One problem with robots is that they are too stupid in an unexpected situation. If a Martian shows up near the Spirit rover, for example, it has a good chance to become a first road fatality on Mars.
Another problem is that robots can only collect facts. But rarely anyone besides scientists wants dry facts about weather or minerals. The rest of humanity wants to *be* there, to be part of action, wherever that is; wants to do things, to build something, to go exploring, to live there... Robots are not very good at that.
The H2-A launch vehicle has had some teething troubles, but they should be able to fix it.
Japan will provide the rocket and the kamikaze crew to fly in it:-)
Japan is way farther from manned spaceflight than anyone else. Maybe on par with Brazil. Everyone else (besides USA) is right there, on the front, with Russia in comfortable lead, China in solid second spot, and Europe not far behind (Ariane is now not that bad.)
However, these take some time to build (a couple years) and I don't think there's a warehouse of them.
They do take about a year to build, IIRC - but their manufacturing is very efficient because of the volume; it is close to hand-assembly of Bentleys, maybe - not for everyone, but not prohibitively forbidding either. That's also exactly why a disposable rocket is something like 10x as cheap as a single Shuttle flight.
The Progress and shuttle are, as far as I know, the only two craft that can dock to the ISS that have anywhere close to enough power to move the thing.
Soyuz also can dock (obviously:-) and it uses the same engine. It's just departing Progresses are worthless, and nobody sweats about burning 99.9% of their fuel for the station boost. Soyuzes, on the other hand, are crew return vehicles, and you never know what you may need the fuel for... so they stay fueled all the time. When your crew successfully finishes the final deorbit burn, only then you know how much spare fuel you have:-)
Bush stated that we would fulfill our obligation to the international space station. That sends a very positive message to future prospective partners.
It is more similar to your landlord assuring you that he will fulfill the obligations of your current rental contract (while saying nothing about whether it will be renewed.) This position is just a somewhat discouraging legalese, because the ISS itself will not end its life in 2010.
If a moon platform better serves NASA's research goals then cancel the obsolete platforms.
Yes, the Shuttle should be scrapped right now, not waiting until some other disaster. The Shuttle was not sufficiently redundant to begin with, and the decades of use didn't help with it either. The concern here may be that the $1B is simply not enough - "too little, too late". It may be so. I don't think China's space program is financially constrained in any way.
The Moon is particularly important as a low gravity launch pad for BIG ships which are impossible to launch from Earth. An assembly shop in LEO is possible, sure, but it is far more practical to work in pressurized shelters and walk on the ground, instead of floating in dark space... try to set up a warehouse in weightlessness to see what I mean:-)
There's (currently) no way to boost the ISS without the shuttle
The ISS is boosted by a docked Progress which always has some fuel to spare before departing for Earth. An engine is an engine, regardless of what it is attached to. Only mass of your fuel and its chemical properties matter.
The only really serious problem is the trunk space - there is very little, compared to Shuttle and those italian cargo modules...
if humanity occupies 2 planets, then humanity is about half as likely to be annihilated by asteroids
More like p squared, where p is the probability of a strike. You need both events to occur to exterminate humanity.
Also, both strikes must occur almost at the same time; if not, the damaged planet may be repopulated in a short period of time, asteroid-wise (100 years or so), further lowering the chance of total destruction.
Actually, how do you propose to "roam the IPv6 space"? IPv4 can be randomly pinged; but with IPv6 you have a better chance of winning a lottery than of randomly hitting a computer on the IPv6 net...
Though I'm still curious why my appliances need to surf the web.
Your appliances can surf the Web even through NAT, it is perfect for that. The difference begins when your service center can ssh into your fridge and troubleshoot it remotely. That you can not have with a standard, untweaked NAT.
This is not a contrived example, BTW. I have a fridge in my rental apartment which sometimes vibrates a lot, but often it does not. Since I don't own the fridge, I don't care as long as it's minor. But a properly designed modern fridge would be able to monitor itself, signal the service center when something bad happens, and upload the diagnostics data for the mechanic to see.
As another example, I have a bread maker. It has a timer, but how would I know when I am going home a whole working day ahead? So I don't use it. If I have an internet connection to the bread maker, I could begin the baking cycle 3 hours before going home, and get a nice loaf exactly when I need it.
It is also hard to argue that you'd like to ssh into your VCR or Tivo and program them to record something that you just remembered. More than once people called me and asked to tape Buffy or something because they forgot:-)
Some of my friends are seriously involved with home automation. They have tons of gadgets, sensors, motors and everything else. Currently, a Web server is used to control all that. But that is extra complexity. With IPv6 you add devices as you need them, and they are instantly online, accessible to you as long as you have the IPSec key or whatever you choose to secure them.
IPv6 enables citizens to freely connect to each other's computers. IPV4 allows companies and governments to compartmentalize networks and keep the consumers in their little pens out of which they can't get out. Guess where the preferences of the establishment are...
