It's amazing how many pilots/captains have completely lost the ability to navigate their vessels without electronics and the problem is made worse by the fact that the infrastructure you need to navigate without it has been neglected or even systematically dismantled in many countries. I have sometimes wondered what effect it would have on a major NATO military maneuver if you specified half way through the war-game that: "The enemy just knocked out several of our GPS satellites, please simulate this by not making any use of your GPS equipment nor any GPS enabled munitions except those that have a fallback mode".
As far as the sea goes I disagree. You still have to know how to read charts, radar, compass, plot tr/dr, visual nav, est strategies..etc. People may be 'rusty' and unpracticed but they still learned how to do these things when they were going for their exam to be on the bridge of any vessel of any consequence.
Loranc is being torn down and people enter sextant readings into a computer nowadays rather than filling out worksheets or looking up sight reductions.. big deal.
The people who we need to be most worried about when GPS goes down are idiots who buy a boat call themelves "captains" yet can not read a chart and have not even considered what they would do if their electronics or engine failed.
The very first thing you should do is check your grounding... EVERYTHING is secondary to a good grounding system. Without a ground that does not suck introducing surge supression runs the risk of actually increasing damage to your gear.
Is your grounding rod doing its job? Are all of your outlets grounded? Is EVERYTHING coming into your home grounded? Is there a single grounding path?
Surge supressors are useful for protection against induced currents from nearby strikes, crappy utility power, crummy EMP weapons..etc...they don't do jack diddly squat against lightning strikes. The only form of lightning protection is to offer your thunder god a more appealing path to ground as far away from your stuff as possible.
There are other tricks avaliable for reducing induced current on internal wiring. The best approach is to purchase twisted romex... simply twisting wires reduces induced currents more than anything by a wide margin including expensive steel conduit and assorted shielding.
Why do people feel it necessary to answer this question? What good would a resolution do anyone? Outcomes are still the same regardless of what you believe. Even if the "wavefunction" was "real" whatever that means there is still no guarantee we are aware of everything there is to know about it. What good is the label?
Today everything is flash or html5. By not having java installed you are not missing out on anything. Hopefully in the not too distant future the same will be true for flash.
Flash and all adobe products are a horrendous failure from a security POV however we still tend to use them because they provide VALUE.
No website in their right mind requires java anymore. By not having it installed I am not missing out on anything. The value to having java installed for me is nill.
Andriod platform is Javas last remaining "killer" app.. Oracle is hard at work doing its level best to kill even that. Nobody wants to use a closed "copyrighted" programming environment. From a technical perspective.NET is superior to java. It has all but erased any inrodes Java had in the enterprise.
This leaves java with what? telecom, academia and niche verticles?
How about the (admittedly unlikely) case of a known bomb threat in a given region with a cell phone as its remote detonator?
Turning off cell service could just as easily CAUSE the bomb to explode.
Or perhaps a known threat/disaster in an enclosed and highly crowded space where controlling information is necessary to prevent panic and facilitate an orderly evacuation?
People in an enclosed highly crowded space don't need electronic devices to spread panic.
The key is that such capabilities should only be exercised under extreme conditions where lives are in danger
What keeps LEA from seeing a protest as an extreme condition? They could argue the risk of something extreme happening during a protest warrants action.
but never for mere political expediency (ie: impeding a legitimate protest).
Besides the situation-specific danger, any rays strong enough to scan are enough to increase cancer risk. The fact they direct enough energy to disrupt an electromechanical device should be proof of their inherent danger anyway. It's my understanding the quantum energy of that radiation is related to the frequency-- and terahertz radition is pretty high up there on the reactivity scale.
mm wave is not terahertz (sub-mm). The Los Alamos DNA simulations did not cover mm band and I don't know of any evidence the mm band poses any harm to humans..I sure would like to be made aware of such research if it does exist.
TSA and the homeland security industrial complex needs to go on a severe diet. Body scanning and groping for threats you can't even detect is unacceptable.
The FBI will not be satisifed until the contents of every brain and storage device is centrally searchable in realtime.
The FBI will not be satisified until all erase operations on disk drives logically erased the file but forever keep data on disk hence as files are modified disk capacity is reduced until the drive is full and needs to be handed over to the FBI for replacement.
The FBI will not be satisified until they can see inside of and listen every building and every square inch of land in realtime.
LEA always wants more more more... They are incapable of seeing beyond their narrow mission or understanding the secondary effects of their power grabs. They will NEVER be satisified.
It is very important everyone make their elected representatives aware of their position. Write a letter.
