Slashdot Mirror

Sweden actually had quite a few planes back in the days:
http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/9ac5499/en/max/1440/1800/Flygvapnet.gif?format=jpg%2Cpng%2Cgif&ctf=0?format=jpg,png,gif&loadexternal=1
alt: http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/9ac5499/en/max/1440/1800/Flygvapnet.gif

They have been scrapping lots of Viggens :(, should had given them to me instead.

Sweden actually had quite a few planes back in the days:
http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/9ac5499/en/max/1440/1800/Flygvapnet.gif?format=jpg%2Cpng%2Cgif&ctf=0?format=jpg,png,gif&loadexternal=1
alt: http://wapedia.mobi/thumb/9ac5499/en/max/1440/1800/Flygvapnet.gif

They have been scrapping lots of Viggens :(, should had given them to me instead.

Federal Reserve Notes "are authorized" by Section 411 of Title 12 of the United States Code. [2] They are issued to the Federal Reserve Banks "at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System". [2] The notes are then issued into circulation by the Federal Reserve Banks. [3] When the notes are issued into circulation they become liabilities of the Federal Reserve Banks [4] and "obligations of the United States".

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Federal_Reserve_notes

The Treasury can be involved, or the Federal Reserve can directly issue these notes, so exactly, it creates money out of NOTHING.

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Domestic_Violence_Offender_Gun_Ban#3.4

3. 4. Effects on law enforcement officers
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) sent a notice to every law enforcement agency when this law went into effect. Police officers with prior misdemeanor convictions of domestic violence from years earlier were no longer permitted to possess firearms under the new federal law. Several officers were fired for such past misdemeanor offenses. Several of the gun magazines printed a copy of this new ATF order at the time.

OpenOffice sucks, it's ok for the price I guess, but it sucks. The mods may mod me flamebait but it has bugs that would not have passed proper QA.

Example: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=56449

There are others I've had that I can't really remember in detail - I think I had some problems with Impress - when I ended certain bullet text entries with certain characters, weird stuff would happen - mades me wonder how screwed up the underlying code is.

Other options: http://wapedia.mobi/en/Office_suite?p=1

I've tried the eval version of Kingsoft Office and it does look quite like MS Office. I think they just need to make an Outlook compatible that works with Exchange and they would either be a great success or sued to oblivion by Microsoft ;).

this is why Apple are so secretive, to avoid the Osborne Effect.; consumers are quite well informed these days with so many gadget review sites carrying rumours of future product which causes them to delay buying. And, to placate apple fans, Nokia are often just as secretive, but people just don't care these days!!

Agreed. The Intrepid is a great museum, and one of my favorite places in the world. But it's very specifically a museum of durable things. Military aircraft and supersonic transports that are designed for all-weather.

The Space Shuttle is the very definition of a Hangar Queen. It takes tens of thousands of man hours of re-fitting for each flight. The tiles are delicate, and it's not really designed to be exposed to the elements long term. It might be able to be, but given it's track record, do we really want to risk it when there are only three remaining in existence?

Yes, they probably *could* get it into the hangar bay of the Intrepid, but given the shuttle's size, they may actually have to dismantle the ship to do so.

The Essex Class carrier has a deck elevator with dimensions of 60 ft x 34 ft. It's maximum load weight was 40,000 Lbs. The shuttle orbiter by comparison is 122.17 ft by 78.06 ft and weighs 151,205 lb.

In other words, the orbiter weighs in (empty) at triple the capacity of the Intrepid's elevators. Even if they didn't use the elevators and used some kind of crane instead, it's still 78.06 ft on it's smaller dimension vs the deck opening's larger dimension which is 60 ft.

They'd have to dismantle either the Intrepid or the orbiter to get it inside. Even if they did, the hangar deck is hardly climate controlled to begin with...

To use the Intrepid site, they'd either have to dismantle part of the ship to get it inside, then extensively retrofit it to provide a climate controlled environment, or they'd have to build a new facility on the Pier along side Intrepid just to house the Shuttle. The Intrepid gets most of it's operating budget from admissions, memberships, and the occasional grant. I don't think it's going to go away tomorrow, but I do get the distinct impression that compared to the Smithsonian, or the Kennedy Space Center (both government funded), it's hanging on my the margins.

