Superguns were the coolest idea I ever heard of for low cost launching systems. The cargo would need to be able to survive a 100G excelloration but that's not a problem with raw materials and even electronics can be hardened for that force. The cost would be a fraction of current rocket technologies and they could launch far more often. It's a brilliant system so I can't believe no one has pushed it since the inventor died.
Not everyone is in high school and life doesn't end after it. Mid 40s isn't 80s. People have gotten really spoiled. People used to think the sun revolved around the Earth and now they think it revolves around them. The whole point is BluRay isn't a download format. Here's a shocker for you neither is DVD. Everyone is already converting when they do downloads legal and otherwise. If you don't know what formats and codecs are what are you doing on a geek site? Not every product and format is going to be a swiss army knife and do everything you want it to do. I hear some of the most rediculous arguments against products and formats. Another FYI there are dozens of video formats out there that aren't designed for the internet either. Neither was 35mm film for some bizarre reason. I guess they were being shortsighted. Hey it's only lasted a 100 years so I guess it was living on borrowed time. What are the odds of a digital format lasting 100 years? At present a decade would be impressive. Why? Expectations change for one. Most claim its a marketing scam when new standards come out but generally there are technical advances involved. Ones that come out simply to compete with the established standard tend to die young so the market determines what standards survive not the companies. The fact you want it yesterday and the companies are just being mean for not giving it to you isn't a reasonable position. Most of us woulld like to see fusion power, I've been following it since the 70s, yes I know I'm old and I wasn't born after the Teletubbies so I'm not cool. The power companies would much rather go to fusion than solar because it would make them money where as solar costs them business. The problem is no one has proven it's possible to sustain a reaction and produce more power than it takes. And yes a few have passed break even but it isn't sustained and powering a light bulb with a billion dollar plant isn't practical. The point being wanting it doesn't make it so. Development costs a lot and products have to appeal to enough people to make them practical to make. You can't send a letter to Apple and give them the specs for your personal iPod. Why? Because they aren't going to spend a 100 million gearing up a factory to make one for you just to hear you complain that it costs $400. You've got a 100 friends that would like the same configuration? Still not impressed. Come back when you have 10 million that want one configured that way. It's life and economics 101. FYI I want you to stay off my lawn so I don't get stuck changing your diaper. Grow up and make a legitimate argument the next time. If you're on a geek site I assume you have the brains to form an opinion. Maybe I'm wrong on that one.
Why is everything about download? The primary reason people download is for file sharing sites so some how I don't think Sony is bemoaning loosing that business. I'm old enough to have spent my whole childhood preVHS. The early Betamaxs hit in my late teens but only recorded an hour and there were no prerecorded tapes. We didn't have cable in my area so unless you saw a movie the first week or so of it's release you had to hope for a cut down TV version of the film. I find it amazing how spoiled people have become in a little over a generation. Technology just isn't moving fast enough to suit their own personal needs. A hundred years ago most people still rode horses or walked, there was no radio and TV was decades away. Even movies were a rare treat and they were all shorts. These days if they can't get HD video beamed directly to their iPods they think we're still in the stone age. BluRay was never meant as a download format. Apples and oranges. When transfer rates get up to the point of supporting HiDef downloads I'm sure there will be yet another format. You might as well complain about not being able to download Hi8 movies. It was never intended as a download format.
Well duh. That's rediculous for a review. We aren't talking splitting hairs a few dollars more it's a lot more expensive and it's larger and heavier and it's not all pluses since the Mac has more drive space. It feels more like a "Gee I prefer windows" review than a head to head match up. Until some one has a machine of a similar size and weight for a similar price then reviews are pointless. The Macbook Air does exactly what it was designed to do. You simply can't install a DVD drive inside a machine of that size with current technology but give them a few years and they'll likely be the first to do it. Remember the first iMacs had external drives. These days you pull them out of the box and plug them in and they're smaller. Each machine reviewed does a good job for what it was designed for but they are very different machines with different goals. Macbook is the smallest and lightest and it's a solid machine not a radically under powered system just so they could have bragging rights. You want to know the winner? The consumer because the Macbook Air is driving the market so the PC makers will keep pushing to copy it. By then Apple will have the next generation out but the point is everyone will benefit from them pushing the envelope. when it comes down to it it's not fair comparing PCs to Macs because most people are branded and they'll always show a preference. There are advantages to both so once again the consumer wins because there's choice. Remember the dark days of beige computers? For a lot of years they were like model Ts, you can have a computer any color so long as it's beige. A few vendors started selling black cases then suddenly you had cases available that looked like a Rebook shoe, colors and style. We need more companies pushing the break the model. The Macbook Air fits easily inside a brief case without taking up much space. It's more like throwing a thick notepad in the briefcase. That was the intent and they pulled it off and made it afordable. I find it funny that there were complaints about the price on the Macbook Air and now people are touting a more expensive machine that's bigger and heavier.