Focusing away from the legality and what is or is not entrapment there are two obviously fucked up things about this.
1. Searching for mental midgets who could be lead into confessing or going along with LEA invented schemes because they are easily manipulated.
2. Inventing schemes designed to capture headlines and instill more terror in terrorist fearing public....stinger missles..WTF.....
Government pissing away their legitimacy on crack shit like this has consequences for society. For godsakes look at the polling on 9/11 showing more than 1/5th of US population believe it was an Inside or Isreali job.
Thanks to the Internet and media we never forget anymore... What happens when the majority assume the next attack was an inside job?
Unfortunately, what you say is at best inconclusive, but at worst wrong. Google "hormesis".
know that hormesis sounds like a crackpot theory along with holistic super-diluted medicinal honey therapy, but some of the greatest minds in Medical Physics believe it exists. It is basically the hypothesis that low levels of additional radiation can actually make you healthier than no additional radiation at all (including daily dosage of cosmic rays). Hence the quote about high background radon studies and inverse correlations with health outcomes.
Hormesis is irrelevent. The dosages that matter for medical, nuclear and public safety applications are well above the threshold where statistically significant evidence of any "benefit" can be found.
At low levels the signal you think you hear is the noise floor. We don't have necessary sample sizes in any practical study to see anything with meaningful certainty...not when 1/5th of us will die of cancer anyway. Having slept through university statistics courses each interest defaults to seeing what they want to see. All of it is irrelevent. TFA included Iowa study.
So in short, there is at least very suggestive evidence for a "safe" (and even moreso than safe) level of radiation.
Or maybe it means smoking is good for you?
The problem with Hormesis is that it is useful only as a public manipulation tool to irresponsibly sway public consumption. "Relax some radiation is good for you". The problem is that when you go to the Dr and have medical imaging done the amount of radiation you are exposed to is NOT so trivial...the same for industry limits and most everything else that matters. It is simply a tool for irresponsibly spreading uncertainty to effect public opinion.
TFA is not about hormesis... It is about the realitve safety of prolonged low dosage vs short term high dosage exposure. It suggests sustained low dosage exposure is WORSE than previously assumed.
Relax folks...the missles are part of a new handicap system for the skeet shooting events.
IOC took pitty on poor island nations who lack sufficient population from which to draw a talented pool of shooters. In order to increase participation countries with less than 100k population would automatically qualify for the "SAM" handicap.
This does not really seem to solve much of anything. It just makes detecting and chasing down potential routing problems much easier.
What good does querying a DNS server do if the routes have been hijacked and the hijackers took the extra step of making DNS inaccessable? Is a router really going to pull a route if they can't access a DNS server? If they even think about it good luck beating down complex failures.
I think combination of sane filtering practices and centrally managed but globally duplicated authoritative routing data is a better approach if your goal is to actually solve the problem rather than making it easier to detect and mitigate after the fact.
BGP for IPv6 is essentially the same as BGP for IPv4, so if the protocol has a security hole then it will appear on both. However, because IPv6 is designed from the outset to be a hierarchical addressing scheme, address tables should end up being much smaller (even though each entry is longer) which in turn means that accidents should be less common. If it's easier to see the consequences of your actions, you (in theory) should be less likely to make mistakes.
I don't think this will play out. Yes there will be some aggregation thanks to generous allocation policies but it won't do anything about proliferation of shit routes by every dinky little corporation in the world and rich tech geeks who insists on being multi-homed. I would be very surprised to see the situation change much with IPv6.
First they start restricting exports of rare earths and vespene gas... pissing away their monopoly.
Now they seek to mandate architecture rather than let market decide. These systems only work as well as they do and are only affordable as they are due to economies of scale. If you artificially throw a wrench in that the most likely outcome is increased cost and lower quality.
Unfounded american paranoia wrt chinese products and firms including huawei and lenovo is equally stupid.
No it wouldn't. And it hasn't. We've already had many instances of people taking a principled stand against the TSA at security checkpoints; nothing has changed. Tons of people in this very forum clearly equate every TSA employee as a low-life, child molesting, thieving goon, when most of them are just people who needed a job.
Throwing a tantrum at a security checkpoint to make a statement against those mean ol' TSA agents is idiotic misplaced anger. For the most part, these guys are just doing their jobs. The people you need to engage are the ones making the decisions higher up.
People make a conscious decision to perform a specific job. Whether your profession is telemarketer, TSA agent or drug dealer it is something you elect to do.
