The article says that the CRV would have to land near the west coast because the Service (Propulsion) module would need to splash down to the west of the Command module.
I sugges that this is completely bougus. I see no reason why you couldn't supply the Service module with enough internal smarts to be able to separate, maneuver, and then re-boost itself so that it can come down anywhere that you want it to.
The thought that the SM becomes a dumb rock after separation forgets the fact that you can now fit far more computer intelligence onto something the size and weight of a large wristwatch than Mission control had available on the ground during the Apollo missions. It would now be
very easy to put the needed smarts into a Service Module to allow it to drop itself wherever you wanted it to.
The Space Shuttle program was approved in July 1972. President Reagan was sworn into office in 1981. The first Shuttle (Columbia) flew in April 1981.
How exactly was Reagan involved?
My understanding of the challenger explosion is that:
Regan was scheduled o give a televised speech the day that Challenger was scheduled to go up. His speech was intended to talk about (read: steal the thunder of) Challenger. This resulted in a really strong political push to get the shuttle launched today.
As a result, Engineers were strong-armed into OK'ing the launch even though table-top experiments indicated that it would be a bad idea. When the engineers refused to sign off in spite of pressure, it was passed to middle/uppper management to do the sign off.
The shuttle was launched, the shuttle blew up, Regan still ended up having to give a different speech than he originally planned to that night.
Note that gravity works regardless of distance, so you can never technically say you've left any other object's gravitational
Yes you can -- like when a small asteroid 10,000 miles away has an order of magnignitude more effect on you than the earth does. All things are relative and, although gravity has infinite reach (bound only by the speed of light), it's effects after a certain point drop below the gravitational 'noise' level.
Gentlemen.. I have before me a document provided by SCO/Caldera called "COPYING".....
In essence, doesn't this constitute a transfer of ownership?
No. It doesnt constitute a transfer of ownership. Ownership still lies with whomever originally created it (i.e. SCO, unless they stole it from somewhere else). All that is occurring is a transfer of RIGHTS.
Note that the GPL license requires that the original copyright stay with the code, acknowledging where it came from, and the owner can always distribute it to someone else under a different license. (reiserfs is an example.. see their site for more info).
The RIAA doesn't have a monopoly on music. They just have a monopoly on getting music into the media.
Kuro5hin has a recent article which explains the issue, including pointers to archives with about 40,000 music titles that are legal to download.
Boycott the RIAA, and start downloading / buying music that isn't theirs. Support artists who make good music and don't have access to the RIAA's media juggernaut.
I posted the rant below to our science fiction list last week.
______________
The The press coverage from the Globe and Mail might not be quite
what we want, but please remember that it's written by a non-fan,
for non-fans.In my view, the nastiest thinga about it was the
suggestion that the outside world has almost caught up with
Science fiction. Problem is, that's pretty much true.
Think for a moment about classical science fiction:
With the exception of hyper-drive and teleporters, there's
very little that was thought of 30 years ago that isn't either
already invented or earnedtly being developed, whereas in the
golden years of science fiction, it really WAS fiction...
Space was generally considered inaccessible, pocket-sized
radio phones were a dream, TVs weighed about 80pounds;
The idea of a computer capable of speech fitting on your
waist, much less your wrist was a pipe dream and the
sound-barrier was still considered a real barrier.
Nowadays we know that Venus is hot enough to melt your
lead miniatures, Mars has slightly more water than the Saharah
Desert, one of Jupiters moons *might* have some liquid water on it.
I mean, if you look at the Space Family Robinson now, the
least believable part of the whole thing is that all the kids
are still living with both biological parents!
Age has caught up with many SF con-goers, and so has the world.
Coming up with seriously fictional science fiction is now much
harder than it was. In many ways, I'd say that the article is
an acknowledgement of the forethought of those who were in
Science fiction in the early days. That current science fiction
seems paler in comparison is simply a result of the world
catching up to us.
This leads to the question then: Now that the world has
caught up to us, where do we go? (or, rather where are we
going?) In my mind, speculative fiction has always been
about the what if: What if technology was like this? What
if society tilted in that direction? What if we moved to
a world where the biology was just a little bit different?
The advantage of the world having caught up with us is that
our market is larger.. Where the Matrix might have been a
low budget film 30 years ago, they were now able to rent an
Australian city.for filming. Goth culture has caught up with
Buffy and Star Trek is such big business that it's almost
unstoppabe.
