Yeah, a light source and good optics go a long way
Also, good sample preparation is essential. I guess most of the problems are there.
For a light source, forget about the "built in" methods. Even a desk lamp goes a long way. And if you try different positions you can get great results, or even go for reflected light instead of transmitted light (depending on the sample)
They benefited from the system all their lives but when it's their turn to pay in, they leave.
Please, what system? Workers are mobile inside Europe. Social security and welfare is more or less equal inside Europe as well.
so that means saving about 4 million euros in taxes, while at the same time dealing with both a perception of greed which can certainly hurt them among conscious consumers as well as the costs associated with moving the operation to Ireland.
Their workers will probably make up for the 4Mi to the Irish government since income tax is higher on Ireland. Still
"perception of greed" yes, sorry, it's a crime to be profitable, I forgot.
"which can certainly hurt them among conscious consumers" yeah, right
"costs associated" I'm not sure, they certainly can move some of production to Ireland, but maybe if it's done slowly it's not complicated
More power to Ireland, they can use the extra taxes.
You're assuming that access to good equipment is equally affordable in all countries.
But well, I could get results from the finicky microscope, good results, I'd say
Apart from the optics, a good source light is essencial
This
I remember that in school we were instructed on how to use the microscope, but it's very easy to mishandle it
So, for kids, go for an affordable choice
Get a toy one
At 7, it will be great
Get preferabily one with >= 50x mag, so you can see cells, etc
Later you can think of a better one
I really don't remember how old I was when I got my first (toy) one, but it was a built-it-yourself kit
Then I got one that was 100x-300x-600x (which was 'more real') and it was lots of fun
The real "broken stuff" is probably in : DirectX
Or better, the lack of a precise specification. And different manufacturers implementing different details in different ways.
But it's lots of games depending on several different functionalities. You can certainly test in most games. But then you find out Quake III relies on an old bug or quirk of the spec that you fixed and that broke the game
Game developer makes the game with available cards. Sees that no one does 'item X' correctly, finds a solution that works on everybody. Item X is fixed but breaks old games.
Not to mention AMD (ATI) has a "tradition" of shipping crappy drivers.
Let's ban synthetic drugs while the tradicional/crime financing drugs are still around
Let's make more difficult for people to have their nicotin fix in a less harmful way by banning all 'less harmful' alternatives.
The drug traffickers and tobacco companies are grateful for your cooperation.
Unless the fun is imaginary, then we're spinning in circles
You'll probably end up in cabin (oh but a cabin made of wood? that's deforestation) eating what you're trying to plant and raise (trying, because fertilizers come from cattle raising: bad or petroleum: bad and no herbicides)
True, it's field electron emission!
The interesting parts are the very small size and the addition of the gate which allows modulation of the electron flow.
Absolutely. I would describe it more as a "new type of transistor" than a "small vacuum tube" (and the fact that it's solid state and apparently can be integrated with other devices)
The article is painful in some aspects
Electrons move more slowly in a solid than in a vacuum, which means transistors are generally slower than vacuum tubes; as a result, computing isn't as quick as it could be.
I'm flabbergasted.
Meyyappan, who co-developed the "nano vacuum tube," says it is created by etching a tiny cavity in phosphorous-doped silicon. The cavity is bordered by three electrodes: a source, a gate, and a drain. The source and drain are separated by just 150 nanometers, while the gate sits on top. Electrons are emitted from the source thanks to a voltage applied across it and the drain, while the gate controls the electron flow across the cavity
This is really a vacuum tube if you add a high dose of immagination. Really
The separation of the source and drain is so small that the electrons stand very little chance of colliding with atoms in the air
Makes me wonder if tunneling plays a part here
Makes sense if you want to reuse the disk and don't want to use a computer to rewrite it.
I think the overcurrent is not just "to the chip" but may be exactly tied to the erasing process, so you just "fry" (over erase) the memory cells
And that's exactly the point, if you're in a critical situation (like at gunpoint) you don't want to waste time with "overwriting" but should just go to the overcurrent method.
"First method goes through the disk, overwriting all data with garbage"
That's the WORSE possible way to "self destruct"
Do you know why in flash memory they have to work differently then on a spinning disk?
Erasing blocks takes a lot of time. Exactly because it's erasing a whole block!
Erasing and then overriding seems pointless (even though theoretically you could dissolve the chip in acid and then measure the charges there to see if you can recover traces of data)
The second way seems much more promising.
And by the way, "InVincible"?! Really? It should be the opposite of that!
"Personal reasons" could be anything
I'd like to imagine something like: He's not being too fond of YHOO redecorating his office with smoked cod.
Do you know what makes sense?
Not wasting time doing graphical gimmicks for a window manager (which will be buggy and slow anyway)
"to help the perhaps 1-2% of your userbase"
I think the number is higher, still, why should I upgrade my machine to run the latest versions?
"More software projects have gone awry for lack of calendar time than for all other causes combined." -- Fred Brooks, Jr., _The Mythical Man Month_
