Living in the Future: I'm easily boggled.
Cryptoengineer
Best Buy.
This little box, about the size of a man's wallet, can easily hold the
entire printed contents of my town library, illustrations included.
Its small enough to get lost in my backpack. Ten of them could hold
the entire text contents of the Library of Congress, in the volume of
a fat hardback.
I am impressed.
pt
Dan Goodman
In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
than the entire world had when I was born.
A calculator I bought for a dollar.
--
Dan Goodman
dsgood at lj, dw, ij, tw__ , Diaspora fb: see above
Quadibloc
> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
> than the entire world had when I was born.
>
> A calculator I bought for a dollar.
They're selling _programmable_ calculators for a dollar now?
But then, maybe you are older than I am. When I was born, there were
already IBM 704 computers humming away...
John Savard
Helmut_Meukel
You probably don't realize that _any_ electronic calculator has
/internally/ about the same computing power as the entire world when
I was born in 1947.
Konrad Zuse built his famous Z3 in 1941, his Z4 in 1945 (both
electro-mechanical, the Z4 used magnetic storage). The famous ENIAC was
built in 1946.
The IBM 704, the first mass-produced computer with floating point
arithmetic hardware, was introduced in 1954.
Mass-production is somewhat exaggerated, IBM sold 123 systems from 1955
to 1960.
Helmut.
garabik-ne...@kassiopeia.juls.savba.sk
> On Jun 10, 10:03 pm, "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
>> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
>> than the entire world had when I was born.
>>
>> A calculator I bought for a dollar.
>
> They're selling _programmable_ calculators for a dollar now?
I think it is possible to get a good Pentium 4 computer in working order
for less than that...
> But then, maybe you are older than I am. When I was born, there were
> already IBM 704 computers humming away...
>
Also do not forget the combined computing power of millions[1] of human
brains aided by paper and pencils doing the arithmetics...
[1] I put "millions" as an estimate of those brains that 1) are capable
of doing at least multiplication and 2) did regularly do arithmetics
decades ago
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
| Radovan Garabík http://kassiopeia.juls.savba.sk/~garabik/ |
| __..--^^^--..__ garabik @ kassiopeia.juls.savba.sk |
-----------------------------------------------------------
Antivirus alert: file .signature infected by signature virus.
Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature file to help me spread!
Bill Gill
> Quadibloc<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>> On Jun 10, 10:03 pm, "Dan Goodman"<dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
>>> than the entire world had when I was born.
>>>
>>> A calculator I bought for a dollar.
>>
>> They're selling _programmable_ calculators for a dollar now?
>
> I think it is possible to get a good Pentium 4 computer in working order
> for less than that...
>
>> But then, maybe you are older than I am. When I was born, there were
>> already IBM 704 computers humming away...
>>
>
> Also do not forget the combined computing power of millions[1] of human
> brains aided by paper and pencils doing the arithmetics...
>
> [1] I put "millions" as an estimate of those brains that 1) are capable
> of doing at least multiplication and 2) did regularly do arithmetics
> decades ago
>
people on public works projects. Some of those projects involved
calculating mathematical tables. I believe that they did use some
mechanical calculators to do the work, but basically it was old
fashioned pencil and paper calculations.
Mathematical tables used to be the way we did trigonometric functions
and Logarithms, among a whole bunch of other things. I still have
a copy of "Mathematical Tables From the Handbook of Chemistry and
Physics. I don't know if the Handbook still includes them or not.
Heck, I don't even know if they still have the Handbook.
Bill Gill
Howard Brazee
wrote:
>You may or not be aware that during the depression the WPA hired lots of
>people on public works projects. Some of those projects involved
>calculating mathematical tables. I believe that they did use some
>mechanical calculators to do the work, but basically it was old
>fashioned pencil and paper calculations.
One of the most thanked (in person or not in person) person in the
history of science has to be John Napier (although Henry Briggs may be
better for this). Heinlein memorized log tables to quickly
calculate numbers his Naval Academy upperclassmen asked him.
>Mathematical tables used to be the way we did trigonometric functions
>and Logarithms, among a whole bunch of other things. I still have
>a copy of "Mathematical Tables From the Handbook of Chemistry and
>Physics. I don't know if the Handbook still includes them or not.
>Heck, I don't even know if they still have the Handbook.
Me too. I haven't opened it in decades.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
erilar
<13ebac66-e72a-4bd9...@g28g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
Infant 8-)
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
lal_truckee
> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
> than the entire world had when I was born.
I surmise you (and your respondents) are ignoring analog ballistics
computers and their brethren, around many years before the digital
family actually arrived. Although it isn't easy to compare "computing
power" between the families, the existence of the analog branch should
certainly should be recognized.
Brian M. Scott
<how...@brazee.net> wrote in
<news:a0v6v6pc0ae5e6o0l...@4ax.com> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 08:00:44 -0500, Bill Gill <bill...@cox.net>
> wrote:
[...]
>> Mathematical tables used to be the way we did
>> trigonometric functions and Logarithms, among a whole
>> bunch of other things. I still have a copy of
>> "Mathematical Tables From the Handbook of Chemistry and
>> Physics. I don't know if the Handbook still includes
>> them or not. Heck, I don't even know if they still have
>> the Handbook.
> Me too. I haven't opened it in decades.
The CRC Handbook is now in its 91st edition. There's even
an online version for subscribers; its table of contents is
visible at <http://www.hbcpnetbase.com/>.
Brian
Mike Dworetsky
> Cryptoengineer wrote:
>
>> I just purchased a 1 terabyte portable harddrive; it cost $107.99 at
>> Best Buy.
>>
>> This little box, about the size of a man's wallet, can easily hold
>> the entire printed contents of my town library, illustrations
>> included. Its small enough to get lost in my backpack. Ten of them
>> could hold the entire text contents of the Library of Congress, in
>> the volume of a fat hardback.
>>
>> I am impressed.
>
> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
> than the entire world had when I was born.
>
> A calculator I bought for a dollar.
When were you born?
In 1943, the first Colossus decryption computer was built at the Post Office
Research Station and then sent to Bletchley Park where it was used to
decypher the German Enigma codes.
The second one was a big improvement and was ready for D-Day in June 1944.
I'm not sure how to describe what it did in terms of more modern computer
power. A test of a replica in 2007 established that it had the equivalent
of a processing speed of around 5 MHz. Limitations on speed were due
partly to the way in which the computer read its data from punched paper
tape. If they speeded up the tape, it tended to shred.
The wikipedia article has interesting details:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colossus_computer
These machines were fast and the only large digital computers at the time.
Very often, after D-Day, the British were able to read German messages
before their recipients (who had the key) learned the contents. Churchill
ordered the destruction of the machines after the War and ordered the plans
destroyed lest the Russians purloin their secret. A couple of them survived
and were secretly installed at the British secret communications centre
(GCHQ) where they were used to decode the British version of the Enigma
machine that was being sold commercially to various foreign governments
whose traffic the British were able to read.
Despite the secrecy, some who worked on Colossus worked in the British
computer industry after the War, developing a new generation of computers.
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
tphile2
wrote:
Don't forget that other mechanical calculating device for speedy
computing. The Slide Rule that's been around since the 17th century
"not as clumsy or random as a computer. An elegant calculator, from a
more civilized age ;-)
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Or the abacus. Seems as though I read somewhere that it compared very
favorably until quite recently. (Though I don't think it does floating
point :-)
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Joel Olson
news:isvotn$o1q$1...@dont-email.me...
The Handbook was considered more important than the textbook.