These were things that we were fighting for a generation or
so ago. Now that they've been achieved, we're upset that they're
now considered almost passe. Simply put: that's part of the
cost of success.
You would own the copyright to the image, to the extent to which it was a new work (I.e. if you sliced it up and rearranged it to look like something else, or put it in justaposition with something else to create a different effect). -- but to the extent to which my photo was in your photo, I would have some control over it as a derivative copy (i.e. if your photo was JUST my photo and all of my photo, I'd have about 99% copyright over it).
At some point -- as my photo becomes less and less an integral part of your photo, it would become effectively just your picture (i.e. a picture on the wall in the background of an otherwise busy image focused on something going on in the middle of the room).
______
Let's say, for example, that I take a picture of you standing on a beach. I'd own copyright in the picture, but you have an effective copyright on your face, so I'd need to get a release from you to submit it to a magazine. Suppose that Bill Gates then took a picture of RMS holding my picture:
Bill Gates would own the picture, but would require a release from RMS (face), me(those parts of my picture that weren't your picture), and you (face, if it was recognizable) before he could publish it.
He could, however, get around the release requirement by removing or obscuring those parts of the image that were owned by an intransigent party. (I.E. replacing RMS with a picture of Bill to avoid having to GPL the image).
The reason why a screenshot could be considered a work on it's own would be mostly a result of the work that the user did to getting to the point where the screen was displayed. Yes, the various elements are technically copyright by the game designers, but I'd expect that "fair use" analysis would determine that that wasn't the important aspect of the image (in most cases).
Apparently (according to one story) one of the biggest recent investors in SCO is a company that has Bill Gates' wife on the board. Unfortunately, that's about all that I remember about it.
Ironically, Galileo Galilei spent his own last eight years under close house arrest.
This is referenced at the end of the New Yorker article:
"Galileo Galilei only got house arrest by his sponsor the Roman Catholic Church for discovering things they didn't want to be true, whereas our Project Galileo gets a death sentence from nasa for its greatest discovery: the prospect of life on Europa."
I think that it's actually a suggestion of the RFCs that you avoid using networks 0 and 1, and use random numbers instead -- precisely to minimize the probability of address space collisions if you end up merging nets with another entity.
The one nice thing about 192.168/16 is that it's a class-C block in the old class-full address system and so many programs which pay attention to that will give you a/24 netmask and broadcast numbers by default. It's not that much of a bonus, but it sometimes helps for quick & dirty network setups.
I'd say that if you have a big enough network, then use 10/8 or 172.16/12 otherwise, if you're like my home network (6 machines on 2 subnets(!)), 192.168/16 is far more than enough.
In terms of collision avoidance, though, I'd have to agree that I've almost never seen someone using 172.16/12 in a production environment. I sometimes wonder just how many people even know that it exists.
I also fail to see how an attempt by a recording company to respond to consumers' complaints about price by dropping their prices is in any way similar to Microsoft responding to complaints about their monopoly and unfair trade practices by trying to unfairly extend their monopoly.
I'd look at it a different way:
The fact that they can imperiously cut their prices by 30% pretty much proves that they've using onopoly pricing to begin with.
Some might enjoy the irony of the spammers getting spammed. Anyway, I don't see how an script that sends randomized emails is any different.
Hmmm... Let me see... They send me 500 emails. I send them one (teling them to back the F*CK off). The fact that there are 10,000,000 other people like me is their problem, not mine.
I agree, though. One should not just spam the entire list. Pick 10 or 40 and send a personal email to each one of them. Let other people handle the rest.
From the second article:
For the supercomputer to break the top five supercomputers in the world, it would have to possess 10 teraflops of memory.
I think that they mean 10teraflops of computing power, as opposed to 10terabytes of memory -- since the later would require each CPU to have 10GB of ram in it. Nonetheless, the anomaly tells me that this is a reporter not used to computer issues. (too few computer geeks at the college paper).
Plus, you can create a Win installation CD for yourself that does not install OE at all,
Usefull for corporate users, but lots of good that does for my roommate who's got XP running on her box... On the other hand, it's good to know that you can uninstall it cleanly because it would seem that many virus writers like to use it as a propogation vector, even if it's not being directly run by the user.
My interpretation (IANAL) is that an organization can be considered a party, thus distributing within that party/organization isn't a violation since that party still has access to the source code -- but it's still distribution, and thus within the domain of the GPL. In any case, making multiple binary-only copies to run on a company's computers would probably be within the bounds of the GPL.
On the other hand, giving a copy to empoyees to use on their home computers would probably constitute a distribution to those employees and thus probably require making the source code available to them.
My reading is that if I'm not distributing the program I'm not responsible to distribute the source. As such, if you obtain a copy of the program despite my wishes, then I have no responsibility to give you the source code.
On the other hand, the GPL restricts you from redistributing the program until and unless you can distribute the source code. As such, until you gain access to the source code, you don't have the right to distribute it.
Moral of the story: If you're going to steal someone else's GPL code, make sure you get the source.
Slashdot Mirror
I sugges that this is completely bougus. I see no reason why you couldn't supply the Service module with enough internal smarts to be able to separate, maneuver, and then re-boost itself so that it can come down anywhere that you want it to.
The thought that the SM becomes a dumb rock after separation forgets the fact that you can now fit far more computer intelligence onto something the size and weight of a large wristwatch than Mission control had available on the ground during the Apollo missions. It would now be very easy to put the needed smarts into a Service Module to allow it to drop itself wherever you wanted it to.
How exactly was Reagan involved?
My understanding of the challenger explosion is that:
Regan was scheduled o give a televised speech the day that Challenger was scheduled to go up. His speech was intended to talk about (read: steal the thunder of) Challenger. This resulted in a really strong political push to get the shuttle launched today.
As a result, Engineers were strong-armed into OK'ing the launch even though table-top experiments indicated that it would be a bad idea. When the engineers refused to sign off in spite of pressure, it was passed to middle/uppper management to do the sign off.
The shuttle was launched, the shuttle blew up, Regan still ended up having to give a different speech than he originally planned to that night.
Yes you can -- like when a small asteroid 10,000 miles away has an order of magnignitude more effect on you than the earth does. All things are relative and, although gravity has infinite reach (bound only by the speed of light), it's effects after a certain point drop below the gravitational 'noise' level.
In essence, doesn't this constitute a transfer of ownership?
No. It doesnt constitute a transfer of ownership. Ownership still lies with whomever originally created it (i.e. SCO, unless they stole it from somewhere else). All that is occurring is a transfer of RIGHTS.
Note that the GPL license requires that the original copyright stay with the code, acknowledging where it came from, and the owner can always distribute it to someone else under a different license. (reiserfs is an example.. see their site for more info).
Kuro5hin has a recent article which explains the issue, including pointers to archives with about 40,000 music titles that are legal to download.
Boycott the RIAA, and start downloading / buying music that isn't theirs. Support artists who make good music and don't have access to the RIAA's media juggernaut.
______________
The The press coverage from the Globe and Mail might not be quite what we want, but please remember that it's written by a non-fan, for non-fans.In my view, the nastiest thinga about it was the suggestion that the outside world has almost caught up with Science fiction. Problem is, that's pretty much true.
Think for a moment about classical science fiction: With the exception of hyper-drive and teleporters, there's very little that was thought of 30 years ago that isn't either already invented or earnedtly being developed, whereas in the golden years of science fiction, it really WAS fiction...
Space was generally considered inaccessible, pocket-sized radio phones were a dream, TVs weighed about 80pounds; The idea of a computer capable of speech fitting on your waist, much less your wrist was a pipe dream and the sound-barrier was still considered a real barrier.
Nowadays we know that Venus is hot enough to melt your lead miniatures, Mars has slightly more water than the Saharah Desert, one of Jupiters moons *might* have some liquid water on it.
I mean, if you look at the Space Family Robinson now, the least believable part of the whole thing is that all the kids are still living with both biological parents!
Age has caught up with many SF con-goers, and so has the world. Coming up with seriously fictional science fiction is now much harder than it was. In many ways, I'd say that the article is an acknowledgement of the forethought of those who were in Science fiction in the early days. That current science fiction seems paler in comparison is simply a result of the world catching up to us.
This leads to the question then: Now that the world has caught up to us, where do we go? (or, rather where are we going?) In my mind, speculative fiction has always been about the what if: What if technology was like this? What if society tilted in that direction? What if we moved to a world where the biology was just a little bit different?
The advantage of the world having caught up with us is that our market is larger.. Where the Matrix might have been a low budget film 30 years ago, they were now able to rent an Australian city.for filming. Goth culture has caught up with Buffy and Star Trek is such big business that it's almost unstoppabe.