The task is most likely possible simply because there's been an STTR solicitation published.
This is not how things are done. It is very, very typical to get requests for things that are physically impossible. Then you either don't bid, or try to lower the requirements.
It would be also stupid to publish requests only for things that the customer thinks are possible. How would the customer know what is and what is not possible? Leave it to the specialists. Ask for what you need, and they will tell you what you can have. Then you decide.
In other words, the existence of the program does not mean anything.
because removal of randomness (along with redundancy) is what compression is all about.
I am afraid you have it backwards. Compression is removal of repetitive, guessable parts. The better you compress, the more random the output becomes. Perfectly compressed data consists of bits where each bit has no relation whatsoever to any other bit in this data.
So it is perfectly possible to hide information in large data files. The original request is impossible, because you not just need to reliably extract the ciphertext - you can't even recognize it as such; what you have to do is to extract a probable ciphertext and decipher it, only then you know that you are successful. But deciphering of even one ciphertext may take years, and the customer wants to do millions of them, and in real time... good luck.
That answer is less likely because the possible attacks, as speculated in the parent posts, are so simple that they do not require any planning or preparations or even leadership.
Other posters indicate that even citizens of a waiver country will be fingerprinted if they need a visa - and there are many reasons why they may have one (such as to work or study in US.) Some citizens of those countries were already fingerprinted and posted their experiences here.
The waiver skips fingerprinting only if you are visiting briefly, with only sightseeing purpose, or for very limited business activities (like a trade show.)
I wonder how long it will be before they want to fingerprint ALL airline passangers
It probably will start as a voluntary, convenience measure - that proverbial carrot. There are enough people who do not care, or do not understand what they are subjected to. Many people today are just consumers of goods and services, and they will gladly take 10% discount on airfares (or something) for using a fingerprint-based identity check.
Once part of the population is hooked, that will be played against the rest of people, placating them as "OBL's helpers" or something else, equally ridiculous and equally effective. A "Red Corridor" can be set up for refusniks, for example, and it will be much slower. The attrition will move the plank from the original 30% to maybe 80%, since people will just submit and continue with their lives.
The rest, 20% or less, will be then forced into the new groove. A mandatory body cavity probing, complete with X-ray, in every airport would be a good start; after some time, cumulative dose of X rays will be deadly anyhow. And to clean things up, a little-known rider will be inserted into an agriculture bill to completely outlaw travel and some other activities unless positively ID'ed with biometrics.
You may say it is too dark a future. I say, if it can be done, it will be done.
The mastermind of 9/11 was pulled over for speeding days before the terrorist attacks.
His intent to terrorize was not printed in any of his documents; and he probably produced his driver's license anyway, with his name and address. How would a green card / visa check matter? He was in the country legally, and his visa was extended even after he died.
I'm a reasonably frequent traveler with 20 years of business travel. If I could check in to the airport by touching a fingerprint panel, and avoiding all the lines, what's not to like?
I'd say, your fingers would be very useful to terrorists. Guard them well!
This database *will* be queried whenever a fingerprint is lifted at a crime scene. There will be false matches - at least because visitor's index fingers will be matched to any fingerprints that aren't known which finger left them (there are no numbers on your fingerprints, just fyi:-)
Since there will be false matches, once the suspect visitor arrives next time, the border guard will slap the big red button, sirens start wailing, and (like in Stargate SG-1) troops run in and take positions around the visitor... the visitor's heart then fails, so that the justice is complete.
But more seriously, this database will create more confusion than help. Nobody cares about 1e6 fingerprints from people who were most likely not here, but could possibly, technically, be. It will only pollute the database, and will infinitely expand the scope of probable suspects. What Detective Smith is going to do if his burglary scene in Chicago has probable fingerprints of a Malaysian who was visiting LA for three days, and already left?
Slashdot Mirror
I think the only reaction Helium might be insterested in would be nuclear.
Another problem is that robots can only collect facts. But rarely anyone besides scientists wants dry facts about weather or minerals. The rest of humanity wants to *be* there, to be part of action, wherever that is; wants to do things, to build something, to go exploring, to live there... Robots are not very good at that.
Japan will provide the rocket and the kamikaze crew to fly in it :-)
Japan is way farther from manned spaceflight than anyone else. Maybe on par with Brazil. Everyone else (besides USA) is right there, on the front, with Russia in comfortable lead, China in solid second spot, and Europe not far behind (Ariane is now not that bad.)
Because Fox does not listen, quite wisely :-)
They do take about a year to build, IIRC - but their manufacturing is very efficient because of the volume; it is close to hand-assembly of Bentleys, maybe - not for everyone, but not prohibitively forbidding either. That's also exactly why a disposable rocket is something like 10x as cheap as a single Shuttle flight.
