A x 12 ohms = 4V (again, nearly the same as 120V!)
The DC calculations are based on a bulb found at http://www.superbrightleds.com/bi-pin.html -- which I found using a google search; I have no affiliation with this company.
...and because if one LED or the wire between two LEDs becomes damaged, the entire string of lights will go out.
For a lot of hobbyists, the plan goes something like this:
It kind of seems to me like we're the folks on the wrong side of town. If you were an advanced race of creatures, would you really want to drop in and say "hi" to the species that has nuclear capability, but just barely the restraint not to exercise it, and that thinks that pumping noxious chemicals into the environment is a good thing?
I'd wait until the human race grows up a little before I came knocking on the door...that is, if I didn't already live here myself.
chroot isn't a way to access a system remotely, but if he has physical access to the system (as the summary for this story suggests), then after booting with a live CD or floppy, chroot would be the next step that would allow you to change the root password.
So you're right that chroot won't get him access to the laptop, but once he's in, chroot will let him change the password so he can get in next time.
No you don't, as long as you don't mind buying new locks every time you go somewhere. I have considered, when traveling, locking all of my belongings with non-TSA approved locks just to make them go to the effort of breaking the locks. 'Course I'm just ornery
There's an implied "as long as you don't abuse the system" in that statement, and if you read through their policies and guidelines, you find that implication become fleshed out in more detail.
That's a necessary "evil" when running any kind of on-line forum, unless you want it to become a haven for spammers and other low-life.
I spent eleven months on public assistance due to health problems when I was 24. My wife has seen hard times, too. Before she met me, she was a struggling single mom trying to raise her daughter after her cretin ex-husband decided he had better things to do than be a dad. When she met me, I was making $11.25 an hour and pulling myself out of the debt that a year of health problems and no health insurance cause. I'm now 37, and I make easily enough money to support my family in a comfortable lifestyle, and my wife makes almost as much as I do. We aren't rich by any means, but we are well within the middle to upper middle class income bracket.
Yes, you can pull yourself up by your bootstraps, if you make an effort and refuse to quit. No, it isn't easy, but being a parent -- actually, just being an adult -- never is.
And YOU, on the other hand, are a 19-year-old emo brat, whining about how unfair the world is, aren't you?
OP is saying that you can still have a life after having kids, with which I most emphatically agree. My daughter is the highlight of my life, and sharing the things I love with her -- music, computers, rock climbing, hiking -- makes every sacrifice I have ever made worthwhile. It means I can't always take these things to the extreme I used to -- for example, when I take her rock climbing, she does most of the climbing while I mostly act as a spotter for her -- but I haven't given those things up.
Professionally, I have a job I like, even though there might be other jobs I would like better that don't pay as well. But if I had a job I hated, I would quit in a heartbeat, because I have found through my experience that coming home in a piss-poor mood because your job sucks is a far worse choice than cutting back on expenses and living a little leaner while working in a much more pleasant environment.
If you disagree, that's fine, but pretending to be a victim of the big, bad world is just self-delusion.
Incidentally, I don't know about OP, but while I probably am middle to upper middle class (though definitely not rich), I have a Bachelor's degree rather than a Master's degree, and while I like my job enough to be reasonably good at it, it is *not* my dream job. It's a compromise job between starving artist and filthy-rich-but-miserable-type-A-personality-stress-freak.
No, it isn't. How well I raise my daughter is the most important measure of success. I am not any better a dad because my salary is $X more than the guy down the street; I am a better dad because my daughter knows deep down in the core of her being that I love her more than anything else in the world. I am a better dad because I teach her right from wrong and love her enough to make sure she understands why choice "a" is right and choice "b" is wrong. I am a better dad because I take time from things that I would really like to be doing to do things with her, instead -- and most of the time, what I do with her is a lot more fun than what I would have been doing, anyway. As long as I am providing enough food, shelter, and a reasonably safe environment, then it doesn't matter if I make $40,000, $80,000 or $4,000,000 per year.
That's a recipe for depression and resentment that will make the household a living hell for those kids. Like everything else in life, the secret is finding a balance between taking care of yourself and taking care of your family.
If you hate your job, but think you need to stick with it so you can take care of your family, get out NOW. I made that mistake, and in hindsight, I can't believe how stupid it was.