To summarize, what we need is a better way to dig cheap holes.
Think of it: with a cheap way to drill a hole we can drill down close to the mantle of the earth for cheap geothermal. With a cheap way to dig a tunnel we can expand our freeway infrastructure by placing new roads below ground. Infrastructure can be run underground more cheaply--if we have a cheap hole to run them through.
Holes are the future."
I'd like to submit a proposal for genetically engineering gophers the size of a bus. They'd be a cheap source for tunneling and could be bred instead of expensive manufacturing. So long as they don't start digging up lawns or develop a taste for human flesh they could be a major resource and not use any fossil fuels.
It'll never fly in the States. Over here lifting a remote control or a Wii gaming system are considered exercise. Most people get fighting mad when you talk about getting rid of SUVs and would rather pay the high gas prices. Lift 50lbs of weights once day to save a few cents in electricity, I think they'll pay the few cents extra especially when I'm sure the lamps will be Sharper Image bait. That said I'm buying one if for nothing else the cool factor. 5-10lb weights don't scare me and it's not the money to me but the CO2 saved. I'd considered something similar to this many years ago but it never seemed practical for the inconvinence verses the amount of power you get out of the system. My first question was how much weight. 50 pounds is a lot. The problem is you have to overcome some serious friction. Let's say you hooked up a 50lb weight to a 10 to 1 ratio gear box. You might be able to power your computer or the lights in your house for a few seconds the trick is slowing the process. He's loosing a massive amount of power slowing it. A real innovation would be a frictionless system that would have the same effect.
He knows it's a safe bet suing them since they'd rather settle out of court than admit to having a Prince song on their iPod. That should teach people for bulk downloading without checking what they are downloading. If you've downloaded 30,000 to 50,000 songs then there's a good chance there's a Prince song in the wood pile so you might want to cull them out.
And here everyone thought I was crazy stocking up food for the end of the world! Tomorrow there'll be a dual headline, "Sony Wins Format War!" and "Killer Asteroid Strikes At Noon".
If you've got a copy of the Star Wars animated feature on your machine a month before it comes out in the theater I'd say you have a mouth full of chicken feathers and claiming you didn't know it wasn't out yet isn't going to fly. One of the biggest problems with the whole argument is there's a lot of different positions falling under the hat of P2P. People argue that there are legitimate uses but most of it seems to be sharing copyrighted material. Then there's others that are claiming fair use but that's murky too because fair use was never meant to be a dodge for getting around paying for materials. Then you have people that flat out don't want to pay for anything and why should they if they can download it for free? I don't know, maybe because the producers of all this content you want for free may decide to do something that pays instead of producing free content? The subject really needs to be divided up into several arguments. File sharing of non copyrighted materials isn't an issue so it's a non argument and can be excluded. Fair Use? Well Fair Use doesn't cover uploading a movie that has yet to hit the theater for your closest hundred thousand friends to download. So we are largely left with "I don't want to pay for anything" being the argument. Well since the people making said products don't want to work for free so you don't have to pay then either some one else has to pay for you or the products will cease to be produced and everyone will loose including those willing to pay. The debate is being clouded by the different issues but it really comes down to free verses pay. Pay is called capitalism, free means the government pays for content then you get what they want to produce and you pay for it with your tax dollars. So unless you want to watch documentaries on the life and times of Ronald Regan and George W Bush or hear their favorite music you might want to consider paying for music and movies you like. Socialism and Communism may sound like a free ride but you still wind up having to pay through taxes and you tend to get a lot of crap. Yes most films and music are crap these days but believe it or not it can get a lot worse.
Technology has been a boon to nature selection. The less survival worthy seem to find testing the limits of technology irresistable. Their valiant attempts to test those limits is helping to insure the security of the gene pool. If we really want to improve the gene pool we need to go wide with a TV show, "American Darwin". The contestants compete to come up with the most extreme way to commit suicide on national TV. No takers? Obviously you haven't seen Jackass.
Well we now know that high blood pressure killed the last of the Martians. Their love of salty food finally ended the reign of our pyramid building face carving brothers.
Slashdot Mirror
on an 8 core 6.5 with 12 gig of ram.
http://www.realdoll.com/
http://www.astronautix.com/lvfam/gunnched.htm
I installed a Trunk Monkey with a scraper. I also got the accessory crowbar for those annoying hip hop fans with a sub woofer next to me.