The Progress and shuttle are, as far as I know, the only two craft that can dock to the ISS that have anywhere close to enough power to move the thing.
Soyuz also can dock (obviously :-) and it uses the same engine. It's just departing Progresses are worthless, and nobody sweats about burning 99.9% of their fuel for the station boost. Soyuzes, on the other hand, are crew return vehicles, and you never know what you may need the fuel for... so they stay fueled all the time. When your crew successfully finishes the final deorbit burn, only then you know how much spare fuel you have :-)
It is more similar to your landlord assuring you that he will fulfill the obligations of your current rental contract (while saying nothing about whether it will be renewed.) This position is just a somewhat discouraging legalese, because the ISS itself will not end its life in 2010.
If a moon platform better serves NASA's research goals then cancel the obsolete platforms.
Yes, the Shuttle should be scrapped right now, not waiting until some other disaster. The Shuttle was not sufficiently redundant to begin with, and the decades of use didn't help with it either. The concern here may be that the $1B is simply not enough - "too little, too late". It may be so. I don't think China's space program is financially constrained in any way.
The Moon is particularly important as a low gravity launch pad for BIG ships which are impossible to launch from Earth. An assembly shop in LEO is possible, sure, but it is far more practical to work in pressurized shelters and walk on the ground, instead of floating in dark space... try to set up a warehouse in weightlessness to see what I mean :-)
The ISS is boosted by a docked Progress which always has some fuel to spare before departing for Earth. An engine is an engine, regardless of what it is attached to. Only mass of your fuel and its chemical properties matter.
The only really serious problem is the trunk space - there is very little, compared to Shuttle and those italian cargo modules...
More like p squared, where p is the probability of a strike. You need both events to occur to exterminate humanity.
Also, both strikes must occur almost at the same time; if not, the damaged planet may be repopulated in a short period of time, asteroid-wise (100 years or so), further lowering the chance of total destruction.
The human space program is driven by desire of one person to go back to Arkon...
Actually, how do you propose to "roam the IPv6 space"? IPv4 can be randomly pinged; but with IPv6 you have a better chance of winning a lottery than of randomly hitting a computer on the IPv6 net...
Your appliances can surf the Web even through NAT, it is perfect for that. The difference begins when your service center can ssh into your fridge and troubleshoot it remotely. That you can not have with a standard, untweaked NAT.
This is not a contrived example, BTW. I have a fridge in my rental apartment which sometimes vibrates a lot, but often it does not. Since I don't own the fridge, I don't care as long as it's minor. But a properly designed modern fridge would be able to monitor itself, signal the service center when something bad happens, and upload the diagnostics data for the mechanic to see.
As another example, I have a bread maker. It has a timer, but how would I know when I am going home a whole working day ahead? So I don't use it. If I have an internet connection to the bread maker, I could begin the baking cycle 3 hours before going home, and get a nice loaf exactly when I need it.
It is also hard to argue that you'd like to ssh into your VCR or Tivo and program them to record something that you just remembered. More than once people called me and asked to tape Buffy or something because they forgot :-)
Some of my friends are seriously involved with home automation. They have tons of gadgets, sensors, motors and everything else. Currently, a Web server is used to control all that. But that is extra complexity. With IPv6 you add devices as you need them, and they are instantly online, accessible to you as long as you have the IPSec key or whatever you choose to secure them.
IPv6 is self-configuring; this pretty much means that you plug the appliance into the wall socket, and that's it. Try this with IPv4 without DHCP.
IPv6 enables citizens to freely connect to each other's computers. IPV4 allows companies and governments to compartmentalize networks and keep the consumers in their little pens out of which they can't get out. Guess where the preferences of the establishment are...
SuSE 9.0 enables IPv6 automatically, and RedHat 9.0 is only one "modprobe ipv6" away from this.
This is not how things are done. It is very, very typical to get requests for things that are physically impossible. Then you either don't bid, or try to lower the requirements.
It would be also stupid to publish requests only for things that the customer thinks are possible. How would the customer know what is and what is not possible? Leave it to the specialists. Ask for what you need, and they will tell you what you can have. Then you decide.
In other words, the existence of the program does not mean anything.
I am afraid you have it backwards. Compression is removal of repetitive, guessable parts. The better you compress, the more random the output becomes. Perfectly compressed data consists of bits where each bit has no relation whatsoever to any other bit in this data.
So it is perfectly possible to hide information in large data files. The original request is impossible, because you not just need to reliably extract the ciphertext - you can't even recognize it as such; what you have to do is to extract a probable ciphertext and decipher it, only then you know that you are successful. But deciphering of even one ciphertext may take years, and the customer wants to do millions of them, and in real time... good luck.
That answer is less likely because the possible attacks, as speculated in the parent posts, are so simple that they do not require any planning or preparations or even leadership.
The waiver skips fingerprinting only if you are visiting briefly, with only sightseