ah but that can easily be solved by encasing the fuel outlet with a mesh of some sort- lets fuel past but not chunks of foam. besides, is it really that much better to have chunks fall off on the outside and shatter the heat shield? I imagine that if chunks somehow clogged the fuel line they would just eject the tank, use the shuttles remaining thrusters to keep a stable trajectory and glide back to Earth.
that is like duct taping your coffee drink on top of the car because it would be "safer" than just leaving it out there- to continue the analogy [a bad one I know] wouldn't it make sense to just take the cup inside the car instead of duct taping it to the roof?
Preliminary analysis of images taken by onboard cameras revealed expected "popcorning" foam loss during ascent but none that appeared to strike the orbiter.
the fact that the shuttle *not* exploding/crashing etc. is big news should be a warning sign to NASA about this foam... I mean what the hell is it doing on the OUTSIDE of the tank in the first place? wouldn't it be safer/smarter to have it INSIDE the tank its self? I mean the whole purpose of the foam is to keep the fuel nice and cool, which keeps the pressure down etc. but it also means that behind that foam where the axtual structure of the tank is very very cold. so cold in fact that I am sure it has some effect on the metal alloys in the thing, the same metals keeping it from coming apart. so putting the foam inside the tank its self would keep the metal structure warmer which would keep the alloys from becoming brittle and there would be absolutely no risk of that foam crashing into something critical like the wing for example. just an idea.
somehow MS still manages to have enough quality over the free alerternatives that they stay in business.
no, they stay in business because people are familiar with them and have no desire to even comprehend the existence of alternatives.
If you think otherwise, I offer that you may not understand exactly what "quality product" means.
WTF? so Internet Explorer's abysmal CSS/W3C complience means it is a quality product? XP and other flavors of windows having the administrator account as default as well as other HORRIBLE, UNSPEAKABLE security policies means it is a quality product? I am starting to wonder what your idea of quality is...
What seems to be the sticking point here is compatibility in regard to ODF. Microsoft developed the competing openXML format to be essentually compatible with its own products [surprise surprise] while not releasing it under a fully permissive license, currently Microsoft has a covenant not to sue over the standard
Licensing
The Office Open XML format was initially made available under a free and perpetual license.
As there was concern that free and open source software (FOSS) could not use the format under the proposed license[15], Microsoft provided a covenant not to sue. The covenant received a mixed reception, with some in the FOSS community identifying problems[17] and others (such as Lawrence Rosen) endorsing it.
Microsoft also added the Office Open XML format to their Microsoft Open Specification Promise in which Microsoft irrevocably promises not to assert any Microsoft Necessary Claims against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing or distributing any implementation to the extent it conforms to a Covered Specification
ODF doesnt have that kind of potential limitation, nobody had to promise not to sue everyone over using the ODF, Microsoft's license required such "restraint" can you see where this is going? Microsoft's open xml format isnt truly open because they filed it in a way that the only reason people wouldnt get sued was because of their "mercy."
Why should ODF reguire legislation to be passed in order for it to be successful?
because when you have a company convicted of monopoly in many areas it doesnt make sense to confine our government to use just MS's software because they are comfortable using it and ignorant of any choice. they have shown themselves to consistently ignore other options regardless of the benefits so if legislating them to consider alternatives improves things then why not?
Would you know an open document format if it bit you on the butt?
in short yes, it always seems to work. it is the one that has no threat of anyone being sued for using it.
Can you explain how the licensing of ODF better than Microsoft's OpenXML?
yes, observe:
under licensing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenXML]
The Office Open XML format was initially made available under a free and perpetual license[14].
As there was concern that free and open source software (FOSS) could not use the format under the proposed license[15], Microsoft provided a covenant not to sue.
a covenant not to sue isnt really open is it? the FOSS/competition dont need a format with the scant possibility that Microsoft will abuse their position and frankly I dont trust them to do anything other than copy, embrace and inevitably destroy. besides, I dont know about you but I want to own my data, my computer and any software I have on it and that means no Microsoft products unless they GPL every last line of code in it.