With regards to it not mattering or anger being misplaced...the guy who showed up at the checkpoint naked received NATIONAL attention. The more TSA is reported about or heard about in mass media increases critical mass necessary to effect change. The fact that you hear about these things means they do matter and they do effect public opinion which ultimatly effects voter behavior.
Higher churn at TSA means more resources wasted and poorer outcomes. When the only people left who want to be TSA agents are narcissists and pedos TSA will will collapse on its own. It is already well on its way by the looks of things.
Any and all non-violent methods of bringing down the current TSA I am for. I don't much care who in the chain of command is negativly effected by it.
How is Victors delay decision in this experiment only 14 billionths of a second?
Light travels about 1ft/ns in a vacuum. Given the index of refraction of a typical optical delay line your looking at about 2/3's vaccume speed for the same trip thru a fiber cable.
341 feet thru vacuum requires ~341 billionths of a second (~341 ns)
Add in the fiber delay and your at roughly 500 billionths of a second.
Just how long are alice and bobs polarization detectors? What gives?
Stop assuming nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
Why should I?
We have 'proof' that the speed of light is not constant over time, the universe would not exist in its current configuration if the speed of light was the absolutely limit of speed.
The expansion of space has nothing to do with speed of light.
Someone is going to die after telling their family members that they've stopped seeing a regular doctor and went holistic with Crooksey when they should have had their ankle amputated
Let me quote something displayed in bold faced lettering on each and every page of this fellers web site:
âoeI am not a doctor, dietitian, nor nutritionist ⦠in fact I have no medical training of any kind.â
Wake me up when he misrepresents himself.
Assume the guy is a crackpot and assume everything he says is wrong. I would rather live in a society man enough to tolerate crackpots than deal with the consequences of a government that (effectivly) outlaws speech or seeks to fault everyone else for the poor choices and misfortunes of the individual.
He is not a lawyer and not pretending to be one. If his disclaimer is worthless then so should EVERYONE elses.
"Only" a problem for systems where size_t is different from int. So the 15% of you still running in a 32 bit world can rest easy. This also means that on a mixed 32/64 bit system, you could use 32bit libraries until you get around to patching everything. Remember, a whole bunch of stuff uses ssl. Have fun fixing your Java jars.
This advice is wrong. The problem exists in 32 and 64bit libraries. Using 32-bit binaries will NOT protect you from this problem.
The issue is a signed/unsigned mismatch when the unsigned number reaches 2^31 and gets passed to a signed variable it is treated as a negative number with catastrophic results.
Reflections, fine. But "back radiation", no. In brief (I have no time to go into detail today), many of the AGW warming models rely on the concept that clouds etc. "back radiate" some of the absorbed heat, which is in turn absorbed again by the earth. However, this is a flawed model: physics tells us that a cloud that has absorbed radiation from the earth must be cooler than the earth (it has to be to absorb the radiation in the first place), and cannot "back radiate" this radiation and return it to the earth, which is warmer than itself.
I don't know what "back radiation" is. Never heard of it. I have only spoken about "blackbody radiation". Note the word 'black' used by me vs 'back' used by yourself.
Note that this is not the same thing as merely trapping warmth. Trapped, yes. Back-radiated? No. That is a distinction that you have to ask the climate scientists about, because it is their own hare-brained concept, not mine.
I don't know what "back radiated" means. Blackbody radiation is just photons...Sun emits energy the same way only with a lot more kick. Energy flux of a blackbody emitter goes up by 16x for every doubling of temperature so you can see how important it is for moderating energy balance between incoming and outgoing on earth. The hotter the earth gets the more energy it stands to loose from blackbody emission.
Only difference about direct energy from the sun and blackbody energy emitted from the earth is amount and frequency (energy) of the photon.
None of my remarks require rocket science or specialty terms invented by climate scientists. Neither do they pretend to represent a complete or complex model that seeks to simulate all complex interactions including reflections from clouds or any such nonsense. I have no opinion about Spencer or Virginia or ANY complex models. All of that is in the "weeds" , way way over my head. This was never once a part of any of my remarks. I still do wonder why Venus is soo hot.
The only thing worse than being hacked by a bored 15 year old is being hacked by someone with an agenda.
I think governments should sponsor public hacking competitions with basic code of ethics rules and immunity from any legal or civil actions. Better than wasting billions "cyber defense".
For this particular physics concept it doesn't matter whether you are in a closed or open system. "Back radiating" to something warmer is impossible in either one. It has nothing to do with whether there is a net overall increase or decrease in the immediate environment, which in fact might change depending on whether you are in an open or closed system. It has merely to do with the direction of absorption. A cooler object cannot increase the temperature of a warmer object via thermal radiation. It just doesn't happen. Ask any physicist. And that is precisely where Spencer is wrong. He uses a thought experiment to illustrate his point, but his "proof" is based on invalid assumptions. Garbage in, garbage out.
What you are referring to, I believe, is an increase or decrease of entropy. It is indeed possible in an open system for a local region to decrease in entropy. That much is true. But that requires input from other areas of higher energy, not lower. The "back radiation" concept proposes that energy somehow flows from a lower-energy-density region to a higher-energy-density region.
Doesn't happen. If it did, you could cook your food by setting it outside in the snow.
Why does Venus have slightly higher average surface temperature than Mercury? Note the Albedo of Venus compared to Mercury is huge.. Venus is one of most reflective objects in our solar system.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I have no idea who Spensor is or what he said or why that is relevent to any statements I have made. I have no idea what cold object is getting a warm object warmer. It certainly has nothing to do with what I am asserting. It all sounds like crackpot drivel to me worthy of being ignored.
The concept is very simple. The sun provides energy to the earth.
Some of this energy is stored by the earth, some of it is reflected and some of it is released in the form of blackbody photons.
The atmosphere of our planet randomly reflects some of this energy bouncing off or (blackbody) emitted by the earth that would otherwise be lost directly to space. Atoms that make up the atmosphere dictate the characteristics of this reflection behavior. The aggregate result of the reflections is that more energy is stored in the earth than would otherwise be.
This additional energy from the sun locked up by reflections from atmosphere raises the surface temperature and thus the energy released from blackbody photons emitted from all matter.
At some point the amount of energy given to the earth finallly matches the amount reflected back to the universe.
Again this stuff does not take a rocket scientist to understand. It is very basic. If you think I'm full of shit then answer the million dollar question for yourself...why is Venus so hot?
My point was that there has been a good deal of bullshit on BOTH sides of the AGW argument.
There is a different between bullshit and news about AGW. Not all news about AGW is bullshit. If you draw two circles. Label one of them 'AGW news' and the other 'crackpot bullshit'.. I think people should avoid the entire crackpot bullshit circle including any region of this circle intersecting with 'AGW news'.
Which, taken together, are contradictory in the context that you, yourself, set up. In one breath you say "we can calculate static effects", in the next you say "but the system is dynamic". Which, strictly speaking, is true. But both sentences are disingenuous, because of your prior statements which set the context:
The reason I pointed out percentage of human caused carbon content in the atmosphere, static and secondary effects as separate items is because the first two are much easier for people to access, understand, observe and calculate. There is not serious opposition to this data.
This includes crackpot assertions regarding greenhouse effect being in doubt because it "violates" the infamous 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Complex models involving supercomputers are much less settled and more of an open question. While general concepts about complex models can be communicated they are mostly inaccessable black boxes to many of us who have not dedicated careers to the subject.
For all I know and frankly perhaps anyone knows the increase in albedo of the earth due to increased cloud coverage by warmer temperatures could limit/cancel out the effect or perhaps one of Al Gores frankenstein carbon permafrost doomsday scenarios could occur. I have no clue and do not pretend to have one.
From what we can easily know from observation and applying high school physics and math is that yes us little humans do have a significant effect on the environment. While we're not sure exactly what that effect will cause we do know it has the potential to be bad. I believe this knowledge in itself is important which is why the distinction was made and disclaimer included. Reasoning about global risk always seems like a prudent endeavour. One need not know everything to hedge against an uncertain or unknowable future.
Personally I'm much more concerned with ocean issues than average surface temperatures.
I have to wonder how many people this change actually affects, and I also imagine the impact is blown out of proportion on sites like slashdot where people A) don't even use windows and B) have some sort of axe to grind against Microsoft.
There is no need to question motives of people who think differently than yourself.
If there was only a choice the whole issue would go away. As it stands having the entire screen replaced when the start menu is depressed is viewed as counterproductive to many. Given millions of people are perfectly happy with Win7 and XP expecting Microsoft customers to upgrade only to be annoyed by a constant clash of interface concepts is a hard sell to say the least.
Slashdot Mirror
It's amazing how many pilots/captains have completely lost the ability to navigate their vessels without electronics and the problem is made worse by the fact that the infrastructure you need to navigate without it has been neglected or even systematically dismantled in many countries. I have sometimes wondered what effect it would have on a major NATO military maneuver if you specified half way through the war-game that: "The enemy just knocked out several of our GPS satellites, please simulate this by not making any use of your GPS equipment nor any GPS enabled munitions except those that have a fallback mode".
