::Grainy movies of chinese trying to acces the internet, all coming up 404::
Cafe User #1: Smebody set us up the firewall!
Cafe User #1: We get signal!
Cafe User #2: Main Screen Turn on!
Govt. Censor: All Your Packets are belong to us!!!
Cafe User #2: NOO!
Govt Censor: You have no chance to access net, make your time. ha. ha. ha.
Cafe USER #2: Release IP tunneling, for great justice!
It doesnt really matter how much mass you have, or gravity to make a black hole, what matters is how compressed that mass is. IIRC, if the earths mass were contained in something the size of a pinhead, it would become a black hole with an event horizon the size of a marble. As you accelerate an object, its mass increases, but its size does not. Accelerate a pinhead so that its mass became that of the earth, and you would have a black hole with the earths mass, wether or not it would be stable if slowed down is another matter, but it would become a black hole for awhile.
Furthermore, stemming off of point number 2, if you saw the source, and then tried to work on a GPL or other open source project, MS could search through the source for similiar code such as "# include stdio.h" and say "See this is exactly the same as in windows" and then sue your pants off.
You say that sarcastically, but youre absolutely right, you are denying the record companies a sale if your copy is stolen, because if the original were stolen YOU would have to buy a new one, or your insurance company would, either way, its an additional sale that the RIAA isnt making because you made a copy. The RIAA DOES support piracy, just the old fashioned kind, yarr!.
Were all still here! Congratulations, Brookhaven, you didnt destroy the Universe, or create a mini black hole that swallowed the earth, or a new big bang or anything like that. I know you guys are still working on it, but youll kill us all eventually;-)
Yeah, UMD does something like this too. Theyre building a new basketball arena, and Comcast, in return for naming rights, agreed to provide free cable to the U and money for the arena. Much to my surprise, i find a charge for cable on my University bill. I called up and asked what the heck was going on. Apparantly the U is charging for "free" cable and using the money to pay for the arena, not the cable. Seems that students would complain about a charge for an arena, but not for cable.
Actually, the main reason why space funding, although not necisarily general science funding has decreased was the outer space treaty of 1967(8?) This treaty had the seemingly innocuous goal of preventing nations from claiming celestial bodies. That way the russians couldnt claim the moon, of course, then neither could the US. Withouth the threat of a "red" moon, space funding dropped off dramatically. If you look at historical budget records, space funding began decreasing immediately after the treaty was signed. Think of it this way, if nations could claim celestial bodies, there woudl be a strong incentive to go there and claim as much land as possible before your enemies did. There is then further incentive to hold onto this land once it has been grabbed, which means armies, space navies, and most of all, bases. All of those things cost lots of money though, and once you start claiming territory, you essentially have to go through it, its an arms race on a grand scale. You could see it starting with apollo and then it all of a suddent died off completely. For several years between 1972 and 1981, the US for all intents and purposes ceased to have a manned spaceflight capability. If the US had claimed territory on the moon, or worse, if the russians had, this woudl have been an unthinkable scenario.
This is not an airplane, in the same way that if a throw a rock into air it still isn't an airplane, cuz it cant take off and land by itself.
A rock is not an airplane because it follows a ballistic trajectory. Unless gravity is significanly less at kitty hawk, the wright brothers plane did not follow a ballistic trajectory. Take a model airplane and throw it into the air, then you have a glider. Its unpowered, and all of its velocity is due to your arm. It does not behave like a rock, it behaves like an unpowered airplane. It can stay in the air only as long as its initial velocity holds out, or until it can catch a themal. If you take a glider, and you put an engine on it such that it is now powered, and capable of remaining in the air longer than any initial velocity imparted to it, you have an airplane. for comparison, aircraft carriers launch their planes with a catapult, does this mean they arent airplanes? no. An airplane is defined by being able to remain in the air when an unpowered glider or kite would be unable to. The wright brothers satisfy this. By 1905 their flyer 3 had traveled almost 30 miles in a single flight. You can make the case that the wrights didnt have the first fully powered takeoff and landing of an airplane, ill give you that, but the principle of the airplane was theirs, powered takeoff is just an evolution.
I thought being in space automatically made you able to read foreign languages, especially on controls. Whenever I watch star trek, if they capture an alien ship, they automatically know how to pilot it, use the controls, eject the warp core etc. Even if this alien ship has never been seen before.
