Car Modern 2011

You Puma and Sushi keep trying to play this down because you 'know how a nuclear reactor works', yet every day your "nowt trouble a t'mill" assurances are just hammered by a new event. An analogy in my mind right now would be architects insisting while we're watching smoke billowing from the towers on our screens that the girders were fireproof-coated so there's no risk of them melting and the buildings collapsing...
Did you even read the previously posted article? Please do. I understand the cause of concern, and that's fine, it's just the unwarranted running around with the chicken little complex that doesn't fit. As per the towers... well, we could make a whole other thread about that, but see this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_%28structure%29). Having a hole ripped in your primary support structure tends to destroy your building, fireproofed or not.


Sorry, but the rest of us know how govts and corporations work. They lie. They cover their own arses. They are incompetent. Gulf oil spill. This very same Tokyo electric company saw the CEO and others resign a few years ago for falsifying safety records. So you ignore the most important aspect of the fleet readings. That they contradict the 'official' line we are being told. That they've now officially been caught lying about how bad it actually is. Did you read any of my previous posts? Of course they lie. Of course the validity of their statements is in question. I said it previously in this thread, multiple times. They also don't necessarily contradict the "official" line.

Look, again, I understand your concern, but I'm going to have to tow the line at the mutant babies remark. Here's a problem; who do you trust? I don't want to spend the time gathering scientific literature for you, so for this next part I'm going to quote the NRC, since it's convenient. I realize you have on your tin foil hat and will probably call this a farce, but I can assure you that there IS literature out there to corroborate these facts.

1) The average radiation exposure to people is ~620 mrem/year-- this means that this ship picked up 52 mrem/hour of radiation from the could. (Read: Only 52 mrem-- the ship was only "in it" for an hour)

2) A CT scan is 150 mrem. Depending on the X-ray, it can be around 30-50 mrem.

3) People working with the NRC have an occupational limit of 5000 mrem.

4) Those people living in areas having high levels of background radiation � above 1,000 mrem (10 mSv) per year � such as Denver, Colorado, have shown no adverse biological effects.

5) Cancers associated with high-dose exposure (greater than 50,000 mrem) include leukemia, breast, bladder, colon, liver, lung, esophagus, ovarian, multiple myeloma, and stomach cancers. Department of
Health and Human Services literature also suggests a possible association between ionizing radiation exposure and prostate, nasal cavity/sinuses, pharyngeal and laryngeal, and pancreatic cancer.

6) Although radiation may cause cancers at high doses and high dose rates, currently there are no data to establish unequivocally the occurrence of cancer following exposure to low doses and dose rates � below about 10,000 mrem (100 mSv).

So yes, if we park the ship in the cloud and wait, and follow the cloud (and it's diffusion), someone may have an adverse effect eventually. You do know how gaseous diffusion works, right? As well as precipitation, metal complexation, and solubility, right? I'll assume not. You should do some reading; that dosage of 52 mrem/hour isn't going to stay like that for long.

Here's (http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bio-effects-radiation.html) the link for the NRC data.

Also, you might want to look up three models of radiation exposure (which I also had previously mentioned, if you read my posts): linear no threshold, linear with adjustment factor, and logarithmic.

The residents will be fine, you can put away your tin foil hats. If we have a melt down, then we'll talk.

If Iger is correct and iTV has a hard drive.. then I beleive iTV could serve as an external iTunes Library server/device. Authorized computers can access and manage it using iTunes (running as a client). iTS downloads, podcasts, imported physical CDs, etc would all be stored on iTV.


I think the opposite. iTV is just another "pod" using a single computer as a separate node. The Apple paradigm here would be to release iTV and then to have a separate cable-in device (EyeTV essentially) at your computer that would serve as the DVR to load and control shows on your central computer, which could then be wirelessly distributed to iTVs throughout the house. Just buy one giant hard drive rather than having a bunch all over the place.

Apple has repeatedly said that they don't think people want a computer in their living room (to surf the net, etc). There does have to be a computer someplace, however, in this case acting as an entertainment server for iTV, iPods, etc.

How about use some of that money to get iTunes/App Store login fixed up. Many reporting it down like me on Twitter.

If you don't mind, I would like to explain that.

I cannot vouch for all the people. I can vouch for most that I have seen.

I am a part of TI, SerDes which is designed in TI, UK [UK Design]. I have been to TI's headquarters [Dallas, Texas], a number of items, and everytime I go, I have seen people using iPhones and blackberries. TI still gives BB's to all the employees, but most have their personal iPhones. It was really hard to spot a guy using an android phone out of close to a thousand people I could spot on campus.

We run most of our software on SunOS 2.6 [Solaris]. We do some of our development work on Windows [which is a PAIN in the OS for no native support for PERL, Python, ClearCase, etc].

