Ashoat

Do you have a source for this claim? It seems rather dubious. EDIT After researching a little bit, you are indeed correct that Firefox 3 is better at CSS than IE 7. However, IE 8 is about the same.

Hmm... I'll probably have to put in a work-around in my signup script, as it usually auto-deletes duplicate accounts. Give me a few days. Why delete your account? First of all, that would get rid of your posts, which may be a valuable resource for somebody with the same problem. And second of all, that would take some work from my end and probably some database corruption to deal with. What do you have to gain from locking yourself out anyways? Requests for account deletion always intrigue me.

The main problem is that this person doesn't own square.com. If they owned square.com, they would be easily have enough money to purchase paid hosting. The cause of this whole problem is that this person is either illiterate or does not pay much attention to large-sized font in bold.

What theoretical reasons? The only things I can think of that known theories can only tell us in this argument are, 1) Matter-antimatter reactions can produce a lot of energy, and 2) Producing antimatter would be result in a net gain of energy. Why do you think that matter-antimatter reactions could be a future energy source? Why are you arguing for this instead of, for instance, harvesting energy from supernova explosions?

Looks like you signed up with duplicate accounts. There is an account with username "cinerx" and domain "bookstore.heliohost.org" that has the same IP as you. The script auto-blocked your account creation and gave you a fake success message to keep you from trying again.

I live in Kirkland, WA. Used to live in Redmond Please tell me the email you signed up with.

If they don't interact through the strong nuclear nuclear force, we can't really get that much energy out of them. Furthermore, from what I understand neutrinos are impossible to contain and have an incredibly small mass (hence a small energy output). I argue that this will not be "solved". There really seems to be no rational reason to argue that antimatter will be the energy of the future.

Everyone, please note that HTML and CSS are not programming languages. Rather, they are markup languages.

Sorry, I can't find your account anywhere. Was the account creation process really fast? Did it take less than five seconds or so (on broadband) for the success page to load?

I'm not sure that MySQL is compatible with ODBC, but if it is - all the more power to you. For the record, we are running MySQL 5.

You're thinking of an "anti-atom". Matter is not neccessarily composed purely of atoms. You could get energy from anihilating a positron with an electron. However, beta decay is an extremely rare from of radioactivity. Most of it is alpha decay - beta decay is extremely dangerous and rare, and anyways only produces minute amounts of positrons which end up anihilating almost right after they are formed. Furthermore, we have no reliable, containable, replenishible, and readily available source of positron beta decay anyways.

Please tell me where "Christianity" states that the world is only a few thousand years old.

Don't forget Java applets, Flash and ActionScript, and for IE, ActiveX.

My next step is to put the old server and Stevie into a DNS cluster, install my free hosting management and signup script on Stevie, and then switch Stevie to be the one handling new signups. After that, I will give a three month ultimatum to existing accounts that they must request a transfer to Stevie or their accounts will be discarded. I will email everyone and put a notice in cPanel. We auto-delete unused accounts after three months anyways, so if an account is being used the webmaster should notice that we are moving. Please only click the banner ads if you are interested. Otherwise you're frauding Google and its advertisers. And no, the moderator applications are not out yet. Thanks for your concern, though.

In the words of Stevie: Great Success! http://stevie.heliohost.org/

I really don't see a contradiction between "religion"'s viewpoint on this subject and science's viewpoint on this subject.

Yup.

Can't hurt, I'm sure. Just make sure to avoid resorting to spam.

Read the information you get at the end of your signup next time.

No need for personal insults.

I can't find your account in the database. You probably signed up with duplicate accounts.

I can't find your account in the database. You are installing duplicate accounts, or somebody with your IP already has a HelioHost account.

Browse wiki carefully and you will see this statement. It's the foremost highest energy obtainable on Earth now, twice higher than nuclear fusion. And finally ok..... considering the technology now, anti-matter is inpractical, but let me emphasize again on this. TIME decides everything that I mentioned. IN FUTURE, we human might have an idea, of how to produce anti-matter or harvest it from somewhere else with low energy cost, so in the end X would be lesser than Y. As simple as that. But when can we human do that? That's an uncertainty, and I believe we might not be able to do it even after the end of the world. BUT what I'm saying here is based on assumption, that we human can do it with low energy cost, remember, ASSUMPTION. to diggsey: If I'm not mistaken, a way to produce anti-matter is from nuclear reaction such as beta-decay and others. If we could collect both energy liberated from the beta-decay and also the positrons, we could make use of both the energy source and make our lost of energy minimal. And from what I've learn during high school, I remember there's quite a lot of nuclear reaction that produces anti-matter as by-products, just that we human not able to collect the anti-matter that escaped into thin air and cancelled-out with matter. IF we could fix all these imperfections of anti-matter, we could make full use of it. AND AGAIN, I stress on this again, what I'm saying is based on assumption that all of these problems can be overcome. THAT WOULD BE BILLION YEARS LATER. For the meanwhile, what we could do is research more on anti-matter to minimize the energy/finance cost of it. Look, I am not denying that such a situation could be possible. What I am saying, however, is that it is extremely improbable. Nuclear fusion's fuel is readily available. Easily twice as available as antimatter. Probably in the range of 10,000 times more available. Why would we use antimatter? If we "run out" of hydrogen we can just steal some from the gas giants. Antimatter is hard to obtain and difficult to use. Hydrogen is easy to obtain, and while significantly harder to use than uranium for nuclear fission it is way easier to use than antimatter. Why would people use antimatter? You can say that it "could" happen, OK. But it could happen that a huge asteroid filled with solid oil starts to orbit the Earth, and we get all our future energy needs from there. Or possibly, we stop using electrical energy altogether and decide to go back to the steam engine days. Or maybe the Moon will crash into the Earth and we'll all die. You need a convincing argument on why this is a feasible solution. Just saying "it could happen" is not proving anything.

Posting Standard has been removed because it is now identical to Ads Standard - Ads Standard no longer has ads.

Would that really make that much money?