Now I might be wrong given the pretext of the article but isn't that a tad more likely than transference by someone sodomising an ape.
You might be appalled by this, but in third world countries, people are taught that the initial AIDS transmission occurred after someone "had relations" with an ape. At least I was taught that by a "abstinence only" group that gave a lecture back when I used to go to middle school in Mexico...
Indeed, the power supply problem does exist, and is actually the limiting factor in the performance of ion thruster engines and electric propulsion in general. That limitation actually causes very high specific impulses to be undesirable as the power supply weight savings exceeds the mass savings in propellant. The ideal specific impulse then becomes an optimization problem.
That said, my point is that there are particular applications for which electric propulsion is better than conventional methods (long-distance robotic missions, to pick one), and there are other applications in which chemical propulsion is better than electric propulsion (such as moving a satellite from low-Earth orbit to geostationary orbit... we don't want to wait months for that to occur!) Kind of like in anything involving engineering, you have trade-offs that you have to consider for a particular mission. But assuming that big liquid propulsion rockets are the solution to all the problems is rather lame.
If you want to do any deep-space maneuvers, you have to carry all that liquid propellant (be it LO2/LH2 or LO2/RP-1, for the rocketry equivalent of a gas guzzler (specific impulse of 200-500 s), instead of carrying a small amount of high-efficiency propellant with a specific impulse of up to 10000 s.
VASIMR and the like won't get you off the ground, because their thrust-to-weight ratio is less than one--meaning they can't beat the force of gravity here on Earth. But once in space, if you're going far, their performance characteristics mean that you can sometimes get to your destination faster and cheaper than you can with ordinary impulse-maneuvered chemical rockets.
$650-$750 million that goes into high-tech, high-paying jobs that cannot be outsourced (security clearances) sounds like something we REALLY NEED at this point, if you ask me. If anything, we need more space spending to stimulate the economy directly at a time of recession.
Neither. A satellite might be hit by the bag, if it happens to be unlucky enough to be in its path in the next month or so. After that, atmospheric drag will slow the tool bag enough for it to start re-entry. That's the reason the ISS has to be continuously boosted to a new altitude after every resupply mission.
As for the ISS: the tool bag right now has a different orbital velocity than the ISS / Shuttle compound (otherwise it wouldn't have drifted away), so its orbital elements change. As a result, the bag will be in an orbit with a) a different perigee altitude (so there's a different amount of atmospheric drag acting on the bag), and more importantly, b) a different period of revolution around the Earth thanks to Kepler's third law. While the bag and the ISS do share a common point on their orbits (at least until drag takes a toll), the time it takes them to reach that same point is slightly different.
Although it makes for a nice Beeb quip, no, it is not too far. Sending water into low-Earth orbit is not cheap (a launch delta-V of ~ 9 km/s) , and sending it to other places like the Moon and Mars is even more expensive. That's why it is necessary to begin testing and using this technology, where it is possible to actually send replenishment water in case something doesn't work properly.
What I wonder is what are they going to do with Endeavour on LC-39B. It is not necessary to have it there anymore as STS-125 is postponed, but was still going to go up soon for STS-126. Since they can't scuttle the pad now (as they'll need it for the rescheduled STS-125 flight next year), will they just launch from LC-39B? or are they going to do a weird rain dance, moving Atlantis back to the VBA, and Endeavour to LC-39A?
Also, the Constellation folks won't be pleased about Yet Another Delay(TM)...
The advent of the mouse killed the keyboard, too, after all. And the internet made TV obsolete, which killed newspapers a few decades ago.
Exactly. Anything will continue to exist as long as it remains useful, and this is especially true for input devices. The QWERTY keyboard as we know it was invented in the 1870s, and the mouse, even with its ubiquity, hasn't killed it.
The mouse is as popular as the keyboard, so what are the chances of new technology making the mouse (or keyboard) completely obsolete? None. Most likely, you will see what has happened so far: input devices used to complement each other, not to replace each other. While the Wiimote is interesting, I can't see it being used for some of the tasks that are best left to mice. Anyone feels like photoshopping 100 images with your arm extended?
It is always a sad day when a giant in his field passes away, and today was one of those days. Indeed, Dr. DeBakey was one of the giants of modern medicine, due to the amount of innovation spearheaded by his efforts. His work directly affected countless lives for the better, as he caused a paradigm shift in cardiovascular medicine.
A sad day indeed. May you rest in peace, Doc.
I know anecdotal evidence is usually worthless, but in this case I have some to share. An ex-uncle of mine (thankfully he is an *ex* uncle due to him being divorced out of the family) swore that Canada was a state of the U.S. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. Not only that, he actually started arguing in public about how Canada must be a state of the U.S., because we send so much stuff there, and actually made fun of us because we were so stupid to believe that Canada was a country. I mean, it is one level of stupidity to think that our neighbors who say "eh" are part of the country, but to actually argue otherwise? Wow, just wow.