The reason I believe that's the case is because:

1. The most important: people have a life. They don't wish to tinker with the phones; whether its easy or hard, they just have no time. We buy smartphones to work for us and do everything on their own. We don't want to work for our 'smartphone' to make it usable. People just don't have time.

2. The quality of service Apple provides is hands down. The best customer service for any product that is theirs. It's great.

3. iPhone is probably the most usable phone at this time. Android is just on the other side. Widgets/Customization that's about it. Low quality apps/ No apps is the case there.

People want something that just works without much effort. These things are to simplify our lives and not complicate, so that we can concentrate on actual work.

Some people get this; some don't.

Yeah I pretty much agree on those points. I've had them all, had the iPhone 4, bought an android (Galaxy S) and a windows phone 7 (Samsung Focus) and am now back on the iPhone 4 with no regrets.

Everybody deserves love and respect--it seems to me that this project is supportive of this notion. Very cool indeed.

Given Greenpeace's mission and credibility, I think it's safe to assume that all manufacturers featured were graded on the same criteria. So at least in this survey, it's quite believable that Apple has dived compared to its competitors.
Yea they're really credible...:rolleyes:

Nuc

Meh... I use MyWi occasionally, meaning only once or twice every TWO months.

Now I would spend an extra $5-10 a month if ATT offered tethering with a 5-10 Gigabyte total data cap on both phone and tethering usage. Spending an extra $25+ to be on a capped 2-4GB plan is BuL*Sh&^ if it means that I have to give up my unlimited plan as well as unrestricted 3G via My3G.


This. I wouldn't mind paying a bit more for tethering, but the $20/mo extra or nothing is really unacceptable. For those of us who only tethering sporadically, it's really a waste of money paying $20/mo. If the carriers really want an extra revenue stream from tethering, they should have different options available.

I would easily pay $5-10 more a month for 1GB of tethering data, and for those who want 2+ gigs for tethering, then $20/mo is fine. They really need a lower option.

I hate how these carriers work in the US.

If you give us a data allowance, that is what you give us - regardless of how we use it.

If you were giving us unlimited data, then I could understand why you would be charging for tethering. But that would go bad anyways.

I agree.

I completely understand the idea that unlimited data should have to pay for tethering, although I think there should just be a cap prior to additional charges like verizon does.

What I dont understand is how they think charging tiered data customers for tethering is fair.

This is the device I've been waiting for 2+ years for Apple to come out with. Those who think this isn't a Tivo killer don't understand Tivo's plans. This hasn't just killed the current Tivo, this has killed the gen4 Tivo that isn't even out yet. It's stolen its thunder by at least a year if not much more.

It's been obvious for awhile now that Tivo has been moving in their slow ponderous way towards a method of content delivery over internet. They have been doing it for ads for years now, and they want to do it with content so bad they can taste it. They hired a key guy from bittorrent several years ago, but haven't done anything impressive since. They want it, but with it taking them 3 years to go with cable card and dual tuner, they just aren't able to get their act together in time.

Apple has played their cards exactly right. They've done what Tivo, Netflix, Microsoft, Sony, and Blockbuster would all give their collective left nut to do. They've done what every local cable company and even every media mogul SHOULD have been laying awake worrying about, which is to have made them irrelevant in one fell swoop. Not to every single consumer by a long shot, but to a significant demographic of tech-savvy consumers who know what they want and will shift paradigms to get it.

As much as I want this right this very second, waiting for 802.11n is the right thing to do and I'm glad Apple did it. I don't have a TV, but I'll buy a 20" monitor and one of these the day it comes out. I'll buy a second one and a projector as soon as possible afterwards.

This is going to be a much bigger deal than the iPod, and that's saying a lot.

Fundamentalists who have taken an extreme point of view. Are you saying that Islam is not allowed any extremists? All religions have then. But not Muslims are extremists.
The muslim extremists in my country always get supported by those who call themselves "moderate muslims". Probably because of some "solidarity" (blind obedience) code in the ummah. When they gang up together like that on issues that are controversial even within the ummah, it's very easy to see them all as extremists. That's how they strive to appear, even when they're not.

Windows Vista & 7 have the UAC - meaning that admin accounts are effectively the same as on *nix & OS X.

It works well (on Win7)

I'm well aware of UAC. UAC also just happens to be "that annoying popup thing" that has become extremely popular for users to disable entirely since the debut of Vista.

Godwined! FTW!

Had to do it! We are like 11 pages in.

2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).

Poor thing... he doesn't realize napster and limewire are history. Also, once the data hits my device, it's mine to do with as I please. Thank you very much.

>laughing_girls.jpg.tiff.