As far as the sea goes I disagree. You still have to know how to read charts, radar, compass, plot tr/dr, visual nav, est strategies..etc. People may be 'rusty' and unpracticed but they still learned how to do these things when they were going for their exam to be on the bridge of any vessel of any consequence.
Loranc is being torn down and people enter sextant readings into a computer nowadays rather than filling out worksheets or looking up sight reductions.. big deal.
The people who we need to be most worried about when GPS goes down are idiots who buy a boat call themelves "captains" yet can not read a chart and have not even considered what they would do if their electronics or engine failed.
The very first thing you should do is check your grounding... EVERYTHING is secondary to a good grounding system. Without a ground that does not suck introducing surge supression runs the risk of actually increasing damage to your gear.
Is your grounding rod doing its job? Are all of your outlets grounded? Is EVERYTHING coming into your home grounded? Is there a single grounding path?
Surge supressors are useful for protection against induced currents from nearby strikes, crappy utility power, crummy EMP weapons..etc...they don't do jack diddly squat against lightning strikes. The only form of lightning protection is to offer your thunder god a more appealing path to ground as far away from your stuff as possible.
There are other tricks avaliable for reducing induced current on internal wiring. The best approach is to purchase twisted romex... simply twisting wires reduces induced currents more than anything by a wide margin including expensive steel conduit and assorted shielding.
Why do people feel it necessary to answer this question? What good would a resolution do anyone? Outcomes are still the same regardless of what you believe. Even if the "wavefunction" was "real" whatever that means there is still no guarantee we are aware of everything there is to know about it. What good is the label?
Back in the day java applets were everywhere.
Today everything is flash or html5. By not having java installed you are not missing out on anything. Hopefully in the not too distant future the same will be true for flash.
Flash and all adobe products are a horrendous failure from a security POV however we still tend to use them because they provide VALUE.
No website in their right mind requires java anymore. By not having it installed I am not missing out on anything. The value to having java installed for me is nill.
Andriod platform is Javas last remaining "killer" app.. Oracle is hard at work doing its level best to kill even that. Nobody wants to use a closed "copyrighted" programming environment. From a technical perspective .NET is superior to java. It has all but erased any inrodes Java had in the enterprise.
This leaves java with what? telecom, academia and niche verticles?
How about the (admittedly unlikely) case of a known bomb threat in a given region with a cell phone as its remote detonator?
Turning off cell service could just as easily CAUSE the bomb to explode.
Or perhaps a known threat/disaster in an enclosed and highly crowded space where controlling information is necessary to prevent panic and facilitate an orderly evacuation?
People in an enclosed highly crowded space don't need electronic devices to spread panic.
The key is that such capabilities should only be exercised under extreme conditions where lives are in danger
What keeps LEA from seeing a protest as an extreme condition? They could argue the risk of something extreme happening during a protest warrants action.
but never for mere political expediency (ie: impeding a legitimate protest).
Good luck codifying that.
Besides the situation-specific danger, any rays strong enough to scan are enough to increase cancer risk. The fact they direct enough energy to disrupt an electromechanical device should be proof of their inherent danger anyway. It's my understanding the quantum energy of that radiation is related to the frequency-- and terahertz radition is pretty high up there on the reactivity scale.
mm wave is not terahertz (sub-mm). The Los Alamos DNA simulations did not cover mm band and I don't know of any evidence the mm band poses any harm to humans..I sure would like to be made aware of such research if it does exist.
TSA and the homeland security industrial complex needs to go on a severe diet. Body scanning and groping for threats you can't even detect is unacceptable.
The FBI will not be satisifed until the contents of every brain and storage device is centrally searchable in realtime.
The FBI will not be satisified until all erase operations on disk drives logically erased the file but forever keep data on disk hence as files are modified disk capacity is reduced until the drive is full and needs to be handed over to the FBI for replacement.
The FBI will not be satisified until they can see inside of and listen every building and every square inch of land in realtime.
LEA always wants more more more... They are incapable of seeing beyond their narrow mission or understanding the secondary effects of their power grabs. They will NEVER be satisified.
It is very important everyone make their elected representatives aware of their position. Write a letter.
Focusing away from the legality and what is or is not entrapment there are two obviously fucked up things about this.
1. Searching for mental midgets who could be lead into confessing or going along with LEA invented schemes because they are easily manipulated.
2. Inventing schemes designed to capture headlines and instill more terror in terrorist fearing public....stinger missles..WTF.....