That guy was such an idiot, it is still hard to believe. But the scary part? He was a gun-toting police officer. Somebody like that, with the mental acuity of a walnut, is supposed to defend us? Holy cow... imagine if he were in the military instead? I actually worry about the Canadians when I ponder that...
True. That said, if you are stuck in the infinite loop, though, you don't have to go clear your cache to be able to log in. You can just go to the main MSN portal, and since that site recognizes that you're still logged in, it will show you a "sign out" link instead. Just log out, and go back to the Hotmail site, and will let you log in again. Not ideal, but better than clearing caches.
I guess l don't understand why Wikipedia would be violating the GFDL (or violating contributors' copyright) to begin with. The violation of the mirror is less a copyright issue than it is a "you're using my server to do your dirty work" issue.
In case it helps, there's A bunch of notices mentioning the GFDL every time you mention a page.
The problem is not using the information that Wikipedia provides--after all, that's why it is contributed under copyleft. The problem is that someone is essentially hosting a site that routes all the heavy computational, database, and programming work through Wikimedia's servers, usually with the intention of making a quick buck by spamming or selling ads.
At the bottom of every page:
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Additionally, all the pages Wikipedia deals with are modified versions of prior GFDL'd documents, so Section 4 of the GFDL (Modifications) and all of its attribution requirements apply. While the GFDL is an awful license to use in a wiki, lack of attribution requirements is not one of those reasons.
It's funny, but you have to consider that the site is a live mirror of Wikipedia. So, they are using Wikipedia's content, through Wikipedia's servers, and then serving ads and spam on top of them. These get nuked by the Wikimedia server administrators quickly.
Try this on Wikipedia itself. If it is not a problem anymore, it probably means that it was fixed in a version that's newer than what the CIA is using. (Currently, all Wikimedia Foundation wikis run MediaWiki 1.13alpha, straight from the Subversion source control repo.) If it is still a problem, email security @at@ wikimedia.org and we'll try to deal with that ASAP.
Damn it, I don't have mod points today. This is an awesome idea. Particularly if you only need one person to press one of the panic buttons to land the plane, you could even manage to get a regular passenger to do it in case of an emergency.
Slashdot Mirror
Illegal immigrants don't need missiles. They have rocks.
Now I might be wrong given the pretext of the article but isn't that a tad more likely than transference by someone sodomising an ape.
You might be appalled by this, but in third world countries, people are taught that the initial AIDS transmission occurred after someone "had relations" with an ape. At least I was taught that by a "abstinence only" group that gave a lecture back when I used to go to middle school in Mexico...
The real solution is to stop voting for incumbents. Nothing's going to change until we get rid of career politicians.
If they got to Congress, they already are career politicians.
NSFNET? Is that like NSFW on steroids?
Indeed, the power supply problem does exist, and is actually the limiting factor in the performance of ion thruster engines and electric propulsion in general. That limitation actually causes very high specific impulses to be undesirable as the power supply weight savings exceeds the mass savings in propellant. The ideal specific impulse then becomes an optimization problem.
That said, my point is that there are particular applications for which electric propulsion is better than conventional methods (long-distance robotic missions, to pick one), and there are other applications in which chemical propulsion is better than electric propulsion (such as moving a satellite from low-Earth orbit to geostationary orbit... we don't want to wait months for that to occur!) Kind of like in anything involving engineering, you have trade-offs that you have to consider for a particular mission. But assuming that big liquid propulsion rockets are the solution to all the problems is rather lame.
Um... yeah, right.
If you want to do any deep-space maneuvers, you have to carry all that liquid propellant (be it LO2/LH2 or LO2/RP-1, for the rocketry equivalent of a gas guzzler (specific impulse of 200-500 s), instead of carrying a small amount of high-efficiency propellant with a specific impulse of up to 10000 s.
VASIMR and the like won't get you off the ground, because their thrust-to-weight ratio is less than one--meaning they can't beat the force of gravity here on Earth. But once in space, if you're going far, their performance characteristics mean that you can sometimes get to your destination faster and cheaper than you can with ordinary impulse-maneuvered chemical rockets.
$650-$750 million that goes into high-tech, high-paying jobs that cannot be outsourced (security clearances) sounds like something we REALLY NEED at this point, if you ask me. If anything, we need more space spending to stimulate the economy directly at a time of recession.
Neither. A satellite might be hit by the bag, if it happens to be unlucky enough to be in its path in the next month or so. After that, atmospheric drag will slow the tool bag enough for it to start re-entry. That's the reason the ISS has to be continuously boosted to a new altitude after every resupply mission.
As for the ISS: the tool bag right now has a different orbital velocity than the ISS / Shuttle compound (otherwise it wouldn't have drifted away), so its orbital elements change. As a result, the bag will be in an orbit with a) a different perigee altitude (so there's a different amount of atmospheric drag acting on the bag), and more importantly, b) a different period of revolution around the Earth thanks to Kepler's third law. While the bag and the ISS do share a common point on their orbits (at least until drag takes a toll), the time it takes them to reach that same point is slightly different.