You did pay for the amount of data you signed for!

They will never make me switch!!!!!! I will never give them any money!!!!!

No Service...

WTF???

:p

we are not saying conroe is crap it just is not suitable for a mac pro.


My point exactly...Mac Snobbery at it's finest.

I hope it will work with all Front Row files, not just iTunes content.

I wonder if the current MacPro will finally be the first Mac where we could swap out the actual processor for the new quad. Didn't Barefeats or somebody do a test on that already?

The intel machines use intel standard parts. No proprietary CPU riser cards or what have you. If you can get to the CPU, that is.

TEPCo press release:

http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/11031229-e.html

X2 - I think they are going to require "real" proof that the user is tethering. What is to say the user is not just using a lot of data via the phone? I am sorry, but this really appears of a way to transfer people away from the unlimited plan.

Another reason for folks to move over to Verizon

The incorrect assumption would be that ATT could never or can't or however you want to phrase it determine if you are using date via tether or not.

And there are always ways. As someone who works for a major IT firm - there are always ways.

Just because ATT didn't act on it before doesn't mean they couldn't tell. And just because they didn't act on it before - doesn't mean they aren't entitled to do it now. It's at their discretion as to pursue or not pursue breaches in the agreement.

Also bear in mind that Conroes are cheaper for apple to buy than Meroms, as well as offering faster clock speeds and more performance. So it wouldn't cost Apple much more, per machine, to put a 2.4Ghz conroe in rather than a 2.0Ghz merom.

Take a look at the iMac. Now, it's quite small, isn't it? Nice and thin, and silet as well. How are you planning to cool that 2.4GHz Conroe in a machine like that? And why should Apple go for a whole different CPU, when they already have a great replacement for their current CPU: Merom. Only thing they need to do is to replace the current CPU with the new one. Conroe would take a lot more work.

I don't buy your argument that Apple needs to spec iMac similarly to consumer desktop-Dells and the like. I mean, Apple hasn't done so so far (with the current Core Duo-version), why should they do so in the future?

What I still believe is that we will have a third desktop that gets placed between MacPro and iMac. And that minitower-machine WILL use Conroe.

Apple can either put Meroms in the iMac and thus make an over-priced under-performing desktop or redesign the motherboard for Conroe and have a competitive desktop.

If that is true, then current iMac isn't competetive either. It's "overpriced" and "underperforming". Is that what you think?

If they want to continue their recent success with the switch to Intel they cannot afford to be lazy and simply drop a merom into the iMac.

Merom is the logical choice. It's a drop-in replacement, it runs cooler, it's about 20% faster, clock for clock... What I think will happen is that current 1.83 and 2Ghz Core Duo'w will be replaced by 2 and 2.13Ghz Meroms.

The Javascript exploit injected code into the Safari process to cause the download of a payload. That payload was the installer.

The installer is marked as safe to auto-execute if "open safe files after downloading" is turned on.

An installer is used to trick users to authenticate because the malware does not include privilege escalation via exploitation.

If you had any technical knowledge you could have figured that out yourself via the Intego article.



Installers being marked as safe really doesn't increase the likelihood of user level access as the Javascript exploit already provided user level access. I don't understand why you are hung up on this installer being able to auto-execute; it really makes no difference in terms of user level access. The attacker could have deleted your files with just the Javascript exploit.



Webkit2 will prevent user level access via an exploit, such as a Javascript exploit.


on the desktop/laptop side which browsers will use webkit2?

Chrome and Safari?

in which case its virtually pojntless (for the community) as the 2 biggest browsers won't have it...or will they have something similar??

Android is to Windows, as iOS is to Mac OS.

The similarities are astounding � Google is doing the same thing Microsoft did back in the day.

As much as Apple cares about marketshare, the experience is more important to them then the product itself. That's really something.

And there's one more thing. Back then, it was Mac and only mac.

Today, its an ecosystem. Hard to beat.

Didn't you know? Aside from owning Apple products it's also quite trendy being an atheist. They think they don't need to back up their points with Reason or facts so it's a kind of intellectual laziness which compels most people.

I'm not saying that I'm a devout Christian or anything of the sort, I'm agnostic, but it's based on Reason.

Huh?? I'm the last person who usually defends Atheists around here (nothing against them) :), I'm Agnostic too, but regardless if I think they are out on a limb for my own personal reasons, using the scientific method, with no practical evidence of God is it really fair to accuse them of not thinking and being lazy?? Lol. It could be argued that believing there is no God for lack of evidence is stronger than believing in God based on faith (lack of proof).

Because it's harder to imagine that an intelligent designer had a hand in it than it is to imagine that everything happened by chance?

So you saying imaging is required in both cases cause we can't prove a thing? ;)