membrane are too massive to operate in that
frequency range.
So I agree if the amplitudes are extreme, but otherwise I doubt it.
--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], tel:+358-50-5756111
student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front
openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175
CIRC with RSBC and gaining some extra room on
the disc, getting rid of the subchannels, a more intelligent coding of
disc addresses... Breaking compatibility wouldn't be too useful, but it
sure would be fun. Now you simply can't do it.
--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], tel:+358
fits people's idea of what is right and what is
wrong - information, if forcibly delivered, is a Bad Thing. The legislative
aspect is what probably kills that line of thought, at least in this forum.
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], gsm: +358-50-5756111
student/math+cs/helsinki
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Trei, Peter wrote:
Just how dangerous an extra 25+% dioxin is I don't know.
Only it's a lot more harm than you'd think, if that 25% is concentrated
somewhere along the human food chain. Which it seems to be.
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED], gsm: +358-50
in a time where few widespread,
consumer visible applications exist.
Intimidation and censorship suffers from the law of declining returns.
[...] The same is true of governmental efforts to control cryptography.
Agreed. Not reassured, though...
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