Larry
> Mathematical tables used to be the way we did trigonometric functions
> and Logarithms, among a whole bunch of other things. I still have
> a copy of "Mathematical Tables From the Handbook of Chemistry and
> Physics. I don't know if the Handbook still includes them or not.
> Heck, I don't even know if they still have the Handbook.
No, the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics no longer contains the CRC math
tables. The first calculator I ever owned that would give me the log or ln of
any number was about 1971. That's about the last time I used Fourier
transforms, too, which were about the only two things I ever used the math
tables for.
Howard Brazee
<tph...@cableone.net> wrote:
>Don't forget that other mechanical calculating device for speedy
>computing. The Slide Rule that's been around since the 17th century
>"not as clumsy or random as a computer. An elegant calculator, from a
>more civilized age ;-)
But with a slide rule we need to learn a few very useful concepts:
Estimating answers to the nearest power of 10 (seeing if the answer
makes sense)
Proportion
Inverse proportion
Converting units
Understanding significant digits
Without slide rules, few people learn these.
As adults 95% of the population don't need any more math.
We have bad laws as the results of not understanding some of these.
Dan Goodman
> On Jun 10, 10:03 pm, "Dan Goodman" <dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>
> > In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing
> > power than the entire world had when I was born.
> >
> > A calculator I bought for a dollar.
>
> They're selling programmable calculators for a dollar now?
>
> But then, maybe you are older than I am. When I was born, there were
> already IBM 704 computers humming away...
I was born in 1943.
Edward A. Falk
Yeah, I have future shock all the time. Here's the latest one
that completely blows me away: 3-d printers than print using
collagen, which can then be seeded with stem cells to form new
human organs.
Five years ago, I met a guy at dinner who was working on this in
the early stages.
A month ago, I see a guy on stage in a video reach into a jar, pull
out a roundish object, and say "This is a human kidney. We printed
it backstage this morning."
I love the 21st century.
--
-Ed Falk, fa...@despams.r.us.com
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/
Robert Carnegie
> In article <8ea155a7-5e89-4c30-ad2e-69d0f9166...@n11g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Cryptoengineer <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I just purchased a 1 terabyte portable harddrive; it cost $107.99 at
> >Best Buy.
>
> >This little box, about the size of a man's wallet, can easily hold the
> >entire printed contents of my town library, illustrations included.
> >Its small enough to get lost in my backpack. Ten of them could hold
> >the entire text contents of the Library of Congress, in the volume of
> >a fat hardback.
>
> Yeah, I have future shock all the time. Here's the latest one
> that completely blows me away: 3-d printers than print using
> collagen, which can then be seeded with stem cells to form new
> human organs.
>
> Five years ago, I met a guy at dinner who was working on this in
> the early stages.
>
> A month ago, I see a guy on stage in a video reach into a jar, pull
> out a roundish object, and say "This is a human kidney. We printed
> it backstage this morning."
>
> I love the 21st century.
Wait till you see the 22nd...
Then again - about the hard disk - I don't know if you can access the
video of BBC TV sour British comedy show _Stewart Lee's Comedy
Vehicle_, season two number six (minus the funny opening titles of
season one), but the after the closing credits, Armando Iannucci tells
Lee - paradoxically[*] - that their - his - latest year's work is now
complete and on a memory stick in the BBC Director General's
office[**] and Lee says that looked at that way, "It just feels like a
******* waste of time." But they're joking - I hope!
[*] Because this bit hasn't happened yet so can't be in it. It's like
Moses supposedly writing the first five books of the bible, except
(spoiler) he dies near the end of the fifth.
[**] Actual BBC job title. Old-fashioned.
******* One of the very naughty words.
Wayne Throop
: I have future shock all the time. Here's the latest one that
: completely blows me away: 3-d printers than print using collagen,
: which can then be seeded with stem cells to form new human organs.
:
: Five years ago, I met a guy at dinner who was working on this in the
: early stages.
:
: A month ago, I see a guy on stage in a video reach into a jar, pull
: out a roundish object, and say "This is a human kidney. We printed it
: backstage this morning."
:
: I love the 21st century.
Indeed. If I'd been born just a bit earlier it's likely I'd never have reached my current age. However, at the current time I'd have more use for feline kidneys, though I expect the price would be prohibitive.
Note, by the way, that this skips right to the end of "A Gift Fron Earth".
Robert Bannister
> Quadibloc wrote:
>
>> On Jun 10, 10:03 pm, "Dan Goodman"<dsg...@iphouse.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing
>>> power than the entire world had when I was born.
>>>
>>> A calculator I bought for a dollar.
>>
>> They're selling programmable calculators for a dollar now?
>>
>> But then, maybe you are older than I am. When I was born, there were
>> already IBM 704 computers humming away...
>
> I was born in 1943.
>
That's when our house was bombed. Other people's births are heralded by
simple stars or comets in the sky, you rotter.
--
Robert Bannister
Dan Goodman
Well, it wasn't my idea.
Joel Olson
news:8ea155a7-5e89-4c30...@n11g2000yqf.googlegroups.com...
Mine was 2 terabytes for about the same price.
Western Digital?
Cryptoengineer
> "Cryptoengineer" <petert...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Yes. This is the "WD My Passport Essential SE 1Tb", which is very
small, and is powered through the USB cable. I'm guessing your 2 Tb is
a desktop version, somewhat larger, and powered via a separate cable
and wall-wart. I wanted something portable.
Back in the early 90's when I was working at MITRE, the company
acquired a 1 Tb storage system (a rack stuffed with drives). A memo
was sent all employees announcing its availability, and seeking
suggestions as to how so much storage could be usefully employed.
pt
pt
Joel Olson
pt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly. Just now hooked it up and Windows doesn't see it.
No software disk in the package either.
Add New Hardware doesn't see it either.
Maybe if I reboot?
Jaimie Vandenbergh
wrote:
Have a look in My Computer (rightclick)/Manage/Disk Management.
If it doesn't show up there then the computer really isn't seeing it.
Try different USB ports - direct to the motherboard would be best.
Then try it on another computer.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
If you haven't got time to RTFM, you haven't got time to whine about it.
Robert Carnegie
Hard disks > 2.19TiB require partitioning with GPT (for example)
instead of MBR to make all the space available, and I think Windows XP
32-bit doesn't support it. Just guessing, but if this was the issue
then I'd expect the device to appear in "Safely remove...", but
without volume letters, probably.
Having said that, there are a lot more formatting and other problems,
particularly with a pre-owned or customer-returned disk, so just take
it and the receipt back to the store.
There's also a brisk trade in fake disk or memory storage devices,
fake as to capacity, sometimes with cunning circuitry so that there's
a real working file allocation table and the last, oh, 1 GB of data
saved are stored and verifiable. Of course, if the fake doesn't need
to work, it's very much easier. They also tend to be cheaper than
usual store prices, but don't count on that...
Paul Colquhoun
|
| Exactly. Just now hooked it up and Windows doesn't see it.
| No software disk in the package either.
| Add New Hardware doesn't see it either.
| Maybe if I reboot?
"Windows" covers a multitude of sins. Can you be a bit more specific as
to the version involved, if you want more advice.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, ULC. http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
Asking for technical help in newsgroups? Read this first:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#intro
Cryptoengineer
How old is your computer? The Passport doesn't support USB 1.0, only
2.and 3. Annoyingly, the front USB ports of my home desktop are USB 1,
so I have to connect it to the back USB ports for it to be seen.
pt
Cryptoengineer
wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 03:10:44 -0500, "Joel Olson" <joel.ol...@cox.net>
In this case, the FM is on the hard drive, and the problem is getting
the hard drive visible to the system. There is one online, I presume.
pt
Jaimie Vandenbergh
Hah - sorry, it's not often my completely random sig picker comes up
with a combo that makes me sound like a jerk. No biscuit for the
sigmonster!
