Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamic (Score 4, Informative) 134

by skids (#48476709) Attached to: Scientists Develop "Paint" To Help Cool the Planet

"Ambient" is important to define here. The temperature of the air is not actually playing much of a role in the black body equation. If the sky was made of more buildings at ambient temperature, then the story would be different, but other than the sun it's mostly an open pit into which anything radiated never returns. Also keep in mind that that figure may be referencing the temperature of the air near the whole building including the lower floors; it is cooler up high on tall buildings.

The idea is that the heat provided from within the building and the heat from the 3% of sunlight that gets through the mirror all pools and the mirror material then converts it to a specific passband. So you have more heat pooling than what comes in on that passband.

How effective this system remains when contaminated with a coat of dust is a question. Also comparative advantage to absorbing the heat/light and using it to power AC.

Comment: Re:Ah, good, progress. (Score 1) 100

by skids (#48465233) Attached to: Firefox Will Soon Offer One-Click Buttons For Your Search Engines

Funny, the presence of that search box is the only reason I still prefer firefox over Chrome or Opera.

Being able to cache a search term in that box and still alter URLs and then go back to my pre-typed search term and mod it and then use it to replace a tab's contents is indispensible.

Comment: Re:Who gives more funding? (Score 1) 397

by skids (#48423337) Attached to: Firefox Signs Five-Year Deal With Yahoo, Drops Google as Default Search Engine

I still use Firefox for any "real browsing" because the others don't have a separate search box without adding an extension, an extension which eventually breaks or robs you of another 5 minutes of your time when you have to start fresh on a new system. Having that extra box hanging around so you can modify search terms while still having a url bar to type in is just too essential when actually doing serious research on the web.

But for performance and thorough feature support I sometimes have to use chrome. Luckily you can still disable the annoying omnibar search by defining a null "search engine" which just browses https://s/ and clicking a few options to limit the amount of stuff that can appear in the evil focus-grabbing dropdown menu. So for 1 minute of customization time you can get chrome to the point where it's half as useful as firefox for browsing and it doesn't hose your CPU under linux like firefox.

Comment: Re:Yes, it could be much cheaper (Score 1) 150

I do hope to see this downsized to an individual level that can help bring ad hoc mesh networks a little closer to being

TFA is about a refinement to tech that's existed for quite some decades now -- I remember pricing out dual FSO/microwave setups way back when. They never really came down into a price range where we could justify deploying them versus leasing telco, even the small ones, and we saw no real motion towards commoditization.

Comment: Re:Call Comcast? (Score 1) 405

by skids (#48382685) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: How To Unblock Email From My Comcast-Hosted Server?

You should start the business-account ticket process anyway. You might even convince them to proactively approach these services from their side. Defending the ability of one's assigned blocks to send email is one of the jobs of any address holder, even if Comcast doesn't care about how badly their residential customers are treated (by others as well as their own techs) they should care about business address ranges.

You could try demanding different addresses as well.

Comment: Re:No shit, (Score 1) 204

by skids (#48379427) Attached to: Your Incompetent Boss Is Making You Unhappy

Yes, it did. Because quite regularly, those things that "everybody knows" turn out to be not actually true.

This is evident since people seem to "just know" things that are easily disprovable, not just hard to prove subject matter that requires a research paper.

A google of phrases like "most people think" can make for some fun afternoon reading.

Comment: Re:Why feed the lawyers? (Score 2) 268

by skids (#48360063) Attached to: GNOME Project Seeks Donations For Trademark Battle With Groupon

Heh. I see what you did there.

In all seriousness, were GNOME-the-desktop to have some major security incident and it affects the viability of GNOME-the-PoS with potential customers by associating the brand with security problems in search engine results, someone will start to appreciate the merit of avoiding name collisions.

Comment: Re:Number is irrelevant compared to severity (Score 1) 170

by skids (#48320399) Attached to: NSA Director Says Agency Shares Most, But Not All, Bugs It Finds

A vulnerability that requires standing on one leg while juggling two white cats and wearing a clown nose is something they can keep to themselves, because it's so unlikely that anyone else will stumble across it.

...and they have an ample supply of cats and clown noses.

Comment: Re: Old saying (Score 1) 249

by skids (#48318365) Attached to: New Atomic Clock Reaches the Boundaries of Timekeeping

This argument is as spurious as the frames of reference and definitions needed to support it are extreme. Also the orginal post didn't say there were no flaws with "simultaneity", just that calling it "wrong" was "wrong." It's well known that any causal relationship is preserved from any frame of reference, and furthermore "events" on the macro scale don't happen at a discrete moment in time. If you have a balloon with a chipmunk suspended inside it, and you release the chipmunk so it falls and pops the balloon, it can be said with perfect accuracy that the baloon popped simultaneuously with the chipmunk falling, assuming the balloon was not on a table and the chipmunk continued to fall past the edge of the balloon.

The arguments against "simultaneity" require the precise scientific definition of the term, which should be confined to academic papers.

Do not try the above experiment at home.

The general gist of the matter is it would be technically possible to "synchronize" these clocks in the sense that with enough external data to accurately determine the frames of reference involved, we could know the time on one of the clocks as observed by an individual next to that clock from the value of another a clock next to us, even if that individual could never tell us the time on the clock because by the time any communication reached us, it would be stale. This despite the fact that the clocks are actually running at different rates on most frames of reference, not just different offsets. If that was done bilaterally, and both calculations yielded each other's input value, both parties could agree that, in retrospect, they read the clocks at the same "time".

An external observer to both clocks might see the readings happen at different times, but if they have any intellect they have to account for their perspective not being the only valid one.

It would also be possible to construct an average aggregate clock out of a group of these, the question is merely the utility of such a clock, since instead of a "timezone" you'd have a "framezone" where you'd have both an offset and an ongoing drift, not to mention the parameters of that adjustment would not be constant because phenomina like shifting planetary crust don't play nice.

We would not be able to measure the speed of light without such systems, so they obviously play an important role.

CCI Power 6/40: one board, a megabyte of cache, and an attitude...