I use Target Alert - an extention for Firefox that shows icons for links that go to PDFs, zip files... etc. (it's customizable). It's a very nice, simple program.
He's saying that all of his hard disk averages were 3.5-4.5 MB per song, not that every single song fit that range. So if he looked at his MP3s for C:, E: and F:, he just had 3 numbers to look at.
This thing is $12,000 - so it's obviously targeted as businesses. Now, imagine a cluster of employees tightly packed enough to justify 16 WAPs from one physical location. First off, the cheapest solution is to simply wire everyone up. 16 hubs, a switch and the required cabling and labor costs a lot less than $12,000. Even if they need wireless, why not just buy 16 wireless hubs at $60 a pop, and then hook those up to a switch? I don't get it why anyone would buy this...
If that virtual item has real-world, market value, is it still strictly a virtual value because there was no physical, tangible item?
If the item has real-world value, then it has real-world value; that's it. Going up to someone and taking something from them is a crime. There's plenty of non-physical things that are worth money. It's illegal for me to steal patents, trademarks, copyrights, movie/book rights, companies... etc. It's not like you can up and physically steal a company from someone, but can certainly defraud someone out of it.
That said, this case is a little different, as he was playing a game that allows people to defeat other people for items. To counteract that point, the guy did cheat, so I would still think it's a crime. But if they guy hadn't cheated, well then, it's almost like gambling (you can't arrest casino managers because you lost money at blackjack - there's an implied contract when you play saying you'll let them have your money).
The article you reference only talks about glass flow, not about the state of matter glass is at room temp. There's still plenty of debate on that, with most scientists saying glass exhibits properties of both.
I heard that the *real* reason phones aren't allowed to be used on planes is that the phones have line-of-sight with many towers, and it becomes a bandwidth issue for the cell companies (trying to determine which cell has the best signal, never mind the fact that the planes travel at 500+ mph, so there's constant handshaking of the signal). This theory may come from the tinfoil hat crowd, but it's a neat one anyways.
I find this to be a much better solution since bringing up creation in science class lends it more credability than it deserves.
I agree. Here in Maryland, we have Catholic schools everywhere, and I'm always surprised at how well they seperate evolution and creationism, like your school did. I can't quite figure out why the ID pushers want ID taught in biology, other than the fact the most public schools simply don't offer any theology classes, so biology seems like the next best thing. That, or to your point, by having it in biology, it will get equal recognition as evolution does.
Good points, and I hate to correct someone that makes a good post like this, but after reading points 1 and 2, it sounds dangerously close to sounding like a law is somehow better than a theory on some scale of certainty, when in fact they are different (although related) things.
A law is an simply an observation that has been tested to the degree that it would be preverse to think that the law is incorrect. A good example is the Law of Gravity - that material objects are attracted to one another.
In contrast, a theory is simply a statment (or, more often, a set of statments) that is meant to explain such observations. While the Law of Gravity is all well and good, the Thoery of Gravity builds upon that and goes to explain things like planetary motion and rocket trajectories.
Re:OT: where'd all the 4/5 comments go?
on
Xbox 360 for $300
·
· Score: 1
I saw the same thing. Except this post is getting plenty of comments. Not sure why though - maybe nothing interesting is being said? Is there some holiday my employer isn't telling me about?
Anywho, I played with my cookies/prefs, but it looks like it's just a quirk, and people haven't moderated lately.
Fortunately, the article is wrong, at least as far as how SiteKey operates now.
I use SiteKey for Bank of America (it's available in Maryland and DC), and they don't even ask me three questions. Instead, after logging in with username/password, I'm then taken to a page that shows an image (and a phrase). I chose the image upon singup.
The idea is that only BoA knows the image, so if that specific image doesn't show up on that second page, it's a phisher (the phishers are resorting to guessing your picture, unless they break into BoA's secured site).
I find it useful (although it's an extra step, as the second page requires yet another password), but it works. And, despite being a/. nerd, I actually did get phished once -- and it happened to be a fake Bank of America site, so I'm glad to use SiteKey (it was a good phish email - they just told me the bank added new online features - none of that 'please verify you password' crap)
I use Bank of America in Maryland, one of the test areas for SiteKey. As of now, the three challenge questions aren't used, although they did ask me to give them 3 challenge/response pairs.
What Sitekey does do is after you sign in traditionally (Firefox stores this for me already, so I just click on 'Log in using Sitekey'), and then it shows you an image and phrase of your choosing. The important thing is that the image is stored (and encrypted) on BoA's server. So a phisher wouldn't have access to it, and would have to guess what your image is. It's the same tech discussed previously on Slashdot.
I think so:) It makes us feel better saying Firefox is a real competitor to IE.