There shouldn't *be* a problem, it ought to just plug in and be
visible. There are ways Windows can be confused though (well, there's
a surprise...).
Cheers - Jaimie
--
"By all means marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy;
if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher." - Socrates
Walter Bushell
garabik-ne...@kassiopeia.juls.savba.sk wrote:
> I think it is possible to get a good Pentium 4 computer in working order
> for less than that...
More powerful computers for much less, if you are willing to dumpster
dive.
Do people still give up on Winders Computers and just chuck them out
after a year or three?
--
The Chinese pretend their goods are good and we pretend our money
is good, or is it the reverse?
Walter Bushell
wrote:
> Mathematical tables used to be the way we did trigonometric functions
> and Logarithms, among a whole bunch of other things. I still have
> a copy of "Mathematical Tables From the Handbook of Chemistry and
> Physics. I don't know if the Handbook still includes them or not.
> Heck, I don't even know if they still have the Handbook.
And I remember doing tedious calculations involving interpolation on log
and trig tables in high school.
Walter Bushell
<adefb72e-4a98-4a01...@m10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
> On Jun 11, 11:34 pm, f...@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
> > In article
> > <8ea155a7-5e89-4c30-ad2e-69d0f9166...@n11g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Cryptoengineer <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >I just purchased a 1 terabyte portable harddrive; it cost $107.99 at
> > >Best Buy.
> >
> > >This little box, about the size of a man's wallet, can easily hold the
> > >entire printed contents of my town library, illustrations included.
> > >Its small enough to get lost in my backpack. Ten of them could hold
> > >the entire text contents of the Library of Congress, in the volume of
> > >a fat hardback.
> >
> > Yeah, I have future shock all the time. Here's the latest one
> > that completely blows me away: 3-d printers than print using
> > collagen, which can then be seeded with stem cells to form new
> > human organs.
> >
> > Five years ago, I met a guy at dinner who was working on this in
> > the early stages.
> >
> > A month ago, I see a guy on stage in a video reach into a jar, pull
> > out a roundish object, and say "This is a human kidney. We printed
> > it backstage this morning."
> >
> > I love the 21st century.
>
> Wait till you see the 22nd...
Unlikely I shall. :(
OTOH, humanity likely will consist entirely of hunter gatherers
by then. :O
>
> Then again - about the hard disk - I don't know if you can access the
> video of BBC TV sour British comedy show _Stewart Lee's Comedy
> Vehicle_, season two number six (minus the funny opening titles of
> season one), but the after the closing credits, Armando Iannucci tells
> Lee - paradoxically[*] - that their - his - latest year's work is now
> complete and on a memory stick in the BBC Director General's
> office[**] and Lee says that looked at that way, "It just feels like a
> ******* waste of time." But they're joking - I hope!
>
> [*] Because this bit hasn't happened yet so can't be in it. It's like
> Moses supposedly writing the first five books of the bible, except
> (spoiler) he dies near the end of the fifth.
Well he was a profit.
>
> [**] Actual BBC job title. Old-fashioned.
>
> ******* One of the very naughty words.
--
Walter Bushell
"Joel Olson" <joel....@cox.net> wrote:
The suggestion that the computer be used to digitize movies to be stored
on the device would have been right out, I suppose.
Derek Lyons
>On 6/10/11 9:03 PM, Dan Goodman wrote:
>> In my desk drawer is a device which I believe has more computing power
>> than the entire world had when I was born.
>
>I surmise you (and your respondents) are ignoring analog ballistics
>computers and their brethren, around many years before the digital
>family actually arrived. Although it isn't easy to compare "computing
>power" between the families, the existence of the analog branch should
>certainly should be recognized.
And contrary to popular belief, analog lasted surprisingly long. At
least up until the early 90's you could still buy new (electronic)
systems off-the-shelf.
The Navy didn't retire the last of their (electromechanical) analog
fire control systems until Kamehameha was decomissioned in 2002.
(Depending on how you count the battlewagons that are, at least in
theory, still maintained capable of returning to service.)
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
David DeLaney
>More powerful computers for much less, if you are willing to dumpster dive.
>
>Do people still give up on Winders Computers and just chuck them out
>after a year or three?
I'm told some do. I've had the same PC, modulo axe handle and axe etc., for
a decade or so. It's no longer running the same OS it started with, and its
hard drive is now a good deal larger, and it has more RAM and a better video
card ... but I'm fairly sure it's still the same MOTHERBOARD. Oh, and it has
a little blue-glowy fan now. :)
(I'm also told I've got RAM and video card and a couple other things absolutely
positively maxed out, this time for SURE, the analytical engines canna handle
any more Cap'n, so if another upgrade's needed it'll probably be PC-changing
time.)
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Joel Olson
news:proto-83A6F7....@news.panix.com...
Thank you all for the advice and suggestions.
After sleeping on it, I quickly found and solved the problem this morning.
The idiot lights on both the 2nd and 3rd in the chain of extension cords
were out. <sheepish grin>
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
My guess is that it's a blessing that a 2TB hard drive doesn't support USB 1..
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <isvic0$1or$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,
> garabik-ne...@kassiopeia.juls.savba.sk wrote:
>
>> I think it is possible to get a good Pentium 4 computer in working order
>> for less than that...
>
>More powerful computers for much less, if you are willing to dumpster
>dive.
>
>Do people still give up on Winders Computers and just chuck them out
>after a year or three?
>
That's how i got my sister's computer a year or two ago..
Of course I think I ended up putting $200 worth of drives and parts into
the "free" computer..
Edward A. Falk
>
>Note, by the way, that this skips right to the end of "A Gift Fron Earth".
Yes, I've noticed that.
Brian M. Scott
<pr...@panix.com> wrote in
<news:proto-88A3D4....@news.panix.com> in
rec.arts.sf.written:
> In article
> <adefb72e-4a98-4a01...@m10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
[...]
>> [*] Because this bit hasn't happened yet so can't be in
>> it. It's like Moses supposedly writing the first five
>> books of the bible, except (spoiler) he dies near the
>> end of the fifth.
> Well he was a profit.
Does that mean that he was no loss?
Brian
Robert Carnegie
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 11, 11:34 pm, f...@rahul.net (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <8ea155a7-5e89-4c30-ad2e-69d0f9166...@n11g2000yqf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > Cryptoengineer <petert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >I just purchased a 1 terabyte portable harddrive; it cost $107.99 at
> > > >Best Buy.
>
> > > >This little box, about the size of a man's wallet, can easily hold the
> > > >entire printed contents of my town library, illustrations included.
> > > >Its small enough to get lost in my backpack. Ten of them could hold
> > > >the entire text contents of the Library of Congress, in the volume of
> > > >a fat hardback.
>
> > > Yeah, I have future shock all the time. Here's the latest one
> > > that completely blows me away: 3-d printers than print using
> > > collagen, which can then be seeded with stem cells to form new
> > > human organs.
>
> > > Five years ago, I met a guy at dinner who was working on this in
> > > the early stages.
>
> > > A month ago, I see a guy on stage in a video reach into a jar, pull
> > > out a roundish object, and say "This is a human kidney. We printed
> > > it backstage this morning."