I would get up every morning, pissed off before I even locked the front door because I hated going to that job. I was in a bad mood all day long, which didn't endear me to my coworkers or the company's customers. I worked long, long hours because that was what was required of me at the time, and the resulting fatigue made everything else all the worse. In the end, I got fired (rightfully so, I have to admit -- by that point, I wasn't a good employee anymore), which did nothing to improve my employment prospects after that.
No, you probably shouldn't quit a decent, well-paying job to go be unemployed for the next three years while you "find yourself" if you have a family to support. But if a cut in pay gives you either more time or more energy for your family *and* still pays the bills -- even with some cutbacks in your standard of living -- then it's probably worth it. But that's just my opinion and YMMV, etc., etc.
Maybe, but then again, maybe not.
Before I finally got started in IT, I learned to rock climb. After a few years in IT, I took an evening job teaching rock climbing to kids, but it only lasted about three months because I found that even though I enjoyed teaching people to climb, adding a second job to my 9-5 was causing a lot more stress in my life.
But don't take my word for it, 'cause I don't practice what I preach. Even though I still have an IT 9-5, I'm about to start flight instructing again after a 9-year hiatus. We'll see if flight instructing lasts any longer than teaching people to rock climb did
Is it possible for rape to occur in which the victim is not severely disabled, even if only(!) by the psychological scars?
Somehow, I doubt it...
Correlation isn't proof but it is better than nothing.
On the contrary, correlation is worse than nothing, because it encourages people to buy into arguments that haven't been legitimately proven.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not advocating rape porn, violent porn, or any other kind of porn, but I think your reasoning is somewhat flawed.
Your sig is very, very funny in light of your post :)
You insensitive clod! You just POSTED MY PASS---- Oh...ummm...nevermind.
Yeah, that's exactly how it works with telephones, too
When you want to violate the rights I am guaranteed -- yes, guaranteed -- by the Constitution, you'd better believe I will obstruct "justice". It may make your job more difficult, but that's not really my problem, is it? Because whether or not I actually committed a crime, whether or not I deserve to go to jail, I believe that the Constitution is more than ink on paper, and I will fight in any way I know how to protect those freedoms for myself, for my offspring and for everyone else in this country -- even if they think I'm wrong for not just rolling over when you flash your badge.
And if you think charging someone with obstruction of justice for standing up for their rights is a reason to send someone to jail, you should revisit that oath you took when you became a uniformed officer, dude.
--Mike Wallette (not an A.C., and proud of it!)
There, fixed that for you.
I've had to reset BIOS passwords to reinstall an OS on computers before. AFAIK, most mobos have a way to reset the BIOS for this very reason. If not, then in the worst case, you remove the hard drive and install it in another computer from which you do have the ability to boot.
No, that's the whole point!
You set of the thermite charge, ignite your desktop, which then ignites the whole room. The door locks automatically when the thermite charge goes off, and therefore the snoop who tried to get into your computer never hacks another computer again.
Even if you protect the boot loader with a password, you can still break into the system by using a boot floppy or CD if you can get into the BIOS.
:(
At a place where I used to work, I had a Slackware desktop where I left Lilo unprotected by a password, just in case one of the other admins needed access for some reason. I came to work one Saturday morning, and found that my prompt had been changed to "hacked by RackGnome" (an inside joke there). This told me that 1) one of my coworkers had hacked my box, 2) they didn't care if I knew, and 3) therefore, it was a practical joke, and not due to anything work-related. I promptly rebuilt my box (since I didn't know what else they had done -- there were a lot of very creative people there...), reinstalled Lilo with password protection, edited my BIOS to remove the ability to boot from CD or floppy then password protected my BIOS. This closed all of the security holes I knew about, and my desktop was never hacked again (well, AFAIK anyway). Unfortunately, if someone had wanted in bad enough, they could have completely cleared and reset the BIOS, but doing that was a pain. I know, because I had to do it later, when I forgot the BIOS password...
Anyone whose interests conflict with the best interests of me and my loved ones >:]
IIRC, when you set up and configure Windows 2000, you can specify whether encrypted files will be recoverable by the administrator or not.
;)
I don't know if that's been changed in XP or Vista, and it's been long enough since I studied for the W2K Pro MCP that I could be confusing encrypted files with something else on 2K as well