These were things that we were fighting for a generation or so ago. Now that they've been achieved, we're upset that they're now considered almost passe. Simply put: that's part of the cost of success.
NOte, however, that it's the DOJ doing most of the work -- not the SEC.
Would the Monty Python guys sue me if I sarted referring to McBride and friends as The Black Knights?
At some point -- as my photo becomes less and less an integral part of your photo, it would become effectively just your picture (i.e. a picture on the wall in the background of an otherwise busy image focused on something going on in the middle of the room).
______
Let's say, for example, that I take a picture of you standing on a beach. I'd own copyright in the picture, but you have an effective copyright on your face, so I'd need to get a release from you to submit it to a magazine. Suppose that Bill Gates then took a picture of RMS holding my picture:
Bill Gates would own the picture, but would require a release from RMS (face), me(those parts of my picture that weren't your picture), and you (face, if it was recognizable) before he could publish it.
He could, however, get around the release requirement by removing or obscuring those parts of the image that were owned by an intransigent party. (I.E. replacing RMS with a picture of Bill to avoid having to GPL the image).
The reason why a screenshot could be considered a work on it's own would be mostly a result of the work that the user did to getting to the point where the screen was displayed. Yes, the various elements are technically copyright by the game designers, but I'd expect that "fair use" analysis would determine that that wasn't the important aspect of the image (in most cases).
IANAL, but I like acting like one.
Apparently (according to one story) one of the biggest recent investors in SCO is a company that has Bill Gates' wife on the board. Unfortunately, that's about all that I remember about it.
This is referenced at the end of the New Yorker article:
Innovate \In"no*vate\, v. i.
- To introduce novelties or changes; -- sometimes with in or
on. --Bacon.
WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]Every man,therefore,is not fit to innovate. --Dryden.
innovate
So, Microsoft is proud of introducing changes (often created by others?), as opposed to inventing anything of their own.
Now, that makes total sense
24, 25, and 26. Obviously, they were all put together by the same people....
It's a disguise you idiot!!!! This is what he really looks like!
It's called Defenestration
You could always try using someone other than AOL. . . . .
I think that it's actually a suggestion of the RFCs that you avoid using networks 0 and 1, and use random numbers instead -- precisely to minimize the probability of address space collisions if you end up merging nets with another entity.
The one nice thing about 192.168/16 is that it's a class-C block in the old class-full address system and so many programs which pay attention to that will give you a /24 netmask and broadcast numbers by default. It's not that much of a bonus, but it sometimes helps for quick & dirty network setups.
I'd say that if you have a big enough network, then use 10/8 or 172.16/12 otherwise, if you're like my home network (6 machines on 2 subnets(!)), 192.168/16 is far more than enough.
In terms of collision avoidance, though, I'd have to agree that I've almost never seen someone using 172.16/12 in a production environment. I sometimes wonder just how many people even know that it exists.
I'd look at it a different way:
The fact that they can imperiously cut their prices by 30% pretty much proves that they've using onopoly pricing to begin with.
Hmmm... Let me see... They send me 500 emails. I send them one (teling them to back the F*CK off). The fact that there are 10,000,000 other people like me is their problem, not mine. I agree, though. One should not just spam the entire list. Pick 10 or 40 and send a personal email to each one of them. Let other people handle the rest.
For the supercomputer to break the top five supercomputers in the world, it would have to possess 10 teraflops of memory.
I think that they mean 10teraflops of computing power, as opposed to 10terabytes of memory -- since the later would require each CPU to have 10GB of ram in it. Nonetheless, the anomaly tells me that this is a reporter not used to computer issues. (too few computer geeks at the college paper).
I think that it would be more fun to have the FROM addres be one of the other spammers -- at least that way, they get a valid email address :-)
The universe is tied up in knots. Figuring out just how has physicists tied up in knots
QED
Usefull for corporate users, but lots of good that does for my roommate who's got XP running on her box... On the other hand, it's good to know that you can uninstall it cleanly because it would seem that many virus writers like to use it as a propogation vector, even if it's not being directly run by the user.
On the other hand, giving a copy to empoyees to use on their home computers would probably constitute a distribution to those employees and thus probably require making the source code available to them.
On the other hand, the GPL restricts you from redistributing the program until and unless you can distribute the source code. As such, until you gain access to the source code, you don't have the right to distribute it.
Moral of the story: If you're going to steal someone else's GPL code, make sure you get the source.