>
> > > I love the 21st century.
>
> > Wait till you see the 22nd...
>
> Unlikely I shall. :(
Well, my point is, it seems to depend on how fast they can print
copies of bits of you.
But if they have to blend more than one whole kidney to pour into the
printer then it's operating at a loss.
> OTOH, humanity likely will consist entirely of hunter gatherers
> by then. :O
There is that. We're not ready for the oil running out - which
unpreparedness probably means going to war over the last of it (yes I
have been watching the news), ironically consuming the last of it in
doing so.
It's like Easter Island. (Do you know about Easter Island? According
to Jarred Christmas, anyway. No, not Jarred Christmas, why am I
thinking of Jarred Chr stmas... oh, I see why. :-)
ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
didn't exPlain where it comes from).
Robert Bannister
Don't Windows computers have Firewire? That's how my two My Passports
are connected.
--
Robert Bannister
Cryptoengineer
The cheaper ones don't. Of course, there are cards you can add with
firewire ports.
USB 3 is faster then firewire.
pt
Joel Olson
news:3d0b0c2d-3bdd-4450...@w10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
thinking of Jarred Chr《tmas... oh, I see why. :-)
ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
didn't exPlain where it comes from).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jared Diamond. _Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed_
A script for this decade.
Ran Garoo
> I just purchased a 1 terabyte portable harddrive; it cost $107.99 at
> Best Buy.
>
> This little box, about the size of a man's wallet, can easily hold the
> entire printed contents of my town library, illustrations included.
> Its small enough to get lost in my backpack. Ten of them could hold
> the entire text contents of the Library of Congress, in the volume of
> a fat hardback.
>
>
> pt
>
Back when BBSs were ready to die everyone was amazed at 1 GB hdd.
I recall they hit the market at ~ $1000.00 Finally there was
enough local storage so as to not have to expire all the binaries
everyone said they didn't look at.
A couple of months ago I picked up 2x 2.0TB WD desktop external USB
drives at $89 each. Easy enough to mirror them to each other.
I felt greedy and elated until I realized that if I ever got near to
capacity it would be bad, bad, bad to make archival copies or backups.
Like warehouses of 12 track IBM reels. Nevertheless I keep stashing away
clonezilla snaps of all fourteen boxes on my lan.
Acetate got crackled and spalled strips of data; cheap terabyte
consumer grade commodity drives will fail.
N.B. I also have the shirt pocket portable drives, but the WDs
are also portable. I can detach and plug them into any machine
I get near to. Just need bigger pockets? (yay cargo pants)
Walter Bushell
"Joel Olson" <joel....@cox.net> wrote:
> ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
> didn't exPlain where it comes from).
Yes, and did you hear when they replaced the dilithium crystals with
Folger's crystals no one noticed the difference.
Allen Thomson
> Back in the early 90's when I was working at MITRE, the company
> acquired a 1 Tb storage system (a rack stuffed with drives).
My story along those lines involves a visit to ESL in Sunnyvale back
in 1975 or so. They had a 500 MB drive unit that was about the size
of a washing machine and cost several tens of decakilobucks. We were
extremely impressed.
Lonnie Clay
> On Jun 11, 11:31 pm, Cryptoengineer
>
> > Back in the early 90's when I was working at MITRE, the company
> > acquired a 1 Tb storage system (a rack stuffed with drives).
>
>
>
> My story along those lines involves a visit to ESL in Sunnyvale back
> in 1975 or so. They had a 500 MB drive unit that was about the size
> of a washing machine and cost several tens of decakilobucks. We were
> extremely impressed.
The most savage *price* war in computer history was when DEC came out with the VAX line which slashed memory prices from IBM's 1 million per megabyte to 20k per megabyte. Big ouch for big blue!
Lonnie Courtney Clay
Brett Paul Dunbar
<3d0b0c2d-3bdd-4450...@w10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes
>There is that. We're not ready for the oil running out - which
>unpreparedness probably means going to war over the last of it (yes I
>have been watching the news), ironically consuming the last of it in
>doing so.
Oil isn't going to run out any time soon cheap oil may run out and the
marginal price of oil rise. If the price stays high two things happen.
Firstly more expensive sources of oil become viable, e.g. we have know
how to make synthetic oil from coal on an industrial scale since the
1920s it just hasn't been profitable to do so [1]. Secondly people
reduce oil consumption, take oil based power stations out of use, buy
more efficient cars, drive less and reduce energy consumption
[1] IG Farben lost a lot of money on synthetic oil in the late 1920s
betting on oil production having peaked and that prices were
going to rise and stay high, then the huge middle east oil
reserves were discovered the price plummeted and IG Farben's
synthetic oil factories became white elephants [2].
[2] This had the rather unfortunate effect of giving IG Farben an
interest in restricting oil imports into Germany. This led the
company to fund the Nazis, as their policy involved encouraging
domestic self sufficiency by means of high tariffs on imports of
strategic goods, such as oil, in order that Germany not be
vulnerable to a blockade during wartime.
--
Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm
Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/
Brett Paul Dunbar
To email me, use reply-to address
Derek Lyons
>In message
><3d0b0c2d-3bdd-4450...@w10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes
>>There is that. We're not ready for the oil running out - which
>>unpreparedness probably means going to war over the last of it (yes I
>>have been watching the news), ironically consuming the last of it in
>>doing so.
>
>Oil isn't going to run out any time soon cheap oil may run out and the
>marginal price of oil rise.
<snippage excellent discussion of the lack-of-war likely to arise as
cheap oil runs out.>
Many people are droolingly eager for war to start over oil 'running
out'. Most of the people I know personally who are so eager are also
viruently anti-war. And drive SUV's.
A conundrum.
David Johnston
> Many people are droolingly eager for war to start over oil 'running
> out'.
We already have wars driven by the price of oil. I don't expect that
to change for a while.
Helmut_Meukel
>
> There is that. We're not ready for the oil running out - which
> unpreparedness probably means going to war over the last of it (yes I
> have been watching the news), ironically consuming the last of it in
> doing so.
>
We're not running out of oil.
1) "Shale oil is a substitute for conventional crude oil; however,
extracting shale oil from oil shale is more costly than the production
of conventional crude oil both financially and in terms of its
environmental impact. Deposits of oil shale occur around the world,
including major deposits in the United States of America. Estimates
of global deposits range from 2.8 trillion to 3.3 trillion barrels
of recoverable oil."
2) As Brett already wrote, there is the old IG Farben methods to produce
oil from coal. It was used in South Africa (remember the Eembargos?).
It's probably cheaper than shale oil.
3) For most uses you can substitude oil with some other stuff.
Vegetable oil for bio diesel, castor oil for lubricants, ethanol as
fuel, natural gas (methane) as fuel (either from gas fields and as
biogas by fermenting organic matter).
Helmut.
Dimensional Traveler
> In article<ffSdnRF5pt4q52jQ...@supernews.com>,
> "Joel Olson"<joel....@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
>> didn't exPlain where it comes from).
>
> Yes, and did you hear when they replaced the dilithium crystals with
> Folger's crystals no one noticed the difference.
>
several engineering red-shirts shoveling coal into that glowing red area
in the engine room's background.
--
"There's something that doesn't make sense. Let's go and poke it with a
stick."
Quadibloc
> Many people are droolingly eager for war to start over oil 'running
> out'. Most of the people I know personally who are so eager are also
> viruently anti-war. And drive SUV's.
We need to stop using oil as fuel before the *cheap* oil "runs out". A
little thing called global warming.
Fortunately, we don't have to go back to the stone age to do so. We
need to use nuclear power, including the Thorium breeder.
Seeing the human race march towards an entirely avoidable cataclysm,
because the alternative acceptable to the ordinary person from an
economic viewpoint is ignored or dismissed because of hysteria is very
dismaying to me.
John Savard
Robert Carnegie
> Brett Paul Dunbar <br...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >In message
> >Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> writes
> >>There is that. We're not ready for the oil running out - which
> >>unpreparedness probably means going to war over the last of it (yes I
> >>have been watching the news), ironically consuming the last of it in
> >>doing so.
>
> >Oil isn't going to run out any time soon cheap oil may run out and the
> >marginal price of oil rise.
>
> <snippage excellent discussion of the lack-of-war likely to arise as
> cheap oil runs out.>
>
> Many people are droolingly eager for war to start over oil 'running
> out'. Most of the people I know personally who are so eager are also
> viruently anti-war. And drive SUV's.
>
> A conundrum.
I'm just pointing out that the world went to war over oil in 1914 and
hasn't ever really stopped.
Quadibloc
wrote:
> 2) As Brett already wrote, there is the old IG Farben methods to produce
> oil from coal. It was used in South Africa (remember the Eembargos?).
> It's probably cheaper than shale oil.
I remember reading a magazine that said these methods were being
Covered Up by a Big Conspiracy by the Oil Companies.
Refutation without corrections for inflation:
OPEC charges $10 a barrel for oil. This method could make oil for $5 a
barrel. Conclusion: the oil companies are clearly preventing us from
using it by their big conspiracy.
Oops.
Sa'udi Arabia can pump the stuff out of the ground for $2 a barrel. So
anyone who builds a billion-dollar coal gasification plant will see
the Sa'udis reduce their price to $4.98, and never sell a drop. Great
public service, but no "conspiracy" is required to explain why a
private business, such as an oil company, won't do it.
Now, if the *government* put your tax dollars to work building such a
plant, it would be money well spent even if it never produced a drop,
because the country would benefit by the price of oil falling no
matter where it came from.
Basic economics versus conspiracy theories...
John Savard
Edward A. Falk
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>But if they have to blend more than one whole kidney to pour into the
>printer then it's operating at a loss.
The printer prints collegen -- I'm not sure where you get collegen, but
presumably it's readily available given how many uses it already has.
The "kidney" that comes out of the printer is really just a framework.
The next step is to seed it with stem cells and put it into a nutrient
bath for a couple of weeks.
So you don't have to put any actual kidneys in to get a kidney out.
Way cool.
See also: "skin gun".
Derek Lyons
>On Jun 13, 11:25 am, fairwa...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons) wrote:
>
>> Many people are droolingly eager for war to start over oil 'running
>> out'.
>
>We already have wars driven by the price of oil.
Not in this ficton.
Joy Beeson
wrote:
> And I remember doing tedious calculations involving interpolation on log
> and trig tables in high school.
I remember cheating and buying a set of five-place tables to use
instead of the four-place tables we were supposed to practice on.
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
Nigel
> On 6/13/2011 2:53 AM, Walter Bushell wrote:> In article<ffSdnRF5pt4q52jQnZ2dnUVZ_uidn...@supernews.com>,
> > "Joel Olson"<joel.ol...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >> ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
> >> didn't exPlain where it comes from).
>
> > Yes, and did you hear when they replaced the dilithium crystals with
> > Folger's crystals no one noticed the difference.
>
> I'm still looking for the original Star Trek "blooper" reel showing
> several engineering red-shirts shoveling coal into that glowing red area
> in the engine room's background.
>
Ah, you want "Steam Trek": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y39gHihP74
Cheers,
Nigel.
Robert Carnegie
> In article <3d0b0c2d-3bdd-4450-9a52-0a0a29e56...@w10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >But if they have to blend more than one whole kidney to pour into the
> >printer then it's operating at a loss.
>
> The printer prints collegen -- I'm not sure where you get collegen,
From a college?
I think they were probably saying "collagen"?
> but
> presumably it's readily available given how many uses it already has.
It's "organic" material, and if you're putting it inside a human body
then it had better be absolute top quality.
> The "kidney" that comes out of the printer is really just a framework.
> The next step is to seed it with stem cells and put it into a nutrient
> bath for a couple of weeks.
>
> So you don't have to put any actual kidneys in to get a kidney out.
>
> Way cool.
Sure, but there is more to it than the printing, as I suspected. And
I thought they were printing it with cells: why not? (Might need the
Epson patent piezoelectric print head...)
Frankly, this is still a lot like "We made an eye" and it's a glass
eye. More so than I thought.
Ideally you'd cut open the patient surgically - maybe keyhole-style -
and print the new organ in situ (pronounced "inside you" :-) (not
really!!)
> See also: "skin gun".
Hmm.
Am I allowed to Google that? ;-)
Robert Carnegie
Although there are still things that are difficult to do without
gasoline, such as provide cars, for everyone, with a respectable range
before a refuelling stop of acceptable duration. Or air travel.
And there's an environmental cost of materials to make an electric car
- and a question of scarcity.
On the other hand, we managed to put goddamn platinum into every
catalytic converter. They talk about vaccuuming it off the roads to
re-use.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
No, apparently there was an actual blooper shot on the original Trek
with the engineers shoveling coal into the Enterprise's engines.
That was an amusing link, though.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Lonnie Clay
> On 6/14/11 5:54 AM, Nigel wrote:
> >> On 6/13/2011 2:53 AM, Walter Bushell wrote:> In article<ffSdnRF5pt4q52jQ...@supernews.com>,
> >>> "Joel Olson"<joel....@cox.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
> >>>> didn't exPlain where it comes from).
> >>
> >>> Yes, and did you hear when they replaced the dilithium crystals with
> >>> Folger's crystals no one noticed the difference.
> >>
> >> I'm still looking for the original Star Trek "blooper" reel showing
> >> several engineering red-shirts shoveling coal into that glowing red area
> >> in the engine room's background.
> >>
> >
> > Ah, you want "Steam Trek": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y39gHihP74
> >
>
> No, apparently there was an actual blooper shot on the original Trek
> with the engineers shoveling coal into the Enterprise's engines.
>
> That was an amusing link, though.
>
>
>
> --
> Sea Wasp
> /^\
> ;;;
> Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
> http://seawasp.livejournal.com
I liked it too. I watched the whole thing, and checked out followups...
Lonnie Courtney Clay
trag
> ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter
> and didn't exPlain where it comes from).
I've always assumed that the dilithium crystals "catalyze" some kind
of process which converts normal matter into antimatter. The show
makes the least amount of nonsense that way.
trag
> In article <ffSdnRF5pt4q52jQnZ2dnUVZ_uidn...@supernews.com>,
> "Joel Olson" <joel.ol...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
> > didn't exPlain where it comes from).
>
> Yes, and did you hear when they replaced the dilithium crystals with
> Folger's crystals no one noticed the difference.
I did. I did. I didn't know anyone else remembered it...
trag
> In article <3d0b0c2d-3bdd-4450-9a52-0a0a29e56...@w10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> >But if they have to blend more than one whole kidney to pour into the
> >printer then it's operating at a loss.
>
> The printer prints collegen -- I'm not sure where you get collegen, but
> presumably it's readily available given how many uses it already has.
>
> The "kidney" that comes out of the printer is really just a framework.
> The next step is to seed it with stem cells and put it into a nutrient
> bath for a couple of weeks.
>
> So you don't have to put any actual kidneys in to get a kidney out.
>
> Way cool.
From what I understand, they haven't figured out how to "print" the
vascularization of organs. In other words, putting in the plumbing
for blood is a current limiting obstacle.
Walter Bushell
<66afb8c8-15a1-441f...@j13g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Oil is one thing. Water is quite another.
Jerry Brown
wrote:
ISTR that it "regulates" the mix of matter and antimatter in some way,
but I can't remember whether this explanation is onscreen canon or
from one of the technical manuals or something.
Jerry Brown
--
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Walter Bushell
<f078d584-1424-4a59...@v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
trag <tr...@prismnet.com> wrote:
I have to say the last sentence is well put.
Forgetting FTL, the biology stinks. Sapients from different planets
having offspring? Vastly easier by far to make a chimp-human hybrid.
Or crossing Lassie with a cantaloupe to produce a melancholy baby.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article
><f078d584-1424-4a59...@v10g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
> trag <tr...@prismnet.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 12, 6:56 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com>
>> > ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter
>> > and didn't exPlain where it comes from).
>>
>> I've always assumed that the dilithium crystals "catalyze" some kind
>> of process which converts normal matter into antimatter. The show
>> makes the least amount of nonsense that way.
>
>I have to say the last sentence is well put.
>
>Forgetting FTL, the biology stinks. Sapients from different planets
>having offspring? Vastly easier by far to make a chimp-human hybrid.
They actually addressed that in-series in that one where Kirk looses his
memory and gets married. Supposedly the theory was that some progenitor
race had seeded known space with humanoid life. (Of course that makes
green Vulcan blood nonsense, but they took a stab at it.)
>
>Or crossing Lassie with a cantaloupe to produce a melancholy baby.
>
There is a Xanth book in your future. Repent now.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Robert Carnegie
Accordng to (with reservations)
<http://orbitalvector.com/Power/Antimatter%20Power/ANTIMATTER
%20POWER.htm>
which I haven't read in full, antimatter "is a natural byproduct of
proton chain fusion which powers most stars, and the annihilation of
these antiparticles actually accounts for about 11% of the Sun’s
energy output."
So I assume you can just use the Transporter to scoop antimatter out
of the Sun.
Y'know, maybe.
Walter Bushell
Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 10:27:50 -0400, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>
> wrote:
>
> > And I remember doing tedious calculations involving interpolation on log
> > and trig tables in high school.
>
> I remember cheating and buying a set of five-place tables to use
> instead of the four-place tables we were supposed to practice on.
It was *supposed* to be faster to use the smaller tables and it may have
been for people who did it for a living. Still for life critical
applications, like navigation I would prefer the use of the full table.
Turned out to be pure drudgery by the time I was in a position to do
those calculations, as was the long division way of extracting square
roots.
Also, of note, there were shipwrecks tied to bad values in tables.
Dimensional Traveler
a joke done on the set of the original Star Trek by the crew of the show.
Brett Paul Dunbar
<t...@loft.tnolan.com> writes
>They actually addressed that in-series in that one where Kirk looses his
>memory and gets married. Supposedly the theory was that some progenitor
>race had seeded known space with humanoid life. (Of course that makes
>green Vulcan blood nonsense, but they took a stab at it.)
Actually it doesn't. If the common ancestor had both Hemocyanin (copper
based, green, found in molluscs) and Haemoglobin (iron based, red)
oxygen transport mechanisms and one line of descendents then lost the
Hemocyanin and the other lost the Haemoglobin that would fit. There is
also a skink genus (Prasinohaema) with green blood due to a high level
of the bile pigment biliverdin so that's another possibility.
--
Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm
Livejournal http://brett-dunbar.livejournal.com/
Brett Paul Dunbar
To email me, use reply-to address
Walter Bushell
t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
> >Forgetting FTL, the biology stinks. Sapients from different planets
> >having offspring? Vastly easier by far to make a chimp-human hybrid.
>
> They actually addressed that in-series in that one where Kirk looses his
> memory and gets married. Supposedly the theory was that some progenitor
> race had seeded known space with humanoid life. (Of course that makes
> green Vulcan blood nonsense, but they took a stab at it.)
IIRC it was single cell life, but that won't work as any intelligent
life forms on different planets would be more dissimilar that any two
Earthly metazoa. Can't put the humanoid forms into the planted single
cells because the genes would be lost or rendered non functional because
they would not be selected for.
David DeLaney
>trag <t...@prismnet.com> wrote:
>> I've always assumed that the dilithium crystals "catalyze" some kind
>> makes the least amount of =A0nonsense that way.
>
>Accordng to (with reservations)
><http://orbitalvector.com/Power/Antimatter%20Power/ANTIMATTER%20POWER.htm>
>which I haven't read in full, antimatter "is a natural byproduct of
>proton chain fusion which powers most stars, and the annihilation of
>energy output."
>
>So I assume you can just use the Transporter to scoop antimatter out
>of the Sun.
>
>Y'know, maybe.
They're talking about positrons: 4 protons -> He4 + 2 positrons + 2 neutrinos
+ energy, to sum over the entire fusion cycle. That's more 'anti-electricity'
than 'antimatter', really; you need antiprotons and antineutrons to make
actual antiatoms.
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Bill Snyder
Which was amazingly prescient and subtle considering that nobody
who was producing lots of it seems to have gotten attacked in that
year, or later on for that matter. To the extent that any pattern
at all is (arguably) detectible, it seems to have been for those
with more oil to declare war on those with less.
In 1914 the US accounted for 66.34% of world oil production,
Russia for 16.74%, Mexico for 5.29%. Romania for 3.20%,
the Dutch East Indies for 3.17%, India for 2.00%, Galicia for
1.26%, Japan for 0.68%, Peru for 0.48% . . . all other countries
sum to 0.82%, if I haven't screwed up the math.
Now let's see, the US wasn't attacked and didn't get drawn into
the war until a few years later; Russia, at 16.74%, did the
attacking, going after Austria-Hungary and Germany, which,
counting Galicia, accounted for about 1.5%; Mexico was never
involved; Romania was neutral until 1916, and then attacked
Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
very well.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
Walter Bushell
d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
> >Accordng to (with reservations)
> ><http://orbitalvector.com/Power/Antimatter%20Power/ANTIMATTER%20POWER.htm>
> >which I haven't read in full, antimatter "is a natural byproduct of
> >proton chain fusion which powers most stars, and the annihilation of
> >these antiparticles actually accounts for about 11% of the Sun=92s
> >energy output."
> >
> >So I assume you can just use the Transporter to scoop antimatter out
> >of the Sun.
> >
> >Y'know, maybe.
>
> They're talking about positrons: 4 protons -> He4 + 2 positrons + 2 neutrinos
> + energy, to sum over the entire fusion cycle. That's more 'anti-electricity'
> than 'antimatter', really; you need antiprotons and antineutrons to make
> actual antiatoms.
Hey, just use ante pasta and bring it into contact with pasta.
Bo Lindbergh
No, but there is Calvin & Hobbes in his past.
/Bo Lindbergh
Robert Carnegie
>
> In 1914 the US accounted for 66.34% of world oil production,
> Russia for 16.74%, Mexico for 5.29%. Romania for 3.20%,
> the Dutch East Indies for 3.17%, India for 2.00%, Galicia for
> 1.26%, Japan for 0.68%, Peru for 0.48% . . . all other countries
> sum to 0.82%, if I haven't screwed up the math.