And you seem to not know anything about Alberto Santos Dumont, he worked with baloons, not planes. There is a significant difference. Baloon flight had been possible since 1783 read this or this The key phrase being
Santos-Dumont continued to work on dirigibles, but finally achieved his dream of flying in a heavier-than-air craft in October of 1906, when his 14 Bis flew a distance of 60 meters at a height of 2 to 3 meters. As far as the world knew, it was the first airplane flight ever and Santos-Dumont became a hero to the world press. The stories about the Wright brothers flights at Kitty Hawk and later near Dayton, Ohio, were not believed even in the US at the time.
(emphasis added)
Get a life, everyone knows that the first "starship" enterprise was the enterprise shuttle prototype. And what about The USS Enterprise, aircraft carrier? Just because it wasnt mentioned in a show, or a manual, doesnt mean it couldnt have existed.
Acutally newtons theory of gravity was disproven by einstein. Mercury doesnt orbit the sun in accordance with newtownian mechanics, because it is moving so fast. Einsteinian gravity corrects for this. Unless youre moving pretty fast though, newtonian mechanics is a close enough approximation, and relativity is much more complex a theory.
Back in the 1970's the same global warming scaremongers were telling us that a new global ice age was coming.
Frankly, they might be right, in the long term, more heat means more water evaporation from the oceans, which means more snow in places like antarctica and the arctic, where temperature could rise 30 degrees in the winter and not get above freezing. Increased snowfall leads to increased glaciation, i.e. ice age. The problem is, this may take a thousand years to happen, or only 100, we just dont know. In the meantime, all the other stuff will happen, rising sea levels, floods, increased hurricanes, etc.
The temperature of the earth and the surface climate have radically changed many times in the past, and without any any artificial greenhouse emmissions from humans.
Youre absolutely right, these things have happened in the past, through natural causes, but this doesnt mean that humanity, in its current form, would have survived and prospered in these times. The earth will go on if manhattan is underwater, but it will make it much harder to catch a cab.
The effect of the sun's radition, volcanos, etc have long had an effect on the earth.
Also correct, again, this doesnt mean that human induced warming is not occuring. Humans put out more CO2 each year than all the volcanoes on earth (~3 billion tons, net) If volcanoes have an effect, then humans will too.
There is some evidence for the earth's warming, but the evidence is far from clean and many observations (such as (corrected) satellite data and weather balloons) show no warming.
try hereherehereherehere And as for your satellite data argument, I suggest you read Nature, v394, August 13 1998, p661-4 Stating that corrected satellite data actually shows.13 degF increase per decade, consistent with ground based obs.
WHen the New York Times famously said "Blame global warming for the blizzard"
Yes, the NY times did exagerate. It should have said "Blame Global Warming for the SEVERITY of the blizzard" The blizzard probably would have happened anyways, but the point is that GW makes weather events worse, because energy is pumped into the system.
But the use of hysteria and scaremongering to sell a political agenda is wrong IMO.
USA not an uppity country trying to take over the world?
Trying? you do realize that the US occupies most of western europe, and all of japan, and the middle east, and the phillipines, and korea. We have military bases all over the place. We rule the world. Just look at what happened when we pulled out of kyoto: Europe made some indignant noises and called on japan and the rest of uerope to sign the treaty on their own, now japan looks like it will pull out too. Any agreement or action by the international community has to have US support if it hopes of getting enacted, end of story.
Re:John Henry vs. The Machine
on
Books on Demand
·
· Score: 2
voilla! You have a book-like product.
Simply take scraps, newspaper and glue, compress into block form, push into a can and label "Spam" and voila, you have a meat like product.
More like massive mismangment for projects with little or no scientific value (read ISS).
What good is a baby? they make a mess, they wake you up in the middle of the night, they drain your pocketbook, and all they do is sit there and make noises and mess themselves all day long. I say we kill all the babies, because theyre useless and a huge drain on society. Think of all the other more worthy things people could spend their money on if there werent any babies.
You dont see the value of the ISS now, nobody does, its just been born. The technology will advance, and just as babies grow up to become valuable members of society, the ISS will grow up to become a valuable scientific outpost, if people will keep from offing it.
Slashdot Mirror
Adobe has backed down from their former stance against dimitry, according to this story at the bbc. btw, this was submitted to slashdot, but rejected.
