Your girlfriend doesn't have a *power outlet*? Where does she live, a cave?
Hey, not all of us have robotic girlfriends TYVM.
Agreed on the "just plug it in" thing, if you can remember to turn the stove off or lock your house on the way out, you can remember to plug your car in when you get home.
And again, I was making the point: a car, even in 70 degree weather, heats up like nobody's business.
Probably not quite so much when it doesn't have a huge lump of metal at 95 degrees centigrade sitting inside it.
70 degrees is pleasant with the windows down. 100 degrees is very manageable if you have some air movement, unless you're wearing a full business suit and tie or something.
You completely missed the point of his comment. Have you ever had to get somewhere at a specific time, and planned on leaving just early enough only to realise you need to get gas? That is what he is talking about.
And your statement here perfectly outlines that it's not a new problem in any sense.
If you can charge at your usual parking place, there's no reason not to leave with a topped off battery every single day, so you're actually reducing the chances of that happening.
Vehicle weight mainly affects energy lost to stop-start traffic, with a relatively small effect on rolling resistance. On a long trip you're likely to be doing highway miles, where the majority of your energy loss is aerodynamic drag. For day to day commuting you wouldn't leave the generator attached at all, so day to day driving wouldn't change.
I'm not sure I follow - I read it as them launching your TubeSat thingy into orbit and sending it on its merry way, not keeping them as a cluster. Maybe you just can't make a self-powered orbital module in a half-pound package along with an ion motor, a useful payload and sufficient reaction mass to achieve a permanent orbit. If you can fit everything but the reaction mass in the package, though, I can't see why it's so implausible that with an extra pound and a half of reaction mass, you could achieve your goals. The total mass of launch vehicle is irrelevant, after separation only your module matters.
Low earth orbit is above the law, literally, isn't it? Send up a few gigabytes of flash memory and a transmitter. Torrents from space!
Maybe not so practical for your run-of-the-mill movie downloads, but for *very* sensitive political stuff, the sort of thing that tinfoil-wearing X-Files enthusiasts can only dream of proving, I can definitely see it being the go.
True, it'd be somewhat difficult to build something that small. Then again, you may not have to. From TFA:
TubeSats are also available as Double TubeSats, Triple TubeSats, or Quadruple TubeSats. The length, volume, and mass of these expanded TubeSats are based on the multiplying factor.
So for $32k you could send almost a kilogram into orbit. I bet you could pack a miniature ion drive into that size, and it'd last a lot more than four times the length of a single TubeSat orbit.
I think possibly you're confusing the user interface paradigm of 'drag and drop' (ie. you click on something, drag it to another application, and that application should do something semi-intelligent with it like open it) and the programming architecture for 'object linking and embedding' (or ActiveX as the whippersnappers call it these days). Drag and drop doesn't require any kind of intelligent embedding, it's just a different clipboard-type action. Embedding generic objects, of course, requires the sort of architecture that ActiveX uses.
There may be contexts in 25th century engineering where a mechanical keyboard is safer/superior to a touchscreen panel. In that case, Scotty would certainly have needed to be proficient with them.
In a role as technical officer, he'd be in contact with a thousand little standalone devices, none of which would be smart enough to have built-in natural language processing. Not because it wouldn't be technically possible, but because it's a waste when a keyboard would do just as well at a much lower cost. And we haven't yet realistically beaten the keyboard as a means of controlling a terminal-type interface.
Think of it as being like the serial inputs on most electronics modules these days. A sort of engineer-level human interface.
At what points do we consider something human? Be very careful where and how the line is drawn, or many of us may end up not being legally considered human. If we draw the line another way, we might have to stop eating pigs, dogs, etc.
This is the fundamental problem of performance-based definitions of sentience. You're never going to find a set of purely performance-based criteria that simultaneously allows all genetic humans, and disqualifies all non-genetic humans, and let us be perfectly clear - what we're trying to do is find a functional excuse for 'speciesism' that lets us justify treating some animals as livestock while retaining the concept that other animals are special.