The 500 year rule makes sense to me. These are invaluable pieces of human history. The Apollo Command Modules are in the same class. The National Air And Space Museum in D.C. makes sense as a location for one. They already have the Columbia module from Apollo 11, which I assume we would want to maintain to the same standards. However, they also already have the orbiter prototype Enterprise, so it seems to make more sense to spread the three remaining orbiters to allow as many people as possible to have access to them as possible. Perhaps one one at Kennedy Space Center, and one in Houston, and one on the West Coast somewhere?

New York City would allow millions of people to have access. And Intrepid is the premier aerospace site in the city. But it's just not equipped or funded for something like this.

The Aerospace museum at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base may also be appropriate, but it has a distinct military aerospace bias.

Likewise Vandenberg Air Force Base in California could be a great site, as it was almost a second launch site for the Shuttle. Having an orbiter wind up there permanently could be very apropos. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any museum or public exhibit at Vandenberg, which is a shame. Edwards Air Force Base (Secondary shuttle landing site) and White Sands Space Harbor in New Mexico could be appropriate for similar reasons. But again, they're both military bases, and not terribl

Star Trek had cloaking devices in the mid-80's, and it was almost certainly the inspiration for WC cloaked ships being unable to fire while cloaked.

Going the slightly pedantic route here, but I believe TOS first made reference to cloaked vessel -- so, that would be in 1966. They couldn't fire when cloaked either.

Wing Commander is way too late to the game for that one.

Beta version 10.1 of Flash now http://wapedia.mobi/en/Privacy_mode integrates with the privacy modes of Internet Explorer, Chrome and Firefox so that your browser (if it's one of those 3) can manage those flash cookies.

It took literally years of pressure on Adobe to get them to expose Flash's cookies to the browser, but it's (beta) here now.

Disclaimer: I am a planetary scientist but do not work directly on the martian meteorites.

1) We know that the rocks are from Mars because they all have consistent isotope ratios between the various meteorites that are inconsistent with those isotope ratios on Earth but consistent with isotopic ratios on Mars
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Neutron_activation_analysis
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6T-41WBDHD-8&_coverDate=10%2F31%2F2000&_alid=445411040&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_qd=1&_cdi=5823&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000053194&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1495569&md5=1c1b0d04dba7f06365b072655bef68b3 (May need a subscription)

2) The age(s) of the possible fossils are greater than the time the meteorites have been on Earth. Again, this can be calculated using various isotope ratios. In essence, these things formed while the rocks were still on Mars.

3) I agree with your discomfort with the word "prove." Most scientific study is based on the Popper philosophy of disproving something rather than proving its opposite.

A) The new instrumentation and techniques being used on these meteorites are greatly advancing our understanding of them. The press announcement that AH84001 might have evidence of life was premature (what we call "science by press release"), but the publications by the team were certainly good and valid work, whether they are falsified or not...

B) The scientific word "prove" is more about the lack of any valid competing hypotheses. If you can't come up with a reasonable alternative explanation for the data, you have to accept the presented explanation.

Oh, yeah--no FM either.

Say what? Please try one search before posting nonsense. Thanks.

Jacques Toubon

Also: " The Toubon Law (full name: law 94-665 of 4 August 1994 relating to usage of the French language), is a law of the French government mandating the use of the French language in official government publications, in all advertisements, in all workplaces, in commercial contracts, in some other commercial communication contexts, in all government-financed schools, and some other contexts."

CC.

Oh and explosive was 90 grams of hexogen (RDX), http://wapedia.mobi/en/Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine

** ? x ** y is in Ada, Bash, COBOL, Fortran, FoxPro, Gnuplot, OCaml, Perl, PL/I, Python, Rexx, Ruby, SAS, ABAP, Haskell (for floating-point exponents), Turing, and VHDL, at least. Get with the times. http://wapedia.mobi/en/Exponentiation?t=11.#12.

Both? Anyways if thorium is plentiful... this story is FUD...
http://pic.srv104.wapedia.mobi/thumb/cee614565/en/max/1440/900/Relative_abundance_of_elements.png?format=jpg,png,gif

Uranium is almost as common as tin and lead...

Graph

The problem is that the US refuses to build breeder reactors. Much of the world will have no problems at all. The US is simply throwing out a good 80% of the fuel (at incredible costs btw). This is completely a political issue not a technical one.

Also, we sure as fuck won't run out anytime soon. As shown by the pretty graph. Right now uranium is incredifucking cheap. If we raise what we are willing to pay even a tiny tiny bit we will have much more fuel than we know what to do with. Also it will still be much cheaper than any other flexible mass power plant. I'd be comfortable betting a million dollars that we won't run out by 2013 lol.

