You still have to deal with the signal to noise level. Back in the day when email boxes would fill with spam, maybe there would have been a nugget or two in there that might have been useful, but I never would have seen it because of the rest of the crap. Amazon might have to deal with this in some manner so that potential customers don't get buried in crap as well or they'll stop using their service.
I don't even bother to try. Besides the elbow issue you mention, if the person in front of me reclines their seat, then I have to tip my screen forward where it gets too bothersome to try to use. I might try again if I ever move to a tablet computer.
I'm part of a research group where we fly all sorts of electronic crap on helicopters. We typically take off and land with computers and other stuff running. However, as an example of what you talk about, we have had a flight or two where we are flying and the pilot asks us "OK, who has their phone on?" because he can pick up the interference (I'm not sure exactly, but I think it was from GSM phones).
Damn you almost had me there. The internet was never every that. Look no further than the alt groups in usenet. You will see the BS has been flowing a long time.
Indeed. This is where we got things like YHBT. HAND.
Better yet, he should buy a huge-ass inner tube (I think the Acme Corp. makes a good one) and stretch it across a big homemade slingshot. Then he can get on his wing and roller skates and really launch himself.
How far back do you like to keep your documents? From how I understand your message, it doesn't sound like you get rid of anything.
I've got stacks of stuff going back +20 years that is around out of sheer laziness. One of my projects in the next couple months is bulk shredding, but I haven't quite decided where to draw the lines on what to keep and how far back (I'm pretty sure I can get rid of all those canceled checks and account statements from that bank account that was closed 15 years ago...).
Facebook has been adopted by the audience that is slow to adopt and slow to move away as well, which is older people.
So was AOL. People talk of Facebook, especially since it is the darling of the media at the moment, like it is the very fabric that holds civilization together. Having been around these interwebs since the 80's, I can recall many who have risen and fallen. They'll have their cycle, I'm sure.
I think you still have to classify this as vapor for the very reasons you mention. Basically it is a pitch for further funding, which is fine. However, there is no guarantee that this would ever make it to market simply because it is academic research. Hopefully it will, but there are many academic research advances that don't make it to market for a variety of reasons, such as being able to productize it in a cost effective manner (unless you can get it heavily subsidized, for instance). Perhaps there might be no reason in principal that it couldn't be productized, but let us say it does but it comes out 2-3 times the amount of what a regular heat pump does, nobody will buy it. If they haven't done any manufacturability analysis or any kind of market research, I'd take that 5-10 years at this point to be no better than any number they could pull out from between their back pockets.
Cosmic ray hit locations are random. The spacing between parts would not matter. The problem comes from there are many more components in a Core i7 than in the Apollo Guidance Computer, so there are more things to hit. On the other hand, you would never try to fly a Core i7 because it isn't radiation hardened. I agree with the statement that computer power is not the biggest hurdle to space travel because there are plenty of rad-hard processors that have orders of magnitude more processing power than what was on Apollo.
These days it seems to be getting more and more (politically? socially?) acceptable for people to take the Chinese menu approach to science: they want to pick and choose which parts of science they like (e.g., molecular biology and genetics that comes up with Viagra and other things), and which stuff they don't (e.g., evolutionary biology, which is the basis for all that molecular biology and genetics). For the stuff they don't like, they simply choose not to believe it.
I'm curious, even if he was fired without any justified reason, and let's assume for the moment that it was for some petty reason, would you think what he did was in any way justified or correct? If you are withholding judgment to hear what the cause of his termination was, I'm trying to imagine any scenario that would justify his actions. Simply being pissed off doesn't work (for me, at least). If it wasn't virtual damage, but instead if on his way out of the building he did $200k damage by smashing computer monitors, slashing the furniture, and breaking the fancy piece of art in the lobby, would it be any different in your mind?
Slashdot Mirror
It's exactly what I think when I see those ads on tv. You know, the ones that come on at 2am -
It is times like that where I really wish I had built that Scorch-inator.
You still have to deal with the signal to noise level. Back in the day when email boxes would fill with spam, maybe there would have been a nugget or two in there that might have been useful, but I never would have seen it because of the rest of the crap. Amazon might have to deal with this in some manner so that potential customers don't get buried in crap as well or they'll stop using their service.
Don't forget that particle physics has given us strange, charmed, and colored particles.
+1
He always had his headset on, but I do recall him saying that he picked it up on one of the instruments.
I don't even bother to try. Besides the elbow issue you mention, if the person in front of me reclines their seat, then I have to tip my screen forward where it gets too bothersome to try to use. I might try again if I ever move to a tablet computer.
I'm part of a research group where we fly all sorts of electronic crap on helicopters. We typically take off and land with computers and other stuff running. However, as an example of what you talk about, we have had a flight or two where we are flying and the pilot asks us "OK, who has their phone on?" because he can pick up the interference (I'm not sure exactly, but I think it was from GSM phones).
This sounds like it has potential for Scott Adams to get a good number of strips out of this.
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa AHAHAAAaahaa hoo hoho
Damn you almost had me there. The internet was never every that. Look no further than the alt groups in usenet. You will see the BS has been flowing a long time.
Indeed. This is where we got things like YHBT. HAND.
One of the first things he did when he became Speaker was to get rid of the Office of Technology Assessment.
Better yet, he should buy a huge-ass inner tube (I think the Acme Corp. makes a good one) and stretch it across a big homemade slingshot. Then he can get on his wing and roller skates and really launch himself.
Coincidentally, I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this Slashdot box is too narrow to explain.
I'd like to check them out, but apparently their domain name expired yesterday.
How far back do you like to keep your documents? From how I understand your message, it doesn't sound like you get rid of anything.
I've got stacks of stuff going back +20 years that is around out of sheer laziness. One of my projects in the next couple months is bulk shredding, but I haven't quite decided where to draw the lines on what to keep and how far back (I'm pretty sure I can get rid of all those canceled checks and account statements from that bank account that was closed 15 years ago...).
Wasn't in plain sight. It was under the seat. A series of cars were systematically broken into to steal what they could find in them.
You mean it was the scare mongering media who broke into my car and stole my wallet? All these years I figured it was some teenaged punk.
Facebook has been adopted by the audience that is slow to adopt and slow to move away as well, which is older people.
So was AOL. People talk of Facebook, especially since it is the darling of the media at the moment, like it is the very fabric that holds civilization together. Having been around these interwebs since the 80's, I can recall many who have risen and fallen. They'll have their cycle, I'm sure.
So what is the over-under in years until we hear this kind of story about Facebook?
I think you still have to classify this as vapor for the very reasons you mention. Basically it is a pitch for further funding, which is fine. However, there is no guarantee that this would ever make it to market simply because it is academic research. Hopefully it will, but there are many academic research advances that don't make it to market for a variety of reasons, such as being able to productize it in a cost effective manner (unless you can get it heavily subsidized, for instance). Perhaps there might be no reason in principal that it couldn't be productized, but let us say it does but it comes out 2-3 times the amount of what a regular heat pump does, nobody will buy it. If they haven't done any manufacturability analysis or any kind of market research, I'd take that 5-10 years at this point to be no better than any number they could pull out from between their back pockets.
Yeah, but on this model you can turn the volume up to 11.
Cosmic ray hit locations are random. The spacing between parts would not matter. The problem comes from there are many more components in a Core i7 than in the Apollo Guidance Computer, so there are more things to hit. On the other hand, you would never try to fly a Core i7 because it isn't radiation hardened. I agree with the statement that computer power is not the biggest hurdle to space travel because there are plenty of rad-hard processors that have orders of magnitude more processing power than what was on Apollo.
Inspector Gadget
About 10 years ago or so they opened another brewery in Tampa, FL.
These days it seems to be getting more and more (politically? socially?) acceptable for people to take the Chinese menu approach to science: they want to pick and choose which parts of science they like (e.g., molecular biology and genetics that comes up with Viagra and other things), and which stuff they don't (e.g., evolutionary biology, which is the basis for all that molecular biology and genetics). For the stuff they don't like, they simply choose not to believe it.
I'm curious, even if he was fired without any justified reason, and let's assume for the moment that it was for some petty reason, would you think what he did was in any way justified or correct? If you are withholding judgment to hear what the cause of his termination was, I'm trying to imagine any scenario that would justify his actions. Simply being pissed off doesn't work (for me, at least). If it wasn't virtual damage, but instead if on his way out of the building he did $200k damage by smashing computer monitors, slashing the furniture, and breaking the fancy piece of art in the lobby, would it be any different in your mind?