Not everyone is in high school and life doesn't end after it. Mid 40s isn't 80s. People have gotten really spoiled. People used to think the sun revolved around the Earth and now they think it revolves around them. The whole point is BluRay isn't a download format. Here's a shocker for you neither is DVD. Everyone is already converting when they do downloads legal and otherwise. If you don't know what formats and codecs are what are you doing on a geek site? Not every product and format is going to be a swiss army knife and do everything you want it to do. I hear some of the most rediculous arguments against products and formats. Another FYI there are dozens of video formats out there that aren't designed for the internet either. Neither was 35mm film for some bizarre reason. I guess they were being shortsighted. Hey it's only lasted a 100 years so I guess it was living on borrowed time. What are the odds of a digital format lasting 100 years? At present a decade would be impressive. Why? Expectations change for one. Most claim its a marketing scam when new standards come out but generally there are technical advances involved. Ones that come out simply to compete with the established standard tend to die young so the market determines what standards survive not the companies. The fact you want it yesterday and the companies are just being mean for not giving it to you isn't a reasonable position. Most of us woulld like to see fusion power, I've been following it since the 70s, yes I know I'm old and I wasn't born after the Teletubbies so I'm not cool. The power companies would much rather go to fusion than solar because it would make them money where as solar costs them business. The problem is no one has proven it's possible to sustain a reaction and produce more power than it takes. And yes a few have passed break even but it isn't sustained and powering a light bulb with a billion dollar plant isn't practical. The point being wanting it doesn't make it so. Development costs a lot and products have to appeal to enough people to make them practical to make. You can't send a letter to Apple and give them the specs for your personal iPod. Why? Because they aren't going to spend a 100 million gearing up a factory to make one for you just to hear you complain that it costs $400. You've got a 100 friends that would like the same configuration? Still not impressed. Come back when you have 10 million that want one configured that way. It's life and economics 101. FYI I want you to stay off my lawn so I don't get stuck changing your diaper. Grow up and make a legitimate argument the next time. If you're on a geek site I assume you have the brains to form an opinion. Maybe I'm wrong on that one.
Why is everything about download? The primary reason people download is for file sharing sites so some how I don't think Sony is bemoaning loosing that business. I'm old enough to have spent my whole childhood preVHS. The early Betamaxs hit in my late teens but only recorded an hour and there were no prerecorded tapes. We didn't have cable in my area so unless you saw a movie the first week or so of it's release you had to hope for a cut down TV version of the film. I find it amazing how spoiled people have become in a little over a generation. Technology just isn't moving fast enough to suit their own personal needs. A hundred years ago most people still rode horses or walked, there was no radio and TV was decades away. Even movies were a rare treat and they were all shorts. These days if they can't get HD video beamed directly to their iPods they think we're still in the stone age. BluRay was never meant as a download format. Apples and oranges. When transfer rates get up to the point of supporting HiDef downloads I'm sure there will be yet another format. You might as well complain about not being able to download Hi8 movies. It was never intended as a download format.
Well duh. That's rediculous for a review. We aren't talking splitting hairs a few dollars more it's a lot more expensive and it's larger and heavier and it's not all pluses since the Mac has more drive space. It feels more like a "Gee I prefer windows" review than a head to head match up. Until some one has a machine of a similar size and weight for a similar price then reviews are pointless. The Macbook Air does exactly what it was designed to do. You simply can't install a DVD drive inside a machine of that size with current technology but give them a few years and they'll likely be the first to do it. Remember the first iMacs had external drives. These days you pull them out of the box and plug them in and they're smaller. Each machine reviewed does a good job for what it was designed for but they are very different machines with different goals. Macbook is the smallest and lightest and it's a solid machine not a radically under powered system just so they could have bragging rights. You want to know the winner? The consumer because the Macbook Air is driving the market so the PC makers will keep pushing to copy it. By then Apple will have the next generation out but the point is everyone will benefit from them pushing the envelope. when it comes down to it it's not fair comparing PCs to Macs because most people are branded and they'll always show a preference. There are advantages to both so once again the consumer wins because there's choice. Remember the dark days of beige computers? For a lot of years they were like model Ts, you can have a computer any color so long as it's beige. A few vendors started selling black cases then suddenly you had cases available that looked like a Rebook shoe, colors and style. We need more companies pushing the break the model. The Macbook Air fits easily inside a brief case without taking up much space. It's more like throwing a thick notepad in the briefcase. That was the intent and they pulled it off and made it afordable. I find it funny that there were complaints about the price on the Macbook Air and now people are touting a more expensive machine that's bigger and heavier.
Nothing genetic about it the good one just shaves.
To summarize, what we need is a better way to dig cheap holes.
Think of it: with a cheap way to drill a hole we can drill down close to the mantle of the earth for cheap geothermal. With a cheap way to dig a tunnel we can expand our freeway infrastructure by placing new roads below ground. Infrastructure can be run underground more cheaply--if we have a cheap hole to run them through.