This is pure FUD.

Btw peak anything is real... buut we'll have figured out fusion loooong before we run out of uranium and other radioactive crap so it doesn't matter.

Why don't you just say that Disney has "stolen" from you?

Because Disney is not the only company that lines its pockets by parasitizing from the public domain, it's just the worst offender. I anticipated your question, and answered it in my original post.

I find it funny that you are complaining that you can't get free access to something that wasn't yours in the first place.

If no one was allowed free access to anything they didn't create, Disney would have been unable to create most of its works in the first place.

It's not like someone is going to randomly create Mickey Mouse.

This comment displays a lack of understanding of copyright's reason for existence. Copyright exists to encourage creators to share their ideas by giving them a limited monopoly on those ideas. To extend copyright's duration indefinitely defeats the purpose of having copyrights at all.

Indeed, this may explain the rationale of those who choose to ignore the existence of copyright law.

way way back, IBM did some stuff with Java and agents... http://wapedia.mobi/en/Aglets

Boy this is a hard topic to discuss without feeling like you're inadvertently supporting one side or the other.

I'll just preface this by saying this is a topic that has interested me for many years, but especially in light of 9/11, etc. I do not pretend to be any kind of expert on this (who could?)

So:

Source? (other than Fox News, of course)

I was all set to say "how could you have missed all these news quotations saying the he wants to blow up Israel?!?!" But after doing some digging: It turns out that this is the first time I've heard anyone make a genuine distinction between what CNN / FOX / etc. keep quoting and what was actually translated from his original speech:

Our dear Imam (referring to Ayatollah Khomeini) said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement. We cannot compromise over the issue of Palestine. Is it possible to create a new front in the heart of an old front. This would be a defeat and whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.

Source: http://wapedia.mobi/en/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel (Oct. 26, 2005)

Now: I am not supporting this guy (I can't overstate this), nor am I in support of Iran's totalitarian government, but it does appear that the press seem to have reinterpreted his speeches in words that will rile up Western populations.

His argument seems to be a common one from that region:

- Israel is a state and government which he and many others do not recognize, but which Western governments do.
- Israel as a state was created by Western governments following WWII and placed in what used to be known as Palestine, thus his (and many others) continuous reference to "occupied Palestine."
- He considers the state to be a fiction, and wants the Islamic world to work together to remove that state from the region, essentially returning it to the Palestinians.

I could only find this translation regarding his statements about the Holocaust:

The illegitimate Zionist regime is an outcome of the Holocaust... a political and power-seeking network claimed to be the advocate for one group of the victims, and sought reparations for their blood. [This network] ruled that the survivors of this particular group of victims must receive compensation - and part of this compensation was to establish the Zionist regime in the land of Palestine. On this pretext, they attacked Palestine and, after massacring the [indigenous] people and driving them from their homes, they occupied their homeland and created the Zionist regime - in order to ensure that no regional power would emerge in the Islamic lands except for the West, [because] Islamic civilization and culture have the dynamic potential to threaten their interests, which were based on oppression and thirst for power. These principles and philosophy comprise the Zionist regime.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel#Statement_on_Holocaust_Remembrance_Day

So again: I don't see in that quote that he's "denying" the holocaust. (And yes: I know it's out of context, and it's from Wikipedia) He's saying that an "outcome of the Holocaust" was that they made these claims for reparation and compensation, and that they achieved this (the creation of Israel within Palestinian land) via less-than-acceptable means.

The fact that you clarified this particular oft-misquoted statemen

Yes, and I gave you chapter and verse why it's useless. You did not respond with anything quantitative

Ah, but you sure did. Lots of numbers. You must be right. Don't worry, we don't need to see any references on where you're getting your data. Only scientists worry about that sort of thing. Keep spouting numbers.

If you wish to answer in the lanuage[sic] of physics and thermodynamics, I'm all for continuing this discussion.

Dear God I'm not. You've gotten things wrong from your very first post. You don't know how the charging system works. You think the battery runs down to zero and then is useless. You think a lot of things that let me know that you probably haven't been within 100 yards of a Prius, yet you know all about them.

You claim a lack of scientific rigor, then give me numbers on efficiency that have no provenance. You have quoted no sources. Which tips me off that you're no scientist at all. I even told you that you were pulling these numbers out of thin air and you still provided no references.

And you continue to miss the point. Your statement is that the battery system is useless. I showed you that it was not. You state things that are absolute absurdities, such as this:

But in this real world, is we assume the typical 90%/80%/90% efficiencies, the system only has a 65% efficiency, and that's assuming you're going down with no friction or air resistance.