Government pissing away their legitimacy on crack shit like this has consequences for society. For godsakes look at the polling on 9/11 showing more than 1/5th of US population believe it was an Inside or Isreali job.
Thanks to the Internet and media we never forget anymore... What happens when the majority assume the next attack was an inside job?
Unfortunately, what you say is at best inconclusive, but at worst wrong. Google "hormesis".
know that hormesis sounds like a crackpot theory along with holistic super-diluted medicinal honey therapy, but some of the greatest minds in Medical Physics believe it exists. It is basically the hypothesis that low levels of additional radiation can actually make you healthier than no additional radiation at all (including daily dosage of cosmic rays). Hence the quote about high background radon studies and inverse correlations with health outcomes.
Hormesis is irrelevent. The dosages that matter for medical, nuclear and public safety applications are well above the threshold where statistically significant evidence of any "benefit" can be found.
At low levels the signal you think you hear is the noise floor. We don't have necessary sample sizes in any practical study to see anything with meaningful certainty...not when 1/5th of us will die of cancer anyway. Having slept through university statistics courses each interest defaults to seeing what they want to see. All of it is irrelevent. TFA included Iowa study.
So in short, there is at least very suggestive evidence for a "safe" (and even moreso than safe) level of radiation.
Or maybe it means smoking is good for you?
The problem with Hormesis is that it is useful only as a public manipulation tool to irresponsibly sway public consumption. "Relax some radiation is good for you". The problem is that when you go to the Dr and have medical imaging done the amount of radiation you are exposed to is NOT so trivial...the same for industry limits and most everything else that matters. It is simply a tool for irresponsibly spreading uncertainty to effect public opinion.
TFA is not about hormesis ... It is about the realitve safety of prolonged low dosage vs short term high dosage exposure. It suggests sustained low dosage exposure is WORSE than previously assumed.
Relax folks...the missles are part of a new handicap system for the skeet shooting events.
IOC took pitty on poor island nations who lack sufficient population from which to draw a talented pool of shooters. In order to increase participation countries with less than 100k population would automatically qualify for the "SAM" handicap.
This does not really seem to solve much of anything. It just makes detecting and chasing down potential routing problems much easier.
What good does querying a DNS server do if the routes have been hijacked and the hijackers took the extra step of making DNS inaccessable? Is a router really going to pull a route if they can't access a DNS server? If they even think about it good luck beating down complex failures.
I think combination of sane filtering practices and centrally managed but globally duplicated authoritative routing data is a better approach if your goal is to actually solve the problem rather than making it easier to detect and mitigate after the fact.
BGP for IPv6 is essentially the same as BGP for IPv4, so if the protocol has a security hole then it will appear on both. However, because IPv6 is designed from the outset to be a hierarchical addressing scheme, address tables should end up being much smaller (even though each entry is longer) which in turn means that accidents should be less common. If it's easier to see the consequences of your actions, you (in theory) should be less likely to make mistakes.
I don't think this will play out. Yes there will be some aggregation thanks to generous allocation policies but it won't do anything about proliferation of shit routes by every dinky little corporation in the world and rich tech geeks who insists on being multi-homed. I would be very surprised to see the situation change much with IPv6.
First they start restricting exports of rare earths and vespene gas... pissing away their monopoly.
Now they seek to mandate architecture rather than let market decide. These systems only work as well as they do and are only affordable as they are due to economies of scale. If you artificially throw a wrench in that the most likely outcome is increased cost and lower quality.
Unfounded american paranoia wrt chinese products and firms including huawei and lenovo is equally stupid.
No it wouldn't. And it hasn't. We've already had many instances of people taking a principled stand against the TSA at security checkpoints; nothing has changed. Tons of people in this very forum clearly equate every TSA employee as a low-life, child molesting, thieving goon, when most of them are just people who needed a job.
Throwing a tantrum at a security checkpoint to make a statement against those mean ol' TSA agents is idiotic misplaced anger. For the most part, these guys are just doing their jobs. The people you need to engage are the ones making the decisions higher up.
People make a conscious decision to perform a specific job. Whether your profession is telemarketer, TSA agent or drug dealer it is something you elect to do.
With regards to it not mattering or anger being misplaced...the guy who showed up at the checkpoint naked received NATIONAL attention. The more TSA is reported about or heard about in mass media increases critical mass necessary to effect change. The fact that you hear about these things means they do matter and they do effect public opinion which ultimatly effects voter behavior.
