Operating systems age control

Bull, just shrapnel! Else just detonate small H bombs to heat the water for the steam turbines...

Get a toy car LOL!

I usually download Linux distros from wherever it is in the world. There are many servers, some close some far away. Will they block those sites? Release specific country versions of debian?

The whole damned control of everything gets more silly and stupid everyday. And they all dance to the out of tune sounds of King Kong.

Or maybe you get a config file entry: 'enable kernel age checking' could be default, and comment it out after install and reboot to get rid of it. Many other options work that way.

A 3 year old can add # at the start of the line #enable kernel age checking 55 and for Taliban the age checking will then be 9 years...

#enable kernel age checking 3

sigh... LOL

We will seee where it goes...

No.

Kind of, yes. Just part of the localization package.

Do you know that some Linux distros can not be downloaded in Cuba? Or that you can not register in the support mail lists or forums?

And that its relatively easy to fingerprint a system as it "talks", online, and, from that decide to block that traffic? Or, that IP??

No, any references? Is that King Kong enforced or by the Cuban government?

But that sort of censorship is everywhere and getting worse. rt.com is blocked here in the Netherlands on internet by local providers Russofobia! Easy to get around in Linux, modify /etc/resolv.conf so it reads: cat /etc/resolv.conf nameserver 8.8.8.8 nameserver 8.8.4.4

Those are the google name servers, and those do not block rt.com No idea what else they block here..

But God did it for us.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

OK, let's compare our web sites.

I was just thinking about my favorite circuits. Some of the bits in my digital delay generators are kinda cute. And the Mach-Zendher modulator drivers.

I kinda like my autotransformer-flyback-multiplier HV supply, which I have posted here.

I have a mosfet-LED thing that's really fun. I might teach a course using it.

Bother. It's interesting.

They have gathered $500M already. It's a long shot that this will work, but the upside would be huge.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

I know first hand.

No, the USA enforces it.

If they have "unlimited electricity" it's not complicated, difficult, nor expensive, to make "sustainable aviation fuel" from air and water with a quite simple and low-maintenance plant, that also being carbon-neutral.

A usual idea to get fusion "pumping the magnet" without "self-sustaining ignition" per se is simple and obvious.

The old ideas of "chemically-assisted" or "low-energy" nuclear reactions are still around (CANR/LENR).

Yeah, yeah, I know, "Pons and Fleischmann hoax".

Yet, Fritz London is still about the super-coolest physicist.

NIF has got (with a little help from us) several times the fusion energy out compared to light energy in, but wall-plug efficiency is still something like 1%, partly because the flashtube pumps emit wide spectrum light, little of which is coupled into the laser glass. Pumping with semiconductor lasers would couple better.

Still, it's a long shot to generate power this way.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

Unlimited energy is unlimited waste heat. Dissipating that waste heat takes more energy and appreciable mass flows. Making small scale electronics more energy efficient isn't usually motivated by energy saving, but by desire to spend as little money and space as possible on heat sinks.

But so far impracticable for anything smaller than a star.

It wasn't a hoax. It was a set of unexplained results, which - as far as I know - still haven't been explained

But he didn't say anything about low-energy nuclear fusion. The only version I know about it is

And it stars off with the wrong concept. You want a continuous process, not a series of very high energy implosions.

It was very exciting news the Pons and Fleischmann, there was great disappointment when others couldn't reproduce the results of the generated heat, whether that's to due with the palladium or so on.

Then later CANR/LENR address a number of accounts of either making heat or particularly the creating helium from hydrogen, that of course was the great claim of Pons and Flesichmann, making helium from hydrogen, transmuting the elements.

The idea I saw about cheap fusion was making a fusion reaction pulse, as an electromagnetic pulse, then just letting that pulse on out a magnet and it results electrical current, which seems a good way to get electricity from the electromagnetic pulse of a nuclear reaction.

The nuclear energy is much less explored its mechanisms, at least publicly, vis-a-vis kinetic energy and electrical energy.

The isotope chart is a lot different than the usual periodic chart of elements: it's a line.

There are lots of materials what make for conditions conducive to reaction, nuclear reaction, like the lattices and so on.

A usual enough idea is that "cold fusion" is like that, too, vis-a-vis accounts of sonoluminescence and the like.

US has had its time as world power. We are very close to a nuclear global war. Russia's Duma had already talked about nuking Kiev.

Exchanging nukes will likely become the new normal

Anyways, wildlife is thriving in the Chernobyl area.

I don't recall that claim ever being made. I'd met Fleischmann many years earlier (1972) when I was lowly post-doc at Southampton, and he was a professor of electrochemistry there, and I did distinguish between what he said (which wasn't much) and the demented commentary in the press.

People were looking for neutrons and helium, but I don't think that anybody found either.

And pigs might fly.

Don't be silly. Nuclear energy is about what happens inside nuclei, and what comes out are gamma rays, other nuclei and sub-atomic particles all of which (neutrinos excepted) are thoroughly detectable and well understood,

So what? That's the way it was taught when I was an undergraduate in the early 1960's. The idea of the "mass defect" had been around when my father was being taught in the 1930s.

Optimistic twaddle.

Generated by people who don't know what they are talking about.

Probably not.

Also unlikely. It would destroy a great deal of stuff that people have invested hugely in getting together and getting working.

Putin does over-egg his propaganda pudding.

Launch one nuke and you'll get nuked into a state where you can't do it again. Mutual assured destruction is designed to get rid of people who are silly enough to think that they can get away with it.

The radioactivity isn't good for them. We see the survivors who didn't have immediately lethal mutations.

rt.com suddenly wants to know if I am a bot for every page I select. So using it sucks I will wait for the nuke sounds...

Oh wait, anonymous browsing

What a world

Age limit?

Has that consideration ever stopped war-mongers?