80% efficiency in a gasoline car??? You are mad. That's higher than the maximum Carnot efficiency for a gasoline engine! Real world numbers are far less, typically for a car about 25%. (See what I did there? I showed you where I'm getting my numbers from. Try it sometime.) So in any event, it's no small wonder you don't understand what I'm talking about. You don't comprehend basic physics.

So I'm done discussing this with you. I believe I've encountered my very first physics troll. You couldn't possibly be that stupid and still be able to work a computer without getting pudding in the keys so I have come to the conclusion that you're merely trolling.

The big thing to note is that we are not talking about the white meter system that we have had in the UK for decades, this gives you cheaper electricity at night for powering storage heaters and the like — although I have known people also run washing machines, etc, off them.

The big new innovation is getting appliances to switch off for short periods, eg when the adverts come on in a popular TV programme many kettles are switched on. Also when a major generator trips out it can take time to bring something else big on-line, the smaller quick-start generators are costly. Currently this is done by bringing in more expensive generators for short periods, also large industrial users (eg Aluminium smelters) will get cut at very short notice.

So the idea is to switch off your freezer/washing-machine for 5-30 minutes so that other more important appliances do not need to be switched off. Thus we all gain at little inconvenience.

However it is something that is to the benefit of everyone if we work together. Those freetards who do not cooperate get the benefits without the cost or inconvenience, but this happens elsewhere, eg: vaccination, if most of the population is vaccinated against mumps then the best strategy for an individual is to not get vaccinated and thus avoid the small risk of vaccination side effect; however if everyone does this then mumps becomes endemic again.

Come on guys - we are civilised and know how to act in the common good!

I'm sure there will be a way round this. make the radio station itself run on a shoestring budget, and have the profits made by a controlling organisation - since after all they pay a percentage of revenue, just ensure the revenue is tiny!

surely it's about time the OSS movement learned how to do HollyWood Accounting

try this link from your mobile phone:
http://wapedia.mobi/en/

That way you get the whole thing, up-to-date, and with no trouble or major memory usage.

Do you have a link detailing those Russian reactors changes I can read? Have you considered where that presumption comes from? Automatic fail-safe are one of the design recommendations the nuclear industry made for itself then ignored in the design of the *new* AP-1000. Current reactor facilities have very limited automation, and that's US reactors, forget Russian reactors.

I don't have a link to it, but I do know that an international fund created by donations from private citizens and countries have spent close to 1 billion to help implement safety upgrades by 2000 or so. OF course there is the Wikipedia page but I don't particularly like referencing them. The IAEA has verified the safety upgrades in various press releases over the years. This gets a little complicated to track because the former soviet union states kept their own reactors so all of the information is spread out a little.

I also think you/we might be misunderstanding the AP1000 operational. It didn't ignore the fail safe, it revised how it works and relied a lot on water pressure just to keep the reaction alive. In short, it's a self contained unit during the cool down phase requiring no alternative pumps or power for three days. The fail safe is in the design in which the reactor material is dropped into a containment vessel to be extinguished as it uses stream and condensation to protect the core during this time.

Of course I may be understanding that wrong. The information from the site is a little vague and general but the passive failure mode has been around for a while in the genII stations and considered safe.

OT: Hut 33 is a brilliant comedy by the BBC set during the era of code-cracking Bletchley Park http://wapedia.mobi/en/Hut_33

Ah, found it here . It turns out the ref is from Kurzweil (shudder) and is for price per computation, not exactly Moore's law but a similar conceit and arguably a better metric.

is it grey, and is it gooey? in which case, it looks like the end of the world is nigh!

Polish Railroads stil use the Odra 1305(produced in 1973) computer to controll the trafic on one of the stations - Wroclaw Brochow.

http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odra_1305#Ostatni_komputer_Odra
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Odra_(computer)

There are also old non-SI ones myria- my 10^4 and myrio- mo 10^-4

- and for even more edification check out http://wapedia.mobi/en/Myriametre
which includes the amusing bronto, groucho, and proposals for this lot :
10^27 xona X
10^30 weka W
10^33 vunda V
10^36 uda U
10^39 treda TD
10^42 sorta S
10^45 rinta R
10^48 quexa Q
10^51 pepta PP
10^54 ocha O
10^57 nena N
10^60 minga MI
10^63 luma L

10-^27 xonto x
10-^30 wekto w
10-^33 vunkto v
10-^36 unto u
10-^39 trekto td
10-^42 sotro s
10-^45 rimto r
10-^48 quekto q
10-^51 pekro pk
10-^54 otro o
10-^57 nekto nk
10-^60 mikto mi
10-^63 lunto l

If enough webpages keep on copying this list, it'll probably get picked up and used and eventually become accepted!