Higher churn at TSA means more resources wasted and poorer outcomes. When the only people left who want to be TSA agents are narcissists and pedos TSA will will collapse on its own. It is already well on its way by the looks of things.
Any and all non-violent methods of bringing down the current TSA I am for. I don't much care who in the chain of command is negativly effected by it.
How is Victors delay decision in this experiment only 14 billionths of a second?
Light travels about 1ft/ns in a vacuum. Given the index of refraction of a typical optical delay line your looking at about 2/3's vaccume speed for the same trip thru a fiber cable.
341 feet thru vacuum requires ~341 billionths of a second (~341 ns)
Add in the fiber delay and your at roughly 500 billionths of a second.
Just how long are alice and bobs polarization detectors? What gives?
Stop assuming nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
Why should I?
We have 'proof' that the speed of light is not constant over time, the universe would not exist in its current configuration if the speed of light was the absolutely limit of speed.
The expansion of space has nothing to do with speed of light.
Someone is going to die after telling their family members that they've stopped seeing a regular doctor and went holistic with Crooksey when they should have had their ankle amputated
Let me quote something displayed in bold faced lettering on each and every page of this fellers web site:
âoeI am not a doctor, dietitian, nor nutritionist ⦠in fact I have no medical training of any kind.â
Wake me up when he misrepresents himself.
Assume the guy is a crackpot and assume everything he says is wrong. I would rather live in a society man enough to tolerate crackpots than deal with the consequences of a government that (effectivly) outlaws speech or seeks to fault everyone else for the poor choices and misfortunes of the individual.
He is not a lawyer and not pretending to be one. If his disclaimer is worthless then so should EVERYONE elses.
Ease of design, power consumption and performance. Pick any two.
It would be interesting to see how this compares with the work of competent designers with a/d and analog skillz.
"Only" a problem for systems where size_t is different from int. So the 15% of you still running in a 32 bit world can rest easy. This also means that on a mixed 32/64 bit system, you could use 32bit libraries until you get around to patching everything. Remember, a whole bunch of stuff uses ssl. Have fun fixing your Java jars.
This advice is wrong. The problem exists in 32 and 64bit libraries. Using 32-bit binaries will NOT protect you from this problem.
The issue is a signed/unsigned mismatch when the unsigned number reaches 2^31 and gets passed to a signed variable it is treated as a negative number with catastrophic results.
Reflections, fine. But "back radiation", no. In brief (I have no time to go into detail today), many of the AGW warming models rely on the concept that clouds etc. "back radiate" some of the absorbed heat, which is in turn absorbed again by the earth. However, this is a flawed model: physics tells us that a cloud that has absorbed radiation from the earth must be cooler than the earth (it has to be to absorb the radiation in the first place), and cannot "back radiate" this radiation and return it to the earth, which is warmer than itself.
I don't know what "back radiation" is. Never heard of it. I have only spoken about "blackbody radiation". Note the word 'black' used by me vs 'back' used by yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-body_radiation
Note that this is not the same thing as merely trapping warmth. Trapped, yes. Back-radiated? No. That is a distinction that you have to ask the climate scientists about, because it is their own hare-brained concept, not mine.
I don't know what "back radiated" means. Blackbody radiation is just photons...Sun emits energy the same way only with a lot more kick. Energy flux of a blackbody emitter goes up by 16x for every doubling of temperature so you can see how important it is for moderating energy balance between incoming and outgoing on earth. The hotter the earth gets the more energy it stands to loose from blackbody emission.
Only difference about direct energy from the sun and blackbody energy emitted from the earth is amount and frequency (energy) of the photon.
None of my remarks require rocket science or specialty terms invented by climate scientists. Neither do they pretend to represent a complete or complex model that seeks to simulate all complex interactions including reflections from clouds or any such nonsense. I have no opinion about Spencer or Virginia or ANY complex models. All of that is in the "weeds" , way way over my head. This was never once a part of any of my remarks. I still do wonder why Venus is soo hot.
The only thing worse than being hacked by a bored 15 year old is being hacked by someone with an agenda.
I think governments should sponsor public hacking competitions with basic code of ethics rules and immunity from any legal or civil actions. Better than wasting billions "cyber defense".
For this particular physics concept it doesn't matter whether you are in a closed or open system. "Back radiating" to something warmer is impossible in either one. It has nothing to do with whether there is a net overall increase or decrease in the immediate environment, which in fact might change depending on whether you are in an open or closed system. It has merely to do with the direction of absorption. A cooler object cannot increase the temperature of a warmer object via thermal radiation. It just doesn't happen. Ask any physicist. And that is precisely where Spencer is wrong. He uses a thought experiment to illustrate his point, but his "proof" is based on invalid assumptions. Garbage in, garbage out.