It will be a long hard fight for equality when we finally do meet or engineer sentient life from non-human stock. And of course, we'll then have to face the moral question of what rights are 'inalienable' to humans, and what rights should be granted to subhuman but still sentient creatures. Sooner or later we're going to have to face and deal with the fact that *not* all men (of whatever gender and species) are created equal. It's going to be interesting watch people try to decide whether they are all created with equal basic rights to life, liberty etc.
It's easy to get registrations for a free game, most of those require you to register to even download the client. Average concurrent users is a much better measure of a game's popularity. Then again I guess you could consider WoW China's business model to be microtransaction based (they pay a very small fee per hour instead of paying a larger fee per month), and that's responsible for a large part of WoW's playerbase. Numbers like that are always inflated as much as they can to make the game look better anyway.
TFS says that it's "thought to be a byproduct of biochemical reactions involving free radicals." So the light is produced as a part of a chemical reaction, not spontaneous emission a la black body radiation. It's like the small blue fringe at the base of a candle flame; the reaction is directly generating higher energy photons (you in the back, put your dilithium crystals down!).
Actually it means he leaves it up to his guests to stick the mint and stuff in the blender, and if they complain about it he'll say "you want coriander? add the damn feature yourself, slacker!"
yeah apparently Japanese scientists have a different definition of visible than I do. I always had that stupid "if I can see it then it is visible, if I can't see it then it isn't visible".
God, I hate you sceptics. You claim that just because it's not possible to see something, it's not visible?
If I had mod points you would get them. Visible light is... well... visible. It is, by definition, light detectable by human eyes. What they mean is "humans emit very small quantities of light in the visible spectrum".
Slashdot Mirror
You can realistically pull maybe 1kW from 5sqm of solar cells in direct sunlight. That's enough to power an aircon unit.
Your girlfriend doesn't have a *power outlet*? Where does she live, a cave?
Hey, not all of us have robotic girlfriends TYVM.
Agreed on the "just plug it in" thing, if you can remember to turn the stove off or lock your house on the way out, you can remember to plug your car in when you get home.
And again, I was making the point: a car, even in 70 degree weather, heats up like nobody's business.
Probably not quite so much when it doesn't have a huge lump of metal at 95 degrees centigrade sitting inside it.
70 degrees is pleasant with the windows down. 100 degrees is very manageable if you have some air movement, unless you're wearing a full business suit and tie or something.
You completely missed the point of his comment. Have you ever had to get somewhere at a specific time, and planned on leaving just early enough only to realise you need to get gas? That is what he is talking about.
And your statement here perfectly outlines that it's not a new problem in any sense.
If you can charge at your usual parking place, there's no reason not to leave with a topped off battery every single day, so you're actually reducing the chances of that happening.
Vehicle weight mainly affects energy lost to stop-start traffic, with a relatively small effect on rolling resistance. On a long trip you're likely to be doing highway miles, where the majority of your energy loss is aerodynamic drag. For day to day commuting you wouldn't leave the generator attached at all, so day to day driving wouldn't change.
How else do you motivate a lazy robot to run?
I'm not sure I follow - I read it as them launching your TubeSat thingy into orbit and sending it on its merry way, not keeping them as a cluster. Maybe you just can't make a self-powered orbital module in a half-pound package along with an ion motor, a useful payload and sufficient reaction mass to achieve a permanent orbit. If you can fit everything but the reaction mass in the package, though, I can't see why it's so implausible that with an extra pound and a half of reaction mass, you could achieve your goals. The total mass of launch vehicle is irrelevant, after separation only your module matters.
Low earth orbit is above the law, literally, isn't it? Send up a few gigabytes of flash memory and a transmitter. Torrents from space!
Maybe not so practical for your run-of-the-mill movie downloads, but for *very* sensitive political stuff, the sort of thing that tinfoil-wearing X-Files enthusiasts can only dream of proving, I can definitely see it being the go.
;)
That, or just use it to screw with SETI.
Option 2 (Daddy was an Astronaut-Burnt-Up-on-Reentry)
~1000USD to be cremated and then ~8000USD to be shot into space.
I'm so tempted to request that in my will. Sure, maybe I won't *see* space but at least I'll get to visit it.
TubeSats are also available as Double TubeSats, Triple TubeSats, or Quadruple TubeSats. The length, volume, and mass of these expanded TubeSats are based on the multiplying factor.
So for $32k you could send almost a kilogram into orbit. I bet you could pack a miniature ion drive into that size, and it'd last a lot more than four times the length of a single TubeSat orbit.
Yes, but on the flip side, it would delay that pesky crashing-into-the-planet problem.
Pfft get a 2D TV like all us cool kids have. Nerd. Everyone knows flatscreens are cooler.
I think possibly you're confusing the user interface paradigm of 'drag and drop' (ie. you click on something, drag it to another application, and that application should do something semi-intelligent with it like open it) and the programming architecture for 'object linking and embedding' (or ActiveX as the whippersnappers call it these days). Drag and drop doesn't require any kind of intelligent embedding, it's just a different clipboard-type action. Embedding generic objects, of course, requires the sort of architecture that ActiveX uses.
There may be contexts in 25th century engineering where a mechanical keyboard is safer/superior to a touchscreen panel. In that case, Scotty would certainly have needed to be proficient with them.
In a role as technical officer, he'd be in contact with a thousand little standalone devices, none of which would be smart enough to have built-in natural language processing. Not because it wouldn't be technically possible, but because it's a waste when a keyboard would do just as well at a much lower cost. And we haven't yet realistically beaten the keyboard as a means of controlling a terminal-type interface.
Think of it as being like the serial inputs on most electronics modules these days. A sort of engineer-level human interface.
Your opinion My opinion :)
His HTML > Your HTML.
At what points do we consider something human? Be very careful where and how the line is drawn, or many of us may end up not being legally considered human. If we draw the line another way, we might have to stop eating pigs, dogs, etc.
This is the fundamental problem of performance-based definitions of sentience. You're never going to find a set of purely performance-based criteria that simultaneously allows all genetic humans, and disqualifies all non-genetic humans, and let us be perfectly clear - what we're trying to do is find a functional excuse for 'speciesism' that lets us justify treating some animals as livestock while retaining the concept that other animals are special.
It will be a long hard fight for equality when we finally do meet or engineer sentient life from non-human stock. And of course, we'll then have to face the moral question of what rights are 'inalienable' to humans, and what rights should be granted to subhuman but still sentient creatures. Sooner or later we're going to have to face and deal with the fact that *not* all men (of whatever gender and species) are created equal. It's going to be interesting watch people try to decide whether they are all created with equal basic rights to life, liberty etc.
Why am I now thinking "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate"?
It's easy to get registrations for a free game, most of those require you to register to even download the client. Average concurrent users is a much better measure of a game's popularity. Then again I guess you could consider WoW China's business model to be microtransaction based (they pay a very small fee per hour instead of paying a larger fee per month), and that's responsible for a large part of WoW's playerbase. Numbers like that are always inflated as much as they can to make the game look better anyway.
Fair enough. Eliminating simpler explanations first is just good science, and your post did so efficiently. :)
Noooo you're stoled mah idea!
Serve me right for not making you sign an NDA.
Their service says that they use advanced technological means to do the transcription. They do not.
Any sufficiently advanced AI is indistinguishable from a Pakistani sweat shop worker.
TFS says that it's "thought to be a byproduct of biochemical reactions involving free radicals." So the light is produced as a part of a chemical reaction, not spontaneous emission a la black body radiation. It's like the small blue fringe at the base of a candle flame; the reaction is directly generating higher energy photons (you in the back, put your dilithium crystals down!).
Actually it means he leaves it up to his guests to stick the mint and stuff in the blender, and if they complain about it he'll say "you want coriander? add the damn feature yourself, slacker!"
yeah apparently Japanese scientists have a different definition of visible than I do. I always had that stupid "if I can see it then it is visible, if I can't see it then it isn't visible".
God, I hate you sceptics. You claim that just because it's not possible to see something, it's not visible?
<.<
>.>
O.o
If I had mod points you would get them. Visible light is... well... visible. It is, by definition, light detectable by human eyes. What they mean is "humans emit very small quantities of light in the visible spectrum".