Since when did the matrix become a philosophy text, and Keanu Reeves a Philosopher? As bill and ted would say: EXCELLENT! ::air guitar::
did you know that the sun is powered by NUCLEAR reactions? I say we ban solar power ;-)
Small correction, I believe ebonics was what you were referring to. eubonics is the language of the EU (if not esperanto) ;-)
::Grainy movies of chinese trying to acces the internet, all coming up 404:: Cafe User #1: Smebody set us up the firewall! Cafe User #1: We get signal! Cafe User #2: Main Screen Turn on! Govt. Censor: All Your Packets are belong to us!!! Cafe User #2: NOO! Govt Censor: You have no chance to access net, make your time. ha. ha. ha. Cafe USER #2: Release IP tunneling, for great justice!
It doesnt really matter how much mass you have, or gravity to make a black hole, what matters is how compressed that mass is. IIRC, if the earths mass were contained in something the size of a pinhead, it would become a black hole with an event horizon the size of a marble. As you accelerate an object, its mass increases, but its size does not. Accelerate a pinhead so that its mass became that of the earth, and you would have a black hole with the earths mass, wether or not it would be stable if slowed down is another matter, but it would become a black hole for awhile.
Furthermore, stemming off of point number 2, if you saw the source, and then tried to work on a GPL or other open source project, MS could search through the source for similiar code such as "# include stdio.h" and say "See this is exactly the same as in windows" and then sue your pants off.
You say that sarcastically, but youre absolutely right, you are denying the record companies a sale if your copy is stolen, because if the original were stolen YOU would have to buy a new one, or your insurance company would, either way, its an additional sale that the RIAA isnt making because you made a copy. The RIAA DOES support piracy, just the old fashioned kind, yarr!.
Were all still here! Congratulations, Brookhaven, you didnt destroy the Universe, or create a mini black hole that swallowed the earth, or a new big bang or anything like that. I know you guys are still working on it, but youll kill us all eventually ;-)
duh, Mac OS Ten, how long did it take apple to come out with good software?
the success of a company should never be judged by its current stock price.
Congratulations, youve single handedly determined what it is that allows people to make money on the stock market. Give yourself a hand.
Our children will not think twice about paying to breathe, Well if they live in space, this will most certainly be true. Air is not cheap in space.
Yeah, UMD does something like this too. Theyre building a new basketball arena, and Comcast, in return for naming rights, agreed to provide free cable to the U and money for the arena. Much to my surprise, i find a charge for cable on my University bill. I called up and asked what the heck was going on. Apparantly the U is charging for "free" cable and using the money to pay for the arena, not the cable. Seems that students would complain about a charge for an arena, but not for cable.
Actually, the main reason why space funding, although not necisarily general science funding has decreased was the outer space treaty of 1967(8?) This treaty had the seemingly innocuous goal of preventing nations from claiming celestial bodies. That way the russians couldnt claim the moon, of course, then neither could the US. Withouth the threat of a "red" moon, space funding dropped off dramatically. If you look at historical budget records, space funding began decreasing immediately after the treaty was signed. Think of it this way, if nations could claim celestial bodies, there woudl be a strong incentive to go there and claim as much land as possible before your enemies did. There is then further incentive to hold onto this land once it has been grabbed, which means armies, space navies, and most of all, bases. All of those things cost lots of money though, and once you start claiming territory, you essentially have to go through it, its an arms race on a grand scale. You could see it starting with apollo and then it all of a suddent died off completely. For several years between 1972 and 1981, the US for all intents and purposes ceased to have a manned spaceflight capability. If the US had claimed territory on the moon, or worse, if the russians had, this woudl have been an unthinkable scenario.
In other news, the University of Maryland at College Park has changed its name to The Pepsi Campus of the University of Maryland
A rock is not an airplane because it follows a ballistic trajectory. Unless gravity is significanly less at kitty hawk, the wright brothers plane did not follow a ballistic trajectory. Take a model airplane and throw it into the air, then you have a glider. Its unpowered, and all of its velocity is due to your arm. It does not behave like a rock, it behaves like an unpowered airplane. It can stay in the air only as long as its initial velocity holds out, or until it can catch a themal. If you take a glider, and you put an engine on it such that it is now powered, and capable of remaining in the air longer than any initial velocity imparted to it, you have an airplane. for comparison, aircraft carriers launch their planes with a catapult, does this mean they arent airplanes? no. An airplane is defined by being able to remain in the air when an unpowered glider or kite would be unable to. The wright brothers satisfy this. By 1905 their flyer 3 had traveled almost 30 miles in a single flight. You can make the case that the wrights didnt have the first fully powered takeoff and landing of an airplane, ill give you that, but the principle of the airplane was theirs, powered takeoff is just an evolution.