What you are referring to, I believe, is an increase or decrease of entropy. It is indeed possible in an open system for a local region to decrease in entropy. That much is true. But that requires input from other areas of higher energy, not lower. The "back radiation" concept proposes that energy somehow flows from a lower-energy-density region to a higher-energy-density region.
Doesn't happen. If it did, you could cook your food by setting it outside in the snow.
Why does Venus have slightly higher average surface temperature than Mercury? Note the Albedo of Venus compared to Mercury is huge.. Venus is one of most reflective objects in our solar system.
I have no idea what you are talking about. I have no idea who Spensor is or what he said or why that is relevent to any statements I have made. I have no idea what cold object is getting a warm object warmer. It certainly has nothing to do with what I am asserting. It all sounds like crackpot drivel to me worthy of being ignored.
The concept is very simple. The sun provides energy to the earth.
Some of this energy is stored by the earth, some of it is reflected and some of it is released in the form of blackbody photons.
The atmosphere of our planet randomly reflects some of this energy bouncing off or (blackbody) emitted by the earth that would otherwise be lost directly to space. Atoms that make up the atmosphere dictate the characteristics of this reflection behavior. The aggregate result of the reflections is that more energy is stored in the earth than would otherwise be.
This additional energy from the sun locked up by reflections from atmosphere raises the surface temperature and thus the energy released from blackbody photons emitted from all matter.
At some point the amount of energy given to the earth finallly matches the amount reflected back to the universe.
Again this stuff does not take a rocket scientist to understand. It is very basic. If you think I'm full of shit then answer the million dollar question for yourself...why is Venus so hot?
My point was that there has been a good deal of bullshit on BOTH sides of the AGW argument.
There is a different between bullshit and news about AGW. Not all news about AGW is bullshit. If you draw two circles. Label one of them 'AGW news' and the other 'crackpot bullshit' .. I think people should avoid the entire crackpot bullshit circle including any region of this circle intersecting with 'AGW news'.
Which, taken together, are contradictory in the context that you, yourself, set up. In one breath you say "we can calculate static effects", in the next you say "but the system is dynamic". Which, strictly speaking, is true. But both sentences are disingenuous, because of your prior statements which set the context:
The reason I pointed out percentage of human caused carbon content in the atmosphere, static and secondary effects as separate items is because the first two are much easier for people to access, understand, observe and calculate. There is not serious opposition to this data.
This includes crackpot assertions regarding greenhouse effect being in doubt because it "violates" the infamous 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Complex models involving supercomputers are much less settled and more of an open question. While general concepts about complex models can be communicated they are mostly inaccessable black boxes to many of us who have not dedicated careers to the subject.
For all I know and frankly perhaps anyone knows the increase in albedo of the earth due to increased cloud coverage by warmer temperatures could limit/cancel out the effect or perhaps one of Al Gores frankenstein carbon permafrost doomsday scenarios could occur. I have no clue and do not pretend to have one.
From what we can easily know from observation and applying high school physics and math is that yes us little humans do have a significant effect on the environment. While we're not sure exactly what that effect will cause we do know it has the potential to be bad. I believe this knowledge in itself is important which is why the distinction was made and disclaimer included. Reasoning about global risk always seems like a prudent endeavour. One need not know everything to hedge against an uncertain or unknowable future.
Personally I'm much more concerned with ocean issues than average surface temperatures.
Honestly I never even use the start menu anymore.
Good for **YOU**
I have to wonder how many people this change actually affects, and I also imagine the impact is blown out of proportion on sites like slashdot where people A) don't even use windows and B) have some sort of axe to grind against Microsoft.
There is no need to question motives of people who think differently than yourself.
If there was only a choice the whole issue would go away. As it stands having the entire screen replaced when the start menu is depressed is viewed as counterproductive to many. Given millions of people are perfectly happy with Win7 and XP expecting Microsoft customers to upgrade only to be annoyed by a constant clash of interface concepts is a hard sell to say the least.
From what I can tell big difference they are using phosphor codings to correct the normally crappy led spectrum.
Spectrum looks very clean but still a small spike around blue/purple.
http://www.usa.lighting.philips.com/pwc_li/us_en/connect/tools_literature/downloads/EnduraLED_A19-110726_2.pdf
Still think I'm going to skip leds and save up for quantum dots and carbon nano tube lighting.