My 480 GB Crucial M500 cost ~200€ a month ago - that's 41.66 cents per GB.
These arms could be programmable to continue doing whatever you were doing, whether it be static, dynamic, or include aspects of both. For example, clamping two items together, operating a pump, or holding a camera steady, respectively.
That's a weird way to say masturbation.
Well, considering what Shirow has been up to lately it's probably the first thing that comes to mind...
Oh, and don't forget this in your research - there are at least three popular SIM card sizes roaming (no pun intended) in the wild these days, and they are mutually incompatible. So don't expect to take the full-sized SIM out of your feature phone and transfer it to the micro SIM slot of a Galaxy S4 or the nano SIM slot of an iPhone 5s
Except of course that SIM cards are mostly plastic, with a smart-card-y bit where the contacts are, so it's perfectly possible to cut a regular SIM card down to whatever size you need as long as you use a template and a pair of scissors or one of the cheap SIM cutters you can get on Amazon or ask the guys in the next phone shop to do it for you...
I used a mini SIM in my Motorola Milestone until I got a Samsung S3 when it came out and I needed a micro SIM card - converting my SIM was a rather short and simple home crafting project.
There have been machines made to do things like play a real trumpet with some success. I suppose that a robot could play a violin or other instruments as well. So [far] it is a question of how well a robot can play.
Exhibit A: Squarepusher x Z-MACHINES - Music For Robots...
Solar FREAKIN roadways is a nice idea, but then again is a pogostick that can hop to the moon as a cheap, reusable trans-orbital vehicle.
Is it plausible though. Well it basically proposes the union of 3 or 4 technologies. LED lights, solar panels, and glass roads.
Glass really isn't a feasible material to make roads out of.
1) its too expensive. Just coating the US road system with roads would cost many times the federal budget.
2) Its too soft. Even with a textured surface for traction, it will wear away too quickly. Dirt on roads is basically small rocks, which are generally much harder than glass. Imagine taking a handful of dirt and rubbing it [on] a window. Now imagine doing that with the wheels of a 20 ton tractor/trailer.
3) I have doubts about the physical properties of the glass to take the load and mechanical heat stress required of a road making material.
Solar panels under the road is a bad idea from the start. If they are under the roads, they are hard to maintain. They will have reduced light from parked cars etc. They are fragile. Not really congenial to the conditions you are likely to get on a road. In many ways building a shed over the road, or just having solar panels by the side of the road is a far better idea. However the power transport really isnt practical. One of the most efficient ways to transport electricity around is as high voltage AC. However to build those lines would probably double the cost of any construction. To bury the cables is even more expensive.
LEDs for variable road marking have been partially implemented. They are usually only cost effective in dynamic traffic management systems. For most roads its utterly pointless as the road markings almost never need to be altered. These LED are usually not easy to see (especially in full daylight when the solar panels are meant to be generating power).
However solar powered roadways has generated well over a million dollars for Julie and Scott Brusaw (a therapist and an engineer).
I'm still on the fence as to if they are just delusional dreamers or (now millionaire) con artists. A lot of this looks like just direct 'what if' daydreaming, but then you get the part of the promotional video where they are shoveling ground up coloured glass into a wheelbarrow, while narrating that they use as many recycled materials as possible in this project. It's very difficult to not see that as a direct lie. They must know full well that they did not use any of that material in the construction of their glass tiles.
(And yes, he's got a PhD in chemistry, so I trust he might have more of a clue or two what happens when a truck hits the road than an electrical engineer(!)...)
The Onion: "Christ, Article A Video"...
Sure you can, you just have to make him keep his hands above his head...
Did you know it took 10+ years for Mozilla to fix the alert() denial loop [mozilla.org]? That bug is older than Mozilla itself, and the most obvious fix of "checkbox to stop further dialogs" was dismissed as a hack (compared to the destructive hack of force-killing Mozilla.)
Yeah, and it should be reverted to the prior behavior because it doesn't fix the issue.
Last I checked alert()s were tab-modal in Firefox, so where's the problem?
If you're giving someone an infinite alert loop, then your code is bad or malicious.
Whether it is bad or malicious this "fix" doesn't fix the issue at all. The very same "denial of service" is easily produced by wrapping an infinite loop in a short window.setInterval(...);. Then instead of an alert() popup you get a never-ending stream of "would you like to stop the script?" dialogs. So, if it's a pop-up dialog denial of service attack you're fixing, then that fucking moronic patch, didn't do jack shit, dingus.
Protip: Application Level Modal Dialogs are the problem -- That they prohibit you from using your browser functions, like the refresh button or address bar, and not just the page itself is the issue.
A "modal dialog" is a DENIAL OF SERVICE to all other application features. The fix should really happen at the OS UI level. Just fire all the UI designers who think modality is grand.
Protip: check to see if the dialog you're moaning about is even still modal before moaning about it. (Hint: it isn't)
Try technocrat.net - Bruce Perens already closed it down twice due to low interest, but if
I'm pretty sure Franz Viehböck isn't at NASA anymore...
The NetBeans one only talks about navigation to the declaration of something, which is a very far cry from autocompletion, background compilation for error detection, showing up-to-date documentation etc. that having an AST and other data from parsing a file fully encompasses, and it seems like they use the debug info generated by GCC, but that is neither on-the-fly nor even near the level of detail you get with actually having a parsed representation of all your code available.
The Eclipse one talks about their own implementation of a GCC-syntax-compatible scanner/parser they have implemented because they couldn't reuse the monolith that is GCC to use it to implement all the features I listed regarding NetBeans. They do use GCC for building the executable, of course.
Thanks for ignoring the most successful science fiction book series ever written...