I thought being in space automatically made you able to read foreign languages, especially on controls. Whenever I watch star trek, if they capture an alien ship, they automatically know how to pilot it, use the controls, eject the warp core etc. Even if this alien ship has never been seen before.
Santos-Dumont continued to work on dirigibles, but finally achieved his dream of flying in a heavier-than-air craft in October of 1906, when his 14 Bis flew a distance of 60 meters at a height of 2 to 3 meters. As far as the world knew, it was the first airplane flight ever and Santos-Dumont became a hero to the world press. The stories about the Wright brothers flights at Kitty Hawk and later near Dayton, Ohio, were not believed even in the US at the time. (emphasis added)
1906 was three years after kitty hawk.
Orville and Wilbur WRIGHT were the first men to get aloft via mechanically powered flight.
Get a life, everyone knows that the first "starship" enterprise was the enterprise shuttle prototype. And what about The USS Enterprise, aircraft carrier? Just because it wasnt mentioned in a show, or a manual, doesnt mean it couldnt have existed.
Acutally newtons theory of gravity was disproven by einstein. Mercury doesnt orbit the sun in accordance with newtownian mechanics, because it is moving so fast. Einsteinian gravity corrects for this. Unless youre moving pretty fast though, newtonian mechanics is a close enough approximation, and relativity is much more complex a theory.
Frankly, they might be right, in the long term, more heat means more water evaporation from the oceans, which means more snow in places like antarctica and the arctic, where temperature could rise 30 degrees in the winter and not get above freezing. Increased snowfall leads to increased glaciation, i.e. ice age. The problem is, this may take a thousand years to happen, or only 100, we just dont know. In the meantime, all the other stuff will happen, rising sea levels, floods, increased hurricanes, etc.
The temperature of the earth and the surface climate have radically changed many times in the past, and without any any artificial greenhouse emmissions from humans.
Youre absolutely right, these things have happened in the past, through natural causes, but this doesnt mean that humanity, in its current form, would have survived and prospered in these times. The earth will go on if manhattan is underwater, but it will make it much harder to catch a cab.
The effect of the sun's radition, volcanos, etc have long had an effect on the earth.
Also correct, again, this doesnt mean that human induced warming is not occuring. Humans put out more CO2 each year than all the volcanoes on earth (~3 billion tons, net) If volcanoes have an effect, then humans will too.
There is some evidence for the earth's warming, but the evidence is far from clean and many observations (such as (corrected) satellite data and weather balloons) show no warming.
try here here here here here And as for your satellite data argument, I suggest you read Nature, v394, August 13 1998, p661-4 Stating that corrected satellite data actually shows .13 degF increase per decade, consistent with ground based obs.
WHen the New York Times famously said "Blame global warming for the blizzard"
Yes, the NY times did exagerate. It should have said "Blame Global Warming for the SEVERITY of the blizzard" The blizzard probably would have happened anyways, but the point is that GW makes weather events worse, because energy is pumped into the system.
But the use of hysteria and scaremongering to sell a political agenda is wrong IMO.
Is it scaremongering if its the truth?
Trying? you do realize that the US occupies most of western europe, and all of japan, and the middle east, and the phillipines, and korea. We have military bases all over the place. We rule the world. Just look at what happened when we pulled out of kyoto: Europe made some indignant noises and called on japan and the rest of uerope to sign the treaty on their own, now japan looks like it will pull out too. Any agreement or action by the international community has to have US support if it hopes of getting enacted, end of story.
Simply take scraps, newspaper and glue, compress into block form, push into a can and label "Spam" and voila, you have a meat like product.
What good is a baby? they make a mess, they wake you up in the middle of the night, they drain your pocketbook, and all they do is sit there and make noises and mess themselves all day long. I say we kill all the babies, because theyre useless and a huge drain on society. Think of all the other more worthy things people could spend their money on if there werent any babies.
You dont see the value of the ISS now, nobody does, its just been born. The technology will advance, and just as babies grow up to become valuable members of society, the ISS will grow up to become a valuable scientific outpost, if people will keep from offing it.