And really, from a features standpoint, it certainly is. Kind of like Apple is to Windows. No one expects Windows to go away, but the hyped features in Longhorn show that Redmond is trying to play catchup to certain features in OS X.
But you're right - it isn't true competition. We should expect IE to go away any more than Windows itself. But the 10% is getting bigger every year, and considering that FF isn't included in Windows, it shows that word of mouth works.
Reminds me of the Model T owner's manual. Things seem so complicated then, even though it's actually the other way around (in a sense, it's a testament to how user-friendly things have gotten).
This is from USA Today (I know, I know, but it's better than nothing). They, in turn, quote "experts". Not the best link, but maybe it can tide you over until someone finds a better one.
Stupid law, by the way. I guess it's meant to benefit the friends/family of the agent, as they can finally learn what the heck their spouse/whatever was up to.
Not only that, but for this specific case, you wouldn't even know that she worked for the CIA. She was a field agent who who had non-official status. This means that not only her employer was to be kept secret from friends/family, but the agency itself actively kept the secret. One of the things they did was set her employer as "Brewster & Associates" or something, so even if you rummaged around her W2's and got the name Brewster, that still wouldn't tell you what she does. Attempts to contact Brewster will only get you a PO Box and phone calls will be answered by other field agents who will deftly defer you away. Non-officials will also sometimes get new SSN's which make it harder to find them.
I had to use floppies yesterday at work -- I was working on some NT machines that we got in from another company. They didn't have a CD/RW, and we didn't want to hook them up to the LAN. So when I had to get some screenshots from them, I used floppies. Although I could've installed a CD/RW or hooked them up to the LAN, a simple, universal removable media just made more sense. I was a bit discouraged though, since I could only fit one 256-color bitmap on each:)
Anywho, I think once more computers recognize USB drives, that's when the floppy will disappear. But there's still a good number of NT machines still in use for various projects.
But that's not illegal. You may get thrown out (as businesses have a right to remove people from their store as they see fit), but offering better prices isn't wrong - I think it helps commerce.
As much as I hate malware/popups, I agree with the court on this. If you were a business owner and you knew your prices were lower than the prices elsewhere, you've got a right to advertise it. The software is just clever enough to pop up ads at the right time.
Right - it cannot take off vertically (front rotor spins, pulls the plane forward, which then turns the overhead prop, which provides lift). But the mu barrier wasn't a helicopter record, it was a rotorcraft record, of which the CarterCopter is a member of.
But the lift-producing rotor is unpowered, so from my understanding, it's still an autogyro. The wikipedia page page mentions this as one of the three types of autogyros (front prop, rear prop, and the VTO).
Also, the guys at CarterCopter call it an autogyro (I know one of them, and have been out to see their copter), so I go by them:)
It is possible. First, we're talking about speed relative to ground, and also, we're only talking about the retreating blade here.
When you think of a helicopter travelling at a normal speed, you'd correctly think that the blades are always slicing 'into' the wind, which is why helicoptors produce so much lift (and why they can hover).
Okay, now imagine the rotor is going really slow. Like 1 revolution per second. Now imagine the helicopter is travelling really fast. On the right hand side of the plane, the blade will still always slice into the wind. But on the left hand side (as the blade retreats), the blade is going slow, but the copter is going fast, so it's airflow is actually backwards over the blade. The airflow is still going from the helicopter's front to its tail, but the blade is facing the wrong way, and if you don't 'flip' the rotor, it will not provide any lift (helicopters flip the blade, autogyros, which is what the CarterCopter is, doesn't). This is mu > 1. And if you imagine a slow rotor/fast copter scenario, you can see why this has never been achieved before.
At mu = 1, it's just at the point between the two scenarios - where the speed of the tip of the rotor is 0 mph (reference to the ground, not the aircraft). So while the inner chord of the blade is going more slowly in the backwards direction, this menas they're going faster in the positive direction. Couple that with the fact they're facing backwards, and indeed the blade is actually moving backwards through the air
Well, the rotor is unpowered (which is why this is an autogyro and not a helicoptor), so if by 'break' you mean 'lose control/power', then the pilots would be in a not-too-terrible position - as the plane travels at low speeds, the rotor is responsible (and capable) of producing lift. As they glided downwards, the rotor would slow the descent. IIRC, the pilots at CarterCopter have already been in a few accidents but there have been no injuries.
Now, if by 'break' you mean 'fall apart', then yeah, that would be bad. But I don't think that happens.
If it matters, the wings provide only a trivial amount of lift at low airspeeds. Most of the lift is provided by the rotor (which is unpowered, making it quite different than a helicopter).
Yeah, Univ. of Maryland has CS, Electrical Engineering, and also a hybrid of the two that is actually called Computer Engineering.
I call myself an engineer because I do engineering work (and have the electrical eng. degree), even though I mostly code now.