>
> Now let's see, the US wasn't attacked and didn't get drawn into
> the war until a few years later; Russia, at 16.74%, did the
> attacking, going after Austria-Hungary and Germany, which,
> counting Galicia, accounted for about 1.5%; Mexico was never
> involved; Romania was neutral until 1916, and then attacked
> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
> very well.
Just Google "Anglo-Persian Oil Company", would you? Thanks.
IIRC and AIUI, Germany in 1914 looked like making deals to get its
hands on a lot of the Middle East black stuff. Something about a
convenient railroad.
The untroubled peace of the Middle East ever since then, I leave you
to contemplate for yourself.
I'm not particularly interested in discussing the specifics of Africa,
either. If a mind is to be changed, its owner, and no one else, must
do it.
And I suppose you never heard of the "Falkland" Islands.
Robert Carnegie
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >trag <t...@prismnet.com> wrote:
> >> I've always assumed that the dilithium crystals "catalyze" some kind
> >> of process which converts normal matter into antimatter. =A0 The show
> >> makes the least amount of =A0nonsense that way.
>
> >Accordng to (with reservations)
> ><http://orbitalvector.com/Power/Antimatter%20Power/ANTIMATTER%20POWER.htm>
> >which I haven't read in full, antimatter "is a natural byproduct of
> >proton chain fusion which powers most stars, and the annihilation of
> >these antiparticles actually accounts for about 11% of the Sun=92s
> >energy output."
>
> >So I assume you can just use the Transporter to scoop antimatter out
> >of the Sun.
>
> >Y'know, maybe.
>
> They're talking about positrons: 4 protons -> He4 + 2 positrons + 2 neutrinos
> + energy, to sum over the entire fusion cycle. That's more 'anti-electricity'
> than 'antimatter', really; you need antiprotons and antineutrons to make
> actual antiatoms.
Well, is there anything to contradict them just using positrons? I
mean apart from the topic never coming up in connection with Data's
positronic brain (I suppose Isaac Asimov never got the trademark).
And, of course, they'd need a similar amount of electrons. Or,
everyone wears rubber sole shoes the whole time. Shaking hands is
unfashionable...
Alternatively, are there other reactions in the Sun that would supply
other antiparticles, if we could just reach in and pick the ones we
like?
You can contain positrons, but the energy taken to do it is probably
more than the use you can make of them. But I don't know if anyone's
collected enough of them in real life to try it out.
David Johnston
wrote:
> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
> > There is that. We're not ready for the oil running out - which
> > unpreparedness probably means going to war over the last of it (yes I
> > have been watching the news), ironically consuming the last of it in
> > doing so.
>
> 1) "Shale oil is a substitute for conventional crude oil; however,
> extracting shale oil from oil shale is more costly than the production
> of conventional crude oil both financially and in terms of its
> environmental impact.
The "however" is important. While there are various methods of
producing substitutes for pumpable oil, if the investment required to
get it out is high enough, they are only useful for supplying military
forces.
Derek Lyons
>The untroubled peace of the Middle East ever since then, I leave you
>to contemplate for yourself.
>I'm not particularly interested in discussing the specifics of Africa,
>either. If a mind is to be changed, its owner, and no one else, must
>do it.
In other words, your mind is already made up and you're not actually
interested in discussion. Therefore, you insist we do all the
googling, and like all trolls insist that once we do we will come to
the same inescapable conclusion you have.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Robert Carnegie
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
> >The untroubled peace of the Middle East ever since then, I leave you
> >to contemplate for yourself.
> >I'm not particularly interested in discussing the specifics of Africa,
> >either. If a mind is to be changed, its owner, and no one else, must
> >do it.
>
> In other words, your mind is already made up and you're not actually
> interested in discussion. Therefore, you insist we do all the
> googling, and like all trolls insist that once we do we will come to
> the same inescapable conclusion you have.
I'm just extremely vague on the details, and, yes, not particularly
interested in discussion. However, to say that there haven't been
wars where oil is, is silly (Kuwait) (Chechnya) (what the hell:
Nigeria).
Brett Paul Dunbar
<8df3b95a-86d5-4c96...@16g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> writes
>IIRC and AIUI, Germany in 1914 looked like making deals to get its
>hands on a lot of the Middle East black stuff. Something about a
>convenient railroad.
The First World War had nothing much to do with oil. The primary
strategic justification for Germany was as a "preventative war". Germany
was the single strongest power in Europe however the Franco-Russian
alliance was gradually becoming stronger due to Russia's rapid growth
and development, combined with Britain becoming closer to France and
Italy becoming unreliable. Germany decided to fight now when there was
still a decent chance of winning rather than delay and be forced to
fight when the alliance had a large advantage.
>And I suppose you never heard of the "Falkland" Islands.
The oil wasn't known, although suspected, but had rather little to do
with the war. Argentina attacked in order to distract the populace from
disliking the Junta by diverting their attention to a long running
national grudge. Britain responded because we were attacked and didn't
want anyone else getting ideas over other long standing territorial
disputes. Such as with Guatemala over Belize.
David Dyer-Bennet
> In article <kj6ev6lsvm6f2ebjlp4jv1otg3103qt...@4ax.com>,
> Joy Beeson <jbee...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 10:27:50 -0400, Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > And I remember doing tedious calculations involving interpolation on log
> > > and trig tables in high school.
>
> > I remember cheating and buying a set of five-place tables to use
> > instead of the four-place tables we were supposed to practice on.
>
> It was *supposed* to be faster to use the smaller tables and it may have
> been for people who did it for a living. Still for life critical
> applications, like navigation I would prefer the use of the full table.
Um, what do you mean "full" table? Nothing magically "full"
about 5 digits as opposed to 4!
(For any given application, there's some degree of
precision that it's worth calculating to, based on the
accuracy of the inputs and what you're doing with the
outputs, certainly.)
> Turned out to be pure drudgery by the time I was in a position to do
> those calculations, as was the long division way of extracting square
> roots.
>
> Also, of note, there were shipwrecks tied to bad values in tables.
Hence Babbage's Difference Engine and later early
mechanical computers.
Note that even the first one, and its competitors, prepared the
printing plates almost directly (the Babbage, at least, pressed type
into a matrix suitable for then casting the printing plates), thus
eliminating a fruitful source of error even apart from the calculation
of the values.
David Johnston
> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
> very well.
>
Oh, I agree. It was only with World War II that people started
specifically invading to secure oil supplies.
Robert Carnegie
wrote:
> In message
> <8df3b95a-86d5-4c96-b439-52063dde8...@16g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> writes
>
> >IIRC and AIUI, Germany in 1914 looked like making deals to get its
> >hands on a lot of the Middle East black stuff. Something about a
> >convenient railroad.
>
> The First World War had nothing much to do with oil. The primary
> strategic justification for Germany was as a "preventative war". Germany
> was the single strongest power in Europe however the Franco-Russian
> alliance was gradually becoming stronger due to Russia's rapid growth
> and development, combined with Britain becoming closer to France and
> Italy becoming unreliable. Germany decided to fight now when there was
> still a decent chance of winning rather than delay and be forced to
> fight when the alliance had a large advantage.
>
> >And I suppose you never heard of the "Falkland" Islands.
>
> The oil wasn't known, although suspected, but had rather little to do
> with the war. Argentina attacked in order to distract the populace from
> disliking the Junta by diverting their attention to a long running
> national grudge. Britain responded because we were attacked and didn't
> want anyone else getting ideas over other long standing territorial
> disputes. Such as with Guatemala over Belize.