The big problem here is that we have politicians deciding the case who are not tech savvy, I mean looking at the last time ODF was killed in bills it isnt comforting when you hear things like this from them:
But during the ensuing policy debate, Betzold and other politicians quickly felt overwhelmed by the technical jargon presented by each side. "I wouldn't know an open document format if it bit me on the butt,"
so you have a situation where Microsoft being public relations geniuses are believed by the politicians who in all likeliness dont have much experience outside MS's products. the old it's good enough for us because we're familiar with it still applies as disturbing as that is
there is only one solution to this madness and that is to use evil plan #236, yes that one- where the entirety of slashdot bands together and does some of our own patent trolling. slaghter this system with its own sword- call it patent slashdotting.
ok then I'll patent a critical gene that this guy has in his DNA and pull a MAFIAA on him if he reproduces. then have genes renamed "files" and if he ever tries to hire a hooker it'll be illegal file sharing:)
Why? What will this matter? Joe will think that Torvalds invented the system! When in reality he just CLONED an existing system? And the true is that Linuzzz today is NOT AT ALL "pure"! Lots of cash is injected everyday by IBM, Sun, Google , MS and houndred of companies! THE ERA OF THE PURE LINUZZZ IS OVERR!!!!!
sounds a lot like a troll but I'll bite. Linus did invent Linux, it isnt merely a clone as you think, it is a completely seperate/distinct OS- in fact there isnt a single line of code from Unix/Minix in the kernel. as for Linux not being "pure" it doesnt matter if the work was paid to be done or not, the code is still free to use. It can still be shared as it was intended and just because IBM and others use the code for what they want and pay people to improve it doesnt mean it isnt still free to share. now Ballmer about your spelling ability, Linux is spelled L-i-n-u-x not linuzz
this is actually an oportunity to raise their "status" for Joe Average, that doesn't even know what the hell Linuzzz is.
frankly I would rather joe average get to know about Linux by doing his own research rather than being spoon fed by Microsoft. In fact, it wouldnt surprise me if all Joe average got from this was that Microsoft is the innovator and Linux is the one behind... it just makes me cringe
The current rumor, which comes in time for the summer conference circuit, may be different. It claims an experiment at the Tevatron has found a peak twice as high as the previous rumors' bumps. And unlike the other rumors, this one includes details: the new particle's mass, for instance, which fits within theoretical bounds on the standard model Higgs. Some versions include a decay chain, which describes what the new particle turned into as the experiment progressed, and which may be consistent with the standard model's predictions.
the higgs particle is one of the last yet undiscovered predictions of the standard model.
But what happens if the Higgs turns out to be just right? Well, then the standard model predicts that you'd need a machine roughly a quadrillion times more powerful than the LHC to find anything new.
if we find the higgs it makes the standard model more convincing as far as its predictive power but by no means means it is correct.
what exactly are we talking here in regards to these defense in europe- because if it is that new fangled starwars like defense net Bush was talking about I hear the success rate is about 3/8
Well, glad *that's* finally solved. Now, on to cancer...
well actually now that we have this super nano glue we can make better computer chips which make faster computers which biochemists can use to simulate proteins/enzymes involved in cancer so that is the idea... but really the spiderman thing does seem kind of silly now until you realize the awesomeness of swinging around places:)
everyone talks about the actual coding sequence but not much about epigenetics- whether or not certain cytosine residues are methylated and what not- quite important if you think about it- put the whole sequence back together and certain genes dont quite work the same way. so really counting all of that it would take quite a significant amount of more information to truely be able to reconstruct the genome as it was. then again only about 3% is methylated in that fashion...
that is completely true- I was just trying to make the point that the reason behind it not being used might have more to do with aesthetics than the paractical considerations of using solar cells in conjunction with mirrors/lenses etc.
they do use mirrors in commercial solar facilities but as far as the home is concerned, the mirror/lens has to be able to focus a large area of light- to do rhat with a mirror for example, you need a mirror/sheet of metal or whatever as large as the area of light you are focusing- a 10 meter diameter area of light focused to a 1 meter diameter beam on to a solar array is equivilent to 100 suns- but in that case you need a mirror that big- this isnt very pretty on homes as in that case you would need a way to focus the light falling on a much larger area than the roof to produce more power than a roof covered with solar cells other ways.
The Spectrolab group experimented with concentrator multijunction solar cells that use high intensities of sunlight, the equivalent of 100s of suns, concentrated by lenses or mirrors. Significantly, the multijunction cells can also use the broad range of wavelengths in sunlight much more efficiently than single-junction cells.
when the article talks about hundreds or thousands of suns, it means they used mirrors and lenses to concentrate the light that falls on a much larger area to then fall on the solar cells. this leads to the solar cells generating a lot more electrical power and thus makes it more economical to produce power from soalr energy as compared to not using mirrors or lenses to focus light onto the panals.