But I can understand the frustration - there is an accredidation process you must go through before you're a "professional engineer", and I don't mean to take that away from those who actually took the required exams (EIT and PE), but I guess that's why the "professional" is there. Other professions that require this post-graduate certification (doctors, lawyers) certainly don't have this problem. Well, maybe doctors, but the people who call themselves doctors but aren't are simply quacks, and no one takes them seriously anyway.
Anywho, I do like text messages for two things: 1) really simple items like "Remember to pick up your dry cleaning". It's stuff that's not worth calling and then going through the "Hi, how are you.... uh huh... hey, pick up your dry cleaning.... okay, bye" conversation. And 2) when you're in loud places like bars, it can be a pain to have to go outside to talk. I text message a lot of people just so my friends know where to find me if I'm at a bar/restaurant. Or vice versa, they'll tell me when they'll be there.
Slashdot Mirror
I use Target Alert - an extention for Firefox that shows icons for links that go to PDFs, zip files... etc. (it's customizable). It's a very nice, simple program.
He's saying that all of his hard disk averages were 3.5-4.5 MB per song, not that every single song fit that range. So if he looked at his MP3s for C:, E: and F:, he just had 3 numbers to look at.
This thing is $12,000 - so it's obviously targeted as businesses. Now, imagine a cluster of employees tightly packed enough to justify 16 WAPs from one physical location. First off, the cheapest solution is to simply wire everyone up. 16 hubs, a switch and the required cabling and labor costs a lot less than $12,000. Even if they need wireless, why not just buy 16 wireless hubs at $60 a pop, and then hook those up to a switch? I don't get it why anyone would buy this...
If the item has real-world value, then it has real-world value; that's it. Going up to someone and taking something from them is a crime. There's plenty of non-physical things that are worth money. It's illegal for me to steal patents, trademarks, copyrights, movie/book rights, companies... etc. It's not like you can up and physically steal a company from someone, but can certainly defraud someone out of it.
That said, this case is a little different, as he was playing a game that allows people to defeat other people for items. To counteract that point, the guy did cheat, so I would still think it's a crime. But if they guy hadn't cheated, well then, it's almost like gambling (you can't arrest casino managers because you lost money at blackjack - there's an implied contract when you play saying you'll let them have your money).
The article you reference only talks about glass flow, not about the state of matter glass is at room temp. There's still plenty of debate on that, with most scientists saying glass exhibits properties of both.
Why is this modded Funny? They are non-profit....
I heard that the *real* reason phones aren't allowed to be used on planes is that the phones have line-of-sight with many towers, and it becomes a bandwidth issue for the cell companies (trying to determine which cell has the best signal, never mind the fact that the planes travel at 500+ mph, so there's constant handshaking of the signal). This theory may come from the tinfoil hat crowd, but it's a neat one anyways.
I agree. Here in Maryland, we have Catholic schools everywhere, and I'm always surprised at how well they seperate evolution and creationism, like your school did. I can't quite figure out why the ID pushers want ID taught in biology, other than the fact the most public schools simply don't offer any theology classes, so biology seems like the next best thing. That, or to your point, by having it in biology, it will get equal recognition as evolution does.
A law is an simply an observation that has been tested to the degree that it would be preverse to think that the law is incorrect. A good example is the Law of Gravity - that material objects are attracted to one another.
In contrast, a theory is simply a statment (or, more often, a set of statments) that is meant to explain such observations. While the Law of Gravity is all well and good, the Thoery of Gravity builds upon that and goes to explain things like planetary motion and rocket trajectories.
I saw the same thing. Except this post is getting plenty of comments. Not sure why though - maybe nothing interesting is being said? Is there some holiday my employer isn't telling me about? Anywho, I played with my cookies/prefs, but it looks like it's just a quirk, and people haven't moderated lately.
I use SiteKey for Bank of America (it's available in Maryland and DC), and they don't even ask me three questions. Instead, after logging in with username/password, I'm then taken to a page that shows an image (and a phrase). I chose the image upon singup.
The idea is that only BoA knows the image, so if that specific image doesn't show up on that second page, it's a phisher (the phishers are resorting to guessing your picture, unless they break into BoA's secured site).
I find it useful (although it's an extra step, as the second page requires yet another password), but it works. And, despite being a /. nerd, I actually did get phished once -- and it happened to be a fake Bank of America site, so I'm glad to use SiteKey (it was a good phish email - they just told me the bank added new online features - none of that 'please verify you password' crap)
I use Bank of America in Maryland, one of the test areas for SiteKey. As of now, the three challenge questions aren't used, although they did ask me to give them 3 challenge/response pairs. What Sitekey does do is after you sign in traditionally (Firefox stores this for me already, so I just click on 'Log in using Sitekey'), and then it shows you an image and phrase of your choosing. The important thing is that the image is stored (and encrypted) on BoA's server. So a phisher wouldn't have access to it, and would have to guess what your image is. It's the same tech discussed previously on Slashdot.
