Actually it is unlikely that temperature differentials have anything to do with it, although I'm in over my head in general. Probably the air has a velocity vector transferred to it as a result of the drag and the interactions between this air and the other air in the system cause the "vortex" effect.
Maybe you should read the article before posting things like this. Of course, you got modded up, so the same should probably go for the moderators.
What you describe is NOT the cause of the movement, as determined by Dr. Schmidt. He clearly states that the motion results from the water droplets giving up energy to the air as drag occurs. Effectively even the cold water is heating the air due not to temperature but because of its slowing velocity. (lots of drops=lots of surface area to volume=lots of drag)
The article justs states that (something magic happens, and then) you have a miniature hurricane. Probably this is due to temperature differentials in the system, in the same way that weather is created in the "real world."
It really isn't overkill. It's a much more subtle problem than your comment indicates.
Probably because a partners link is technically bypassing their "security measures." Slashdot legally considers its comments to be outside its control and owned by their creators, shielding them from harm. On the other hand, news stories are directly controlled (and reviewed by) editors, so/. can't use this defense. So, really, they can't post a partners link.
Exactly. As nebby points out above, a lossless 16x9 rendering of motion video could easily exceed a petabyte for a movie. Cube the amount of storage and people will be thinking holographic representations of the same density. There will always be a demand for more storage; our technological progress is often limited by the practicality of the storage medium.
Um, the major reason for costs dropping (and data rates increasing) is the increase in density. When density flatlines you can always add more (and bigger) platters to increase the amount of data, but it becomes more expensive to build these larger drives. This cost will be offset by increases in manufacturing technology, but gone will be the days of exponential growth.
So, this/does/ directly affect the consumer's wallet.
I'll second that. The story was just good, but combined with the amazing CG it really turns into a great movie.
Seriously people, this movie is worth the price of admission solely on the basis of the visuals. What's great is that it actually turns out to be a good movie as well.
As such, DVD-A players will not output DVD-A in a Digital format (at least not any of the DVD-A players I've seen or read about).
If this remains true it is sure to tick off a lot of audiophiles. After all a $1000 DAC is probably superior to whatever is in the consumer DVD-A units, so the buyer is stuck with paying through the nose to get a DVD-A with a great DAC inline and has to duplicate hardware for no good reason.
Seriously people, the way to go here is less digital-to-analog in the path, not more. Just about every consumer reciever now has (crappy) ADC and DAC, DVD players all have dedicated DAC for video and some have it for audio too. Digital set top boxes (Tivo) and VCRs (MiniDV, DVHS) do too. CD transports usually have the DAC built in too.
Wouldn't it be a better world if you could buy one unit to do audio and video? It would save the serious electronics buyer at least a couple thousand in equiptment costs, not to mention if you wanted to upgrade your audio/video decoder you could do it once for ALL your equiptment instead of buying a new DVD/VCR/CD/etc.
The problem is the $10,000 machine is *maybe* twice as good at 50 times the cost. This means they have to recoup an enormous amount of $$$ while competing with home systems that approach arcade quality more and more over time.
I think arcade can have a future, but that future is tied to the arcade experience. Hence the popularity of fighting games, shooters, and driving games. Fighting and driving games both offer muliplayer potential and the ability to show of your skills in public. Shooters have hardware that's generally not in living rooms. They give the player something unavailable at home.
But when you distill everything to the most basic level, one could make an argument against original, a priori opinions. To address your example, kids love mom more than the dog because she does more for them: more attention, food, and love.
People could have different opinions only insofar as their experiences and the relative weightings of such differ.
I think this is highly persuasive; after all, there is no magic "opinion forming" part of the brain...in all likelihood, we draw on the mass of our knowledge to make decisions. We couldn't form opinions without all of the previous knowledge fed to us by our parents, etc. Even if we later feel that some of these facts are false (from later expreiences) they still shape our mind.
This doesn't detract from the "originality" of people's opinions; each person has different experiences, has broken ties in different ways.
This is exactly the problem in intelligent systems: they aren't deterministic; we don't know what they'll do in some situations. If they are programmed right they'll do what we taught them...but that is often hard to qualify.
I really felt that the fanservice in Ep 25 was just beyond belief...I guess that turned me off.