Ok... uhhhhh... Beavis, they said urine... uh huh huh huh
Although it makes for a nice Beeb quip, no, it is not too far. Sending water into low-Earth orbit is not cheap (a launch delta-V of ~ 9 km/s) , and sending it to other places like the Moon and Mars is even more expensive. That's why it is necessary to begin testing and using this technology, where it is possible to actually send replenishment water in case something doesn't work properly.
Republicans want into your bedroom. Democrats want into your wallet. Libertarians want neither.
Republicans want into your bedroom? Fuck it, I'm voting for Palin!
What I wonder is what are they going to do with Endeavour on LC-39B. It is not necessary to have it there anymore as STS-125 is postponed, but was still going to go up soon for STS-126. Since they can't scuttle the pad now (as they'll need it for the rescheduled STS-125 flight next year), will they just launch from LC-39B? or are they going to do a weird rain dance, moving Atlantis back to the VBA, and Endeavour to LC-39A?
Also, the Constellation folks won't be pleased about Yet Another Delay(TM)...
The advent of the mouse killed the keyboard, too, after all. And the internet made TV obsolete, which killed newspapers a few decades ago.
Exactly. Anything will continue to exist as long as it remains useful, and this is especially true for input devices. The QWERTY keyboard as we know it was invented in the 1870s, and the mouse, even with its ubiquity, hasn't killed it.
The mouse is as popular as the keyboard, so what are the chances of new technology making the mouse (or keyboard) completely obsolete? None. Most likely, you will see what has happened so far: input devices used to complement each other, not to replace each other. While the Wiimote is interesting, I can't see it being used for some of the tasks that are best left to mice. Anyone feels like photoshopping 100 images with your arm extended?
It is always a sad day when a giant in his field passes away, and today was one of those days. Indeed, Dr. DeBakey was one of the giants of modern medicine, due to the amount of innovation spearheaded by his efforts. His work directly affected countless lives for the better, as he caused a paradigm shift in cardiovascular medicine. A sad day indeed. May you rest in peace, Doc.
You think that's bad? That's nothing, really.
I know anecdotal evidence is usually worthless, but in this case I have some to share. An ex-uncle of mine (thankfully he is an *ex* uncle due to him being divorced out of the family) swore that Canada was a state of the U.S. I wish I were joking, but I'm not. Not only that, he actually started arguing in public about how Canada must be a state of the U.S., because we send so much stuff there, and actually made fun of us because we were so stupid to believe that Canada was a country. I mean, it is one level of stupidity to think that our neighbors who say "eh" are part of the country, but to actually argue otherwise? Wow, just wow.
That guy was such an idiot, it is still hard to believe. But the scary part? He was a gun-toting police officer. Somebody like that, with the mental acuity of a walnut, is supposed to defend us? Holy cow... imagine if he were in the military instead? I actually worry about the Canadians when I ponder that...
Any hurricane reaching Delaware is a pretty rare phenomenon, regardless of strength. Actually, in the 150 years for which we have records, no hurricanes have made landfall in Delaware, and only two have caused hurricane-force winds in the state.
I think they're most interested in tracking the bikes themselves so they don't get stolen.
True. That said, if you are stuck in the infinite loop, though, you don't have to go clear your cache to be able to log in. You can just go to the main MSN portal, and since that site recognizes that you're still logged in, it will show you a "sign out" link instead. Just log out, and go back to the Hotmail site, and will let you log in again. Not ideal, but better than clearing caches.
HTH
I guess l don't understand why Wikipedia would be violating the GFDL (or violating contributors' copyright) to begin with. The violation of the mirror is less a copyright issue than it is a "you're using my server to do your dirty work" issue. In case it helps, there's A bunch of notices mentioning the GFDL every time you mention a page.
That is not the problem.
The problem is not using the information that Wikipedia provides--after all, that's why it is contributed under copyleft. The problem is that someone is essentially hosting a site that routes all the heavy computational, database, and programming work through Wikimedia's servers, usually with the intention of making a quick buck by spamming or selling ads.
It's funny, but you have to consider that the site is a live mirror of Wikipedia. So, they are using Wikipedia's content, through Wikipedia's servers, and then serving ads and spam on top of them. These get nuked by the Wikimedia server administrators quickly.
Try this on Wikipedia itself. If it is not a problem anymore, it probably means that it was fixed in a version that's newer than what the CIA is using. (Currently, all Wikimedia Foundation wikis run MediaWiki 1.13alpha, straight from the Subversion source control repo.) If it is still a problem, email security @at@ wikimedia.org and we'll try to deal with that ASAP.
Damn it, I don't have mod points today. This is an awesome idea. Particularly if you only need one person to press one of the panic buttons to land the plane, you could even manage to get a regular passenger to do it in case of an emergency.
Block him. He broke the Three-revert rule.