And really, from a features standpoint, it certainly is. Kind of like Apple is to Windows. No one expects Windows to go away, but the hyped features in Longhorn show that Redmond is trying to play catchup to certain features in OS X.
But you're right - it isn't true competition. We should expect IE to go away any more than Windows itself. But the 10% is getting bigger every year, and considering that FF isn't included in Windows, it shows that word of mouth works.
The manual.
An excerpt - how to adjust the crank shaft
link.
Stupid law, by the way. I guess it's meant to benefit the friends/family of the agent, as they can finally learn what the heck their spouse/whatever was up to.
Not only that, but for this specific case, you wouldn't even know that she worked for the CIA. She was a field agent who who had non-official status. This means that not only her employer was to be kept secret from friends/family, but the agency itself actively kept the secret. One of the things they did was set her employer as "Brewster & Associates" or something, so even if you rummaged around her W2's and got the name Brewster, that still wouldn't tell you what she does. Attempts to contact Brewster will only get you a PO Box and phone calls will be answered by other field agents who will deftly defer you away. Non-officials will also sometimes get new SSN's which make it harder to find them.
Anywho, I think once more computers recognize USB drives, that's when the floppy will disappear. But there's still a good number of NT machines still in use for various projects.
As much as I hate malware/popups, I agree with the court on this. If you were a business owner and you knew your prices were lower than the prices elsewhere, you've got a right to advertise it. The software is just clever enough to pop up ads at the right time.
Right - it cannot take off vertically (front rotor spins, pulls the plane forward, which then turns the overhead prop, which provides lift). But the mu barrier wasn't a helicopter record, it was a rotorcraft record, of which the CarterCopter is a member of.
Also, the guys at CarterCopter call it an autogyro (I know one of them, and have been out to see their copter), so I go by them :)
When you think of a helicopter travelling at a normal speed, you'd correctly think that the blades are always slicing 'into' the wind, which is why helicoptors produce so much lift (and why they can hover).
Okay, now imagine the rotor is going really slow. Like 1 revolution per second. Now imagine the helicopter is travelling really fast. On the right hand side of the plane, the blade will still always slice into the wind. But on the left hand side (as the blade retreats), the blade is going slow, but the copter is going fast, so it's airflow is actually backwards over the blade. The airflow is still going from the helicopter's front to its tail, but the blade is facing the wrong way, and if you don't 'flip' the rotor, it will not provide any lift (helicopters flip the blade, autogyros, which is what the CarterCopter is, doesn't). This is mu > 1. And if you imagine a slow rotor/fast copter scenario, you can see why this has never been achieved before.
At mu = 1, it's just at the point between the two scenarios - where the speed of the tip of the rotor is 0 mph (reference to the ground, not the aircraft). So while the inner chord of the blade is going more slowly in the backwards direction, this menas they're going faster in the positive direction. Couple that with the fact they're facing backwards, and indeed the blade is actually moving backwards through the air
Well, the rotor is unpowered (which is why this is an autogyro and not a helicoptor), so if by 'break' you mean 'lose control/power', then the pilots would be in a not-too-terrible position - as the plane travels at low speeds, the rotor is responsible (and capable) of producing lift. As they glided downwards, the rotor would slow the descent. IIRC, the pilots at CarterCopter have already been in a few accidents but there have been no injuries. Now, if by 'break' you mean 'fall apart', then yeah, that would be bad. But I don't think that happens.
If it matters, the wings provide only a trivial amount of lift at low airspeeds. Most of the lift is provided by the rotor (which is unpowered, making it quite different than a helicopter).
I call myself an engineer because I do engineering work (and have the electrical eng. degree), even though I mostly code now.
But I can understand the frustration - there is an accredidation process you must go through before you're a "professional engineer", and I don't mean to take that away from those who actually took the required exams (EIT and PE), but I guess that's why the "professional" is there. Other professions that require this post-graduate certification (doctors, lawyers) certainly don't have this problem. Well, maybe doctors, but the people who call themselves doctors but aren't are simply quacks, and no one takes them seriously anyway.
Anywho, I do like text messages for two things: 1) really simple items like "Remember to pick up your dry cleaning". It's stuff that's not worth calling and then going through the "Hi, how are you.... uh huh... hey, pick up your dry cleaning.... okay, bye" conversation. And 2) when you're in loud places like bars, it can be a pain to have to go outside to talk. I text message a lot of people just so my friends know where to find me if I'm at a bar/restaurant. Or vice versa, they'll tell me when they'll be there.