I watched it with a friend who had never seen Love Hina before, and I think he got the impression that it was just a vehicle for risque shots of young girls. I'd have to agree with that, but I think the rest of the series is more story driven. (sure the stories may be simplistic/off the wall, but the sexuality is there for a REASON, not just thrown in randomly)
[sigh] I guess we can always hope for some more eps from TV Tokyo...I don't think this has been ruled out, and the manga is still going, so...[fingers crossed]@There's always the GBA game in September:)
Love Hina is great. If you like Tenchi or love comedies in general you'll probably enjoy Love Hina. It has good art and a nice, lighthearted story line. Stay away from Ep 25 and the spring special though...they aren't representative of the series.
Although you've alluded to it, some people might be unaware that due to a quirk of human hearing, louder is always interpreted as better.
Unscrupulous (or lazy) hifi salespeople often take advantage of this fact...people are often unaware of small volume differences as such; rather, they just think the louder sound is better.
Nevertheless, THX is a standard for hardware too, and they love to keep adding to it. (thus THX 7.6534 requires 64 seperate loudspeakers and...) It's just good business; people keep upgrading to stay top-of-the-line, and THX collects licensing fees on every "THX certified" product.
It generally isn't a good tactical decision to land right on top of your enemy, especially when their formations are set and you are unloading piecemeal. Allowing for small advances in war machines, perhaps "halfway around the planet" was as close as they dared get.
Hold on and read my comment before you flame. I'm behind fair use on this one.
What I think is lacking in current cybersquatting laws is that bad faith squatting is considered only in the case where it has already been shown that the complainant has a prior mark which is infringed upon. link
I think that cybersquatting laws should be extended to any bad faith holding of domain names. Why? Because if you go to register a domain name these days you'll notice that virtually every English word and plenty of common combinations are taken. This wouldn't bother me, except that many of these domains aren't even in use...they've been bought by squatters.
It's simple math...when you can buy in bulk, you can register 428 domains for about $3000. Since the going rate for even crap domains seems to be above this (what is $3k to a company?) even one hit in 400 is a net profit. (example: "dot-diddly-dit-dot.com" is on the block for $99999)
This is terrible, because in its original form the domain name system was available to anyone. With "deregulation" consumers can now purchase domains as cheaply as $10...only problem is, big companies have bought most of the useful ones up, so if you aren't another company with a few Gs in your pocket you can forget about most of the names out there.
Sure, new TLDs addresses the problem. But really, why should one settle for i-friable.com, or friable.info, when the owner (houseofdomains.com) is just sitting on them? Shouldn't they go to someone who can contribute something to the Internet? What is to stop someone with a few million in capital from buying a large swath of useful names in every TLD, and waiting for the cash to roll in? (especially since some registrars are giving businesses the first crack at new names)
Opening the door to any bad-faith challenge certainly opens up a can of worms, but wouldn't it be nice to have a web where sushi.com actually led to a sushi site, and thousands of other dead, unused names were being put to good use and making it easier to find information in the billions of web pages out there?
In order to be cybersquatting, you have to register a domain name for which a prior copyright exists, AND be using it in bad faith.
Just registering names for which you hold a copyright or for which no prior copyright exists and then squatting on them is not legally "cyberquatting".
(In fact the bar is slightly higher than this, if you want to read more)
It's tough though...a lot of bots don't "cheat" by breaking the rules of the game...they just play really, really well. So in the millions of people that play, some of them, some of the time, approach that skill level. It sure might/look/ like cheating, but it could be all skill.
I agree that such a "formal place-for-exposing-music" need not exist, but I also feel that such venues are powerful ways to spread music.
The sheer variety and scope of the available music means that it can be difficult to spot the quality; things like popularity of downloads (and better word-of-mouth name recognition) tend to heavily favor established artists. (e.g. even in the online scene people are more likely to listen to Trance Control because of their popularity than to a new, unknown group, even if some people are talking up the unknowns)
Word-of-mouth is a great thing, but having something like a radio station is the difference from having 10 people talk about your music and having a thousand do the same. Talent *should* rise to the surface, either way, but the distribution is much broader and faster with a larger base.
I think the "radio" format is also laudable, because in its pure form it is nothing more that that word-of-mouth writ large. When individual stations and DJ's have the ability to choose their songlists, listeners become aware of which DJs play music they generally like. Thus the Djs can expose their listeners to new things they might not otherwise be aware of. (and vice versa on occasion) In fact, the good stations are often the ones that play things people are known to like interspersed with new, unknown content. This is just like the 50's distribution model you speak of, with stations experimenting so they don't miss the next big thing. (sadly this has become less and less common in commercial radio, because why take a chance on something new when you can play recycled hits?)
This model is better than the word-of-mouth distribution, because you might hear from a number of friends that such-and-such song is good, but never download it. Alternately, you'll probably continue listening to a "radio" stream as long as the music is pleasing, absorbing that new music effortlessly.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it is
"News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."