"The first, and only, successful interception was on September 13, 1985. The F-15 took off from Edwards Air Force Base, climbed to 80,000 feet and vertically launched the missile at the Solwind P78-1, a US gamma ray spectroscopy satellite orbiting at 555 km, which was launched in 1979."

Sure, in some cases. In this case I find it hard to condemn China for making the same mistakes we made while trying to develop the same technology. The US is also partly to blame for the mistake China made, we could have shared the data and technology we developed.

This will happen again, take Iran, it has a great need to defend it self from the US (we've invade it's neighbors, we keep threatening it, call them names, and generally being nasty). Iran also has the capability to design and manufacture missiles. How long before they find the need to perform a test of a key defense system? Also, take North Korea, they already have long range missiles, we can only hope China will share their data with them so they don't have to repeat the test.

Like you said, "I don't know Approach...". You should find a way to look at it from who the TARGET audience is. Home users of a database don't want nor NEED to become developers. Lotus Approach took me about 2 weeks to get really comfortable. Access, never, for me. Filemaker, ehh. It was too developer-aimed, IMO.

Lotus Approach IS used by some serious development types of work, mainly as a front end to Oracle, MySQL, mssql, and some 10 or 15 other db back ends. The data and forms are separate, and have always been, unlike what, Access, which took YEARS for ms to "get it".

Approach is WYSIWYG, so right from the word GO no one NEED be a developer.

NO ONE should be using spreadsheets to do non-statistical storage of data. This happened because for years either the tools didn't exist to appease the desk-side data analyst-- they had to rely on IT. The other part is some developers were lazy or territorial, and LOTS of companies and IT staff are mixed on hoard the data (not just from protection of data, but for IT job security), or share the data (so IT can concentrate on OTHER more important tasks than to risk backlash of "THAT'S not the report I ASKED FOR...".

The other problem is that ms popularized excel, and businesses did, too. LOTS of bad habits grew up around the kludge excel is. It is an abominable excuse for a database wannabe.

Approach lets people GET WORK DONE. People who need databases and never before saw one get sample database tables and applications in Approach. They can reverse engineer these and customize them.

The biggest drawbacks of Approach:

-- no runtime executable (royalty free, or otherwise)
-- not a big enough widget set (compared to FMP, Access, et al...
-- poor or non-existent ERD
-- only runs on windoze
-- not separable from Lotus SmartSuite (except the Japanese version IS separate...)
-- only in maintenance/patch mode, since IBM is SITTING on Lotus SmartSuite, letting it die a slow, worthless death, as if even IBM's OWN want it to die, despite their "10 million S/S users..."
-- not built-in way to record and reuse queries; but users created this and sell solutions

Pluses:

- I use it as a front end to my Linux & win98-based MySQL engine
- I am writing a screenplay dialog and script tracking database
- I can build in minutes or hours what would take me and MOST non-developers days or WEEKS to do in access
- It's GREAT for an ad hoc WYSIWYG prototyping tool

You admit you don't know Approach, yet you could almost single-handedly dissuade most readers here from even considering it. Approach -- if IBM opened up its code-- could almost single-handedly kill Rekall, Kexi, and a slew of others that still retain the giant framework, geek-appeal that most END USERS will run from. Approach is good enough that user- and developer-based solutions are sold all the time.

C'mon man, check out Approach.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_SmartSuite

http://xpertss.com/

http://orderdeskxpert.3dcartstores.com/Order-Center_c_1.html

http://www.experts-exchange.com/Software/Office_Productivity/Office_Suites/Lotus_SmartSuite/Lotus_Approach/Q_22816555.html

http://jabrown.customer.netspace.net.au/approach/index.htm

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Lotus_Approach

http://www-306.ibm.com/software/lotus/products/smartsuite/approachfeatures.html

What COULD happen but isn't is that IBM could:

-- partner with Sun/OpenOffice.org
-- open the code to Kexi, t

http://wapedia.mobi/en/

You don't need a bigger PDA. Use http://en.wapedia.mobi/wapedia:Start on your Mobilephone or Wireless-enabled pda...