Holes are the future."
I'd like to submit a proposal for genetically engineering gophers the size of a bus. They'd be a cheap source for tunneling and could be bred instead of expensive manufacturing. So long as they don't start digging up lawns or develop a taste for human flesh they could be a major resource and not use any fossil fuels.
"Do not attempt to swallow gaming disk or insert it nasally, into the ear canal or rectally. Oh and using said disk for gaming may be addictive."
Hey at least they make nice coasters.
It'll never fly in the States. Over here lifting a remote control or a Wii gaming system are considered exercise. Most people get fighting mad when you talk about getting rid of SUVs and would rather pay the high gas prices. Lift 50lbs of weights once day to save a few cents in electricity, I think they'll pay the few cents extra especially when I'm sure the lamps will be Sharper Image bait. That said I'm buying one if for nothing else the cool factor. 5-10lb weights don't scare me and it's not the money to me but the CO2 saved. I'd considered something similar to this many years ago but it never seemed practical for the inconvinence verses the amount of power you get out of the system. My first question was how much weight. 50 pounds is a lot. The problem is you have to overcome some serious friction. Let's say you hooked up a 50lb weight to a 10 to 1 ratio gear box. You might be able to power your computer or the lights in your house for a few seconds the trick is slowing the process. He's loosing a massive amount of power slowing it. A real innovation would be a frictionless system that would have the same effect.
Decent stories are more like Bigfoot. Lots of people claim to have seen them but there's no physical evidence.
He knows it's a safe bet suing them since they'd rather settle out of court than admit to having a Prince song on their iPod. That should teach people for bulk downloading without checking what they are downloading. If you've downloaded 30,000 to 50,000 songs then there's a good chance there's a Prince song in the wood pile so you might want to cull them out.
in the 2000 and 2004 elections. Thought control lasers make more sense than the election results did.
So that's why booster shots are now called Service Packs in Africa.
She may just assume it's because of her own porn surfing?
And here everyone thought I was crazy stocking up food for the end of the world! Tomorrow there'll be a dual headline, "Sony Wins Format War!" and "Killer Asteroid Strikes At Noon".
If you've got a copy of the Star Wars animated feature on your machine a month before it comes out in the theater I'd say you have a mouth full of chicken feathers and claiming you didn't know it wasn't out yet isn't going to fly. One of the biggest problems with the whole argument is there's a lot of different positions falling under the hat of P2P. People argue that there are legitimate uses but most of it seems to be sharing copyrighted material. Then there's others that are claiming fair use but that's murky too because fair use was never meant to be a dodge for getting around paying for materials. Then you have people that flat out don't want to pay for anything and why should they if they can download it for free? I don't know, maybe because the producers of all this content you want for free may decide to do something that pays instead of producing free content? The subject really needs to be divided up into several arguments. File sharing of non copyrighted materials isn't an issue so it's a non argument and can be excluded. Fair Use? Well Fair Use doesn't cover uploading a movie that has yet to hit the theater for your closest hundred thousand friends to download. So we are largely left with "I don't want to pay for anything" being the argument. Well since the people making said products don't want to work for free so you don't have to pay then either some one else has to pay for you or the products will cease to be produced and everyone will loose including those willing to pay. The debate is being clouded by the different issues but it really comes down to free verses pay. Pay is called capitalism, free means the government pays for content then you get what they want to produce and you pay for it with your tax dollars. So unless you want to watch documentaries on the life and times of Ronald Regan and George W Bush or hear their favorite music you might want to consider paying for music and movies you like. Socialism and Communism may sound like a free ride but you still wind up having to pay through taxes and you tend to get a lot of crap. Yes most films and music are crap these days but believe it or not it can get a lot worse.
Technology has been a boon to nature selection. The less survival worthy seem to find testing the limits of technology irresistable. Their valiant attempts to test those limits is helping to insure the security of the gene pool. If we really want to improve the gene pool we need to go wide with a TV show, "American Darwin". The contestants compete to come up with the most extreme way to commit suicide on national TV. No takers? Obviously you haven't seen Jackass.
Why did I get this image of the picture frame displaying Condom ads?
Strangely enough movie revenues to Hollywood from China seem unaffected.
Well we now know that high blood pressure killed the last of the Martians. Their love of salty food finally ended the reign of our pyramid building face carving brothers.
Is simply going to a system that lacks the features a fix or learning to live without?
Great, a free t-shirt that...
You have to type in Allow before you can put it on.
Can only be washed in Microsoft approved detergent
And isn't compatible with any other clothes I own.
I'll stick with my plain white open source t-shirt
is a free upgrade to XP Pro!