I think its (News for Nerds || Stuff that matters) not (News for Nerds && Stuff that matters).
Actually it is unlikely that temperature differentials have anything to do with it, although I'm in over my head in general. Probably the air has a velocity vector transferred to it as a result of the drag and the interactions between this air and the other air in the system cause the "vortex" effect.
Maybe you should read the article before posting things like this. Of course, you got modded up, so the same should probably go for the moderators.
What you describe is NOT the cause of the movement, as determined by Dr. Schmidt. He clearly states that the motion results from the water droplets giving up energy to the air as drag occurs. Effectively even the cold water is heating the air due not to temperature but because of its slowing velocity. (lots of drops=lots of surface area to volume=lots of drag)
The article justs states that (something magic happens, and then) you have a miniature hurricane. Probably this is due to temperature differentials in the system, in the same way that weather is created in the "real world."
It really isn't overkill. It's a much more subtle problem than your comment indicates.
Probably because a partners link is technically bypassing their "security measures." Slashdot legally considers its comments to be outside its control and owned by their creators, shielding them from harm. On the other hand, news stories are directly controlled (and reviewed by) editors, so /. can't use this defense. So, really, they can't post a partners link.
Mod
Exactly. As nebby points out above, a lossless 16x9 rendering of motion video could easily exceed a petabyte for a movie. Cube the amount of storage and people will be thinking holographic representations of the same density. There will always be a demand for more storage; our technological progress is often limited by the practicality of the storage medium.
Um, the major reason for costs dropping (and data rates increasing) is the increase in density. When density flatlines you can always add more (and bigger) platters to increase the amount of data, but it becomes more expensive to build these larger drives. This cost will be offset by increases in manufacturing technology, but gone will be the days of exponential growth.
/does/ directly affect the consumer's wallet.
So, this
I'll second that. The story was just good, but combined with the amazing CG it really turns into a great movie.
Seriously people, this movie is worth the price of admission solely on the basis of the visuals. What's great is that it actually turns out to be a good movie as well.
Seriously people, the way to go here is less digital-to-analog in the path, not more. Just about every consumer reciever now has (crappy) ADC and DAC, DVD players all have dedicated DAC for video and some have it for audio too. Digital set top boxes (Tivo) and VCRs (MiniDV, DVHS) do too. CD transports usually have the DAC built in too.
Wouldn't it be a better world if you could buy one unit to do audio and video? It would save the serious electronics buyer at least a couple thousand in equiptment costs, not to mention if you wanted to upgrade your audio/video decoder you could do it once for ALL your equiptment instead of buying a new DVD/VCR/CD/etc.
The problem is the $10,000 machine is *maybe* twice as good at 50 times the cost. This means they have to recoup an enormous amount of $$$ while competing with home systems that approach arcade quality more and more over time.
I think arcade can have a future, but that future is tied to the arcade experience. Hence the popularity of fighting games, shooters, and driving games. Fighting and driving games both offer muliplayer potential and the ability to show of your skills in public. Shooters have hardware that's generally not in living rooms. They give the player something unavailable at home.
But when you distill everything to the most basic level, one could make an argument against original, a priori opinions. To address your example, kids love mom more than the dog because she does more for them: more attention, food, and love.
People could have different opinions only insofar as their experiences and the relative weightings of such differ.
I think this is highly persuasive; after all, there is no magic "opinion forming" part of the brain...in all likelihood, we draw on the mass of our knowledge to make decisions. We couldn't form opinions without all of the previous knowledge fed to us by our parents, etc. Even if we later feel that some of these facts are false (from later expreiences) they still shape our mind.
This doesn't detract from the "originality" of people's opinions; each person has different experiences, has broken ties in different ways.
This is exactly the problem in intelligent systems: they aren't deterministic; we don't know what they'll do in some situations. If they are programmed right they'll do what we taught them...but that is often hard to qualify.
I really felt that the fanservice in Ep 25 was just beyond belief...I guess that turned me off.
:)
I watched it with a friend who had never seen Love Hina before, and I think he got the impression that it was just a vehicle for risque shots of young girls. I'd have to agree with that, but I think the rest of the series is more story driven. (sure the stories may be simplistic/off the wall, but the sexuality is there for a REASON, not just thrown in randomly)
[sigh] I guess we can always hope for some more eps from TV Tokyo...I don't think this has been ruled out, and the manga is still going, so...[fingers crossed]@There's always the GBA game in September
Love Hina is great. If you like Tenchi or love comedies in general you'll probably enjoy Love Hina. It has good art and a nice, lighthearted story line. Stay away from Ep 25 and the spring special though...they aren't representative of the series.
touche
Wow. You really have to have balls to post a statement like that to /.
Although you've alluded to it, some people might be unaware that due to a quirk of human hearing, louder is always interpreted as better.
Unscrupulous (or lazy) hifi salespeople often take advantage of this fact...people are often unaware of small volume differences as such; rather, they just think the louder sound is better.
Nevertheless, THX is a standard for hardware too, and they love to keep adding to it. (thus THX 7.6534 requires 64 seperate loudspeakers and...) It's just good business; people keep upgrading to stay top-of-the-line, and THX collects licensing fees on every "THX certified" product.
It generally isn't a good tactical decision to land right on top of your enemy, especially when their formations are set and you are unloading piecemeal. Allowing for small advances in war machines, perhaps "halfway around the planet" was as close as they dared get.
Hold on and read my comment before you flame. I'm behind fair use on this one.
What I think is lacking in current cybersquatting laws is that bad faith squatting is considered only in the case where it has already been shown that the complainant has a prior mark which is infringed upon. link
I think that cybersquatting laws should be extended to any bad faith holding of domain names. Why? Because if you go to register a domain name these days you'll notice that virtually every English word and plenty of common combinations are taken. This wouldn't bother me, except that many of these domains aren't even in use...they've been bought by squatters.
It's simple math...when you can buy in bulk, you can register 428 domains for about $3000. Since the going rate for even crap domains seems to be above this (what is $3k to a company?) even one hit in 400 is a net profit. (example: "dot-diddly-dit-dot.com" is on the block for $99999)
This is terrible, because in its original form the domain name system was available to anyone. With "deregulation" consumers can now purchase domains as cheaply as $10...only problem is, big companies have bought most of the useful ones up, so if you aren't another company with a few Gs in your pocket you can forget about most of the names out there.
Sure, new TLDs addresses the problem. But really, why should one settle for i-friable.com, or friable.info, when the owner (houseofdomains.com) is just sitting on them? Shouldn't they go to someone who can contribute something to the Internet? What is to stop someone with a few million in capital from buying a large swath of useful names in every TLD, and waiting for the cash to roll in? (especially since some registrars are giving businesses the first crack at new names)
Opening the door to any bad-faith challenge certainly opens up a can of worms, but wouldn't it be nice to have a web where sushi.com actually led to a sushi site, and thousands of other dead, unused names were being put to good use and making it easier to find information in the billions of web pages out there?
In order to be cybersquatting, you have to register a domain name for which a prior copyright exists, AND be using it in bad faith.
Just registering names for which you hold a copyright or for which no prior copyright exists and then squatting on them is not legally "cyberquatting".
(In fact the bar is slightly higher than this, if you want to read more)
It's tough though...a lot of bots don't "cheat" by breaking the rules of the game...they just play really, really well. So in the millions of people that play, some of them, some of the time, approach that skill level. It sure might /look/ like cheating, but it could be all skill.
Lunix is truly the superior operating system.
I agree that such a "formal place-for-exposing-music" need not exist, but I also feel that such venues are powerful ways to spread music.
The sheer variety and scope of the available music means that it can be difficult to spot the quality; things like popularity of downloads (and better word-of-mouth name recognition) tend to heavily favor established artists. (e.g. even in the online scene people are more likely to listen to Trance Control because of their popularity than to a new, unknown group, even if some people are talking up the unknowns)
Word-of-mouth is a great thing, but having something like a radio station is the difference from having 10 people talk about your music and having a thousand do the same. Talent *should* rise to the surface, either way, but the distribution is much broader and faster with a larger base.
I think the "radio" format is also laudable, because in its pure form it is nothing more that that word-of-mouth writ large. When individual stations and DJ's have the ability to choose their songlists, listeners become aware of which DJs play music they generally like. Thus the Djs can expose their listeners to new things they might not otherwise be aware of. (and vice versa on occasion) In fact, the good stations are often the ones that play things people are known to like interspersed with new, unknown content. This is just like the 50's distribution model you speak of, with stations experimenting so they don't miss the next big thing. (sadly this has become less and less common in commercial radio, because why take a chance on something new when you can play recycled hits?)
This model is better than the word-of-mouth distribution, because you might hear from a number of friends that such-and-such song is good, but never download it. Alternately, you'll probably continue listening to a "radio" stream as long as the music is pleasing, absorbing that new music effortlessly.