Suppose I just dump a bunch of Algae in a pond, then scoop off the top flotsam once a week, dry it in the sun, and then burn it?
Would this be more or less than 40% efficient?
not even remotely. plants are efficient at converting photons to an immediate energy source but the vast majority is used to keep the existing tissues alive and functioning. esimates I have seen for the efficiency of converting light, CO2 and water into biomass ranges from less than 1% to 5% depending on the species.
if you can install the ntfs write driver support then yes, you can do surgery on XP. you essentually have root [admin] powers when you use a live cd or likely the wizpy so you can do just about anything- including accidentally crippling XP. even better though would be just to extract what you need, nuke XP and install linux from the thing like a live cd:)
Showing an image seems to give a false sense of security to the end user. Would it not be better to teach people to take SSL certs seriously and to verify the cert matches the site the user thinks they should be accessing?
and that is why they also tested people's observational skills- researchers observed people's interaction on a set up computer that would direct people to a site that had some significant difference compared to the real site and few refused to continue doing business as usual... the biggest problem with the whole thing is that no matter how good the verification/anti phishing efforts get they need to take the user into account- not everyone pays attention to what the click or where they surf/do their banking. until people are educated in basic security practices these plugins, certification and verification might as well not exist.
Slashdot Mirror
ah but that can easily be solved by encasing the fuel outlet with a mesh of some sort- lets fuel past but not chunks of foam. besides, is it really that much better to have chunks fall off on the outside and shatter the heat shield? I imagine that if chunks somehow clogged the fuel line they would just eject the tank, use the shuttles remaining thrusters to keep a stable trajectory and glide back to Earth.
that is like duct taping your coffee drink on top of the car because it would be "safer" than just leaving it out there- to continue the analogy [a bad one I know] wouldn't it make sense to just take the cup inside the car instead of duct taping it to the roof?
the fact that the shuttle *not* exploding/crashing etc. is big news should be a warning sign to NASA about this foam... I mean what the hell is it doing on the OUTSIDE of the tank in the first place? wouldn't it be safer/smarter to have it INSIDE the tank its self? I mean the whole purpose of the foam is to keep the fuel nice and cool, which keeps the pressure down etc. but it also means that behind that foam where the axtual structure of the tank is very very cold. so cold in fact that I am sure it has some effect on the metal alloys in the thing, the same metals keeping it from coming apart. so putting the foam inside the tank its self would keep the metal structure warmer which would keep the alloys from becoming brittle and there would be absolutely no risk of that foam crashing into something critical like the wing for example. just an idea.
no, they stay in business because people are familiar with them and have no desire to even comprehend the existence of alternatives.
WTF? so Internet Explorer's abysmal CSS/W3C complience means it is a quality product? XP and other flavors of windows having the administrator account as default as well as other HORRIBLE, UNSPEAKABLE security policies means it is a quality product? I am starting to wonder what your idea of quality is...
ODF doesnt have that kind of potential limitation, nobody had to promise not to sue everyone over using the ODF, Microsoft's license required such "restraint" can you see where this is going? Microsoft's open xml format isnt truly open because they filed it in a way that the only reason people wouldnt get sued was because of their "mercy."
because when you have a company convicted of monopoly in many areas it doesnt make sense to confine our government to use just MS's software because they are comfortable using it and ignorant of any choice. they have shown themselves to consistently ignore other options regardless of the benefits so if legislating them to consider alternatives improves things then why not?
in short yes, it always seems to work. it is the one that has no threat of anyone being sued for using it.
yes, observe: under licensing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenXML]
a covenant not to sue isnt really open is it? the FOSS/competition dont need a format with the scant possibility that Microsoft will abuse their position and frankly I dont trust them to do anything other than copy, embrace and inevitably destroy. besides, I dont know about you but I want to own my data, my computer and any software I have on it and that means no Microsoft products unless they GPL every last line of code in it.