Aren't we also claiming a slice of Antarctica and whatever goodies are
there, on the strength of having territory nearby? Also quite silly
when you look at a globe, but nevertheless - well, anyway, sort of;
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Antarctic_Territory>
†"Since the Antarctic Treaty came into force in 1961, Article 1 of
which states "The treaty does not recognize, dispute, nor establish
territorial sovereignty claims; no new claims shall be asserted while
the treaty is in force", most countries do not recognise territorial
claims in Antarctica."
Nevertheless.
Also:
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/sceptred_isle/page/246.shtml?
question=246>
"In June 1983 Margaret Thatcher called a general election and on the
back of the Falklands War, won a landslide victory."
Well played, ma'am!
Oily in a different sense of the word, eh?
Ran Garoo
I think more to destroy or deny the use of to the enemy.
Most people don't know/remember, but the majority of field
equipment was still horse drawn. Only til the late entry
of the USA into the ETO was there a fielded army wherein
the majority of transport was mechanical needing oil fuels.
Kursk may have been littered with tanks,etc., but
Guderian's roads to and from Moscow had as many horse
corpses as Bonaparte's.
The Reich was good at erzatz. The Belgius process made
a lot of foreign fuel less needed.
David Johnston
> On 6/15/2011 11:35, David Johnston wrote:
>
> > On Jun 14, 6:19 pm, Bill Snyder<bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
> >> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
> >> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
> >> very well.
>
> > Oh, I agree. It was only with World War II that people started
> > specifically invading to secure oil supplies.
>
> I think more to destroy or deny the use of to the enemy.
>
> Most people don't know/remember, but the majority of field
> equipment was still horse drawn. Only til the late entry
> of the USA into the ETO was there a fielded army wherein
> the majority of transport was mechanical needing oil fuels.
Because the USA had so much more petroleum than anyone else. But that
didn't keep the Germans from needing aviation and tank fuel and it
most especially didn't stop the Japanese from needing aviation and
ship fuel. And yeah, they launched invasions to get it. Yes, the
Germans had a substitution process, but it was only worth bothering
with because of desperate shortages.
Walter Bushell
<e5098ab9-976e-4e9d...@b1g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
David Dyer-Bennet <illeg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Um, what do you mean "full" table? Nothing magically "full"
> about 5 digits as opposed to 4!
>
> (For any given application, there's some degree of
> precision that it's worth calculating to, based on the
> accuracy of the inputs and what you're doing with the
> outputs, certainly.)
The homework questions required the use of 4 apparently.
Brett Paul Dunbar
writes
>On 6/15/2011 11:35, David Johnston wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 6:19 pm, Bill Snyder<bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
>>> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
>>> very well.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I agree. It was only with World War II that people started
>> specifically invading to secure oil supplies.
>
>I think more to destroy or deny the use of to the enemy.
>
The Pacific war part of the Second World War was all about oil. The USA
imposed an oil embargo in order to end Japan's invasion of China (Third
Sino-Japanese War). Japan was unwilling to do so, so decided to invade
the Dutch East Indies in order to secure the oil they needed. In order
to prevent the US Navy from interdicting the invasion they decided to
destroy the American Pacific fleet anchored at Pearl Habor.
ErictheTolle
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> On 6/14/11 5:54 AM, Nigel wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 11:29 pm, Dimensional Traveler<dtra...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >> On 6/13/2011 2:53 AM, Walter Bushell wrote:> In article<ffSdnRF5pt4q52jQnZ2dnUVZ_uidn...@supernews.com>,
> >>> "Joel Olson"<joel.ol...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> >>>> ObSF everything 1950-1980 except Star Trek (they used antimatter and
> >>>> didn't exPlain where it comes from).
>
> >>> Yes, and did you hear when they replaced the dilithium crystals with
> >>> Folger's crystals no one noticed the difference.
>
> >> I'm still looking for the original Star Trek "blooper" reel showing
> >> several engineering red-shirts shoveling coal into that glowing red area
> >> in the engine room's background.
>
> > Ah, you want "Steam Trek":http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y39gHihP74
>
> with the engineers shoveling coal into the Enterprise's engines.
Try this scene 4:42 into this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N9o8Abr0bQ
Otherwise not one of the better TOS blooper reals, but it does have
your scene.
Eric Tolle
Robert Bannister
> On 6/15/2011 11:35, David Johnston wrote:
>> On Jun 14, 6:19 pm, Bill Snyder<bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
>>> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
>>> very well.
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I agree. It was only with World War II that people started
>> specifically invading to secure oil supplies.
>
> I think more to destroy or deny the use of to the enemy.
>
> Most people don't know/remember, but the majority of field
> equipment was still horse drawn.
I thought only the Poles still relied on horses. I remember many
horse-drawn vehicles in England well into the 50s for coal, bread, milk,
etc., but I don't remember seeing any military equipment with horses.
Sure you're not thinking of WW1?
Only til the late entry
> of the USA into the ETO was there a fielded army wherein
> the majority of transport was mechanical needing oil fuels.
>
> Kursk may have been littered with tanks,etc., but
> Guderian's roads to and from Moscow had as many horse
> corpses as Bonaparte's.
Poland.
>
> The Reich was good at erzatz. The Belgius process made
> a lot of foreign fuel less needed.
--
Robert Bannister
David Johnston
> On 16/06/11 3:05 AM, Ran Garoo wrote:
>
> > On 6/15/2011 11:35, David Johnston wrote:
> >> On Jun 14, 6:19 pm, Bill Snyder<bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
>
> >>> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
> >>> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
> >>> very well.
>
> >> Oh, I agree. It was only with World War II that people started
> >> specifically invading to secure oil supplies.
>
> > I think more to destroy or deny the use of to the enemy.
>
> > Most people don't know/remember, but the majority of field
> > equipment was still horse drawn.
>
> I thought only the Poles still relied on horses. I remember many
> horse-drawn vehicles in England well into the 50s for coal, bread, milk,
> etc., but I don't remember seeing any military equipment with horses.
> Sure you're not thinking of WW1?
No, it's true that the Germans were using horse drawn wagons to supply
their troops and move artillery. It was the one of the major reasons
why they never tried to deploy the nerve gases they were working on.
Dimensional Traveler
> On 16/06/11 3:05 AM, Ran Garoo wrote:
>> On 6/15/2011 11:35, David Johnston wrote:
>>> On Jun 14, 6:19 pm, Bill Snyder<bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Austria-Hungary; the Dutch were neutral throughout . . . You know,
>>>> I'm not sure the "they did it for oil" thesis actually stands up
>>>> very well.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, I agree. It was only with World War II that people started
>>> specifically invading to secure oil supplies.
>>
>> I think more to destroy or deny the use of to the enemy.
>>
>> Most people don't know/remember, but the majority of field
>> equipment was still horse drawn.
>
> I thought only the Poles still relied on horses. I remember many
> horse-drawn vehicles in England well into the 50s for coal, bread, milk,
> etc., but I don't remember seeing any military equipment with horses.
> Sure you're not thinking of WW1?
>
Linda Taber
Back to (something like) the original topic. I can never go through a
supermarket door without recalling a short story from the '50s (I
suspect), one of the "the strange neighbors turn out to be from the
future" sub-genre, in which one of the clues to the out-of-time nature
of the neighbors was that they tended to bump into doors as if
expecting the doors to open by themselves.
And at the other end (or possibly both ends . . .) of the
chronospectrum, in 2004 I bought several Mousterian tools, dating from
c. 70-50000 BC, along with a 700,000-year-old hand ax. It gave me a
charge to have them sitting on my desk next to my new Dell computer.
Doug