so you have a situation where Microsoft being public relations geniuses are believed by the politicians who in all likeliness dont have much experience outside MS's products. the old it's good enough for us because we're familiar with it still applies as disturbing as that is
there is only one solution to this madness and that is to use evil plan #236, yes that one- where the entirety of slashdot bands together and does some of our own patent trolling. slaghter this system with its own sword- call it patent slashdotting.
ok then I'll patent a critical gene that this guy has in his DNA and pull a MAFIAA on him if he reproduces. then have genes renamed "files" and if he ever tries to hire a hooker it'll be illegal file sharing :)
sounds a lot like a troll but I'll bite. Linus did invent Linux, it isnt merely a clone as you think, it is a completely seperate/distinct OS- in fact there isnt a single line of code from Unix/Minix in the kernel. as for Linux not being "pure" it doesnt matter if the work was paid to be done or not, the code is still free to use. It can still be shared as it was intended and just because IBM and others use the code for what they want and pay people to improve it doesnt mean it isnt still free to share. now Ballmer about your spelling ability, Linux is spelled L-i-n-u-x not linuzz
frankly I would rather joe average get to know about Linux by doing his own research rather than being spoon fed by Microsoft. In fact, it wouldnt surprise me if all Joe average got from this was that Microsoft is the innovator and Linux is the one behind... it just makes me cringe
I wonder if this is anything like America's army where literally nothing fails- very unlike reality
dont cheer yet, filing counterclaims is not the same as winning the case agaisnt the RIAA- if and when the RIAA loses THEN you can cheer.
the higgs particle is one of the last yet undiscovered predictions of the standard model.
if we find the higgs it makes the standard model more convincing as far as its predictive power but by no means means it is correct.
what exactly are we talking here in regards to these defense in europe- because if it is that new fangled starwars like defense net Bush was talking about I hear the success rate is about 3/8
well actually now that we have this super nano glue we can make better computer chips which make faster computers which biochemists can use to simulate proteins/enzymes involved in cancer so that is the idea... but really the spiderman thing does seem kind of silly now until you realize the awesomeness of swinging around places:)
everyone talks about the actual coding sequence but not much about epigenetics- whether or not certain cytosine residues are methylated and what not- quite important if you think about it- put the whole sequence back together and certain genes dont quite work the same way. so really counting all of that it would take quite a significant amount of more information to truely be able to reconstruct the genome as it was. then again only about 3% is methylated in that fashion...
that is completely true- I was just trying to make the point that the reason behind it not being used might have more to do with aesthetics than the paractical considerations of using solar cells in conjunction with mirrors/lenses etc.
they do use mirrors in commercial solar facilities but as far as the home is concerned, the mirror/lens has to be able to focus a large area of light- to do rhat with a mirror for example, you need a mirror/sheet of metal or whatever as large as the area of light you are focusing- a 10 meter diameter area of light focused to a 1 meter diameter beam on to a solar array is equivilent to 100 suns- but in that case you need a mirror that big- this isnt very pretty on homes as in that case you would need a way to focus the light falling on a much larger area than the roof to produce more power than a roof covered with solar cells other ways.
when the article talks about hundreds or thousands of suns, it means they used mirrors and lenses to concentrate the light that falls on a much larger area to then fall on the solar cells. this leads to the solar cells generating a lot more electrical power and thus makes it more economical to produce power from soalr energy as compared to not using mirrors or lenses to focus light onto the panals.
not even remotely. plants are efficient at converting photons to an immediate energy source but the vast majority is used to keep the existing tissues alive and functioning. esimates I have seen for the efficiency of converting light, CO2 and water into biomass ranges from less than 1% to 5% depending on the species.
if you can install the ntfs write driver support then yes, you can do surgery on XP. you essentually have root [admin] powers when you use a live cd or likely the wizpy so you can do just about anything- including accidentally crippling XP. even better though would be just to extract what you need, nuke XP and install linux from the thing like a live cd :)
can you ever think of a time that windows supported hardware out of the box that linux didnt?
heh... let me guess proprietary/company driver? did windows work out of the box on it? didnt think so.
and that is why they also tested people's observational skills- researchers observed people's interaction on a set up computer that would direct people to a site that had some significant difference compared to the real site and few refused to continue doing business as usual... the biggest problem with the whole thing is that no matter how good the verification/anti phishing efforts get they need to take the user into account- not everyone pays attention to what the click or where they surf/do their banking. until people are educated in basic security practices these plugins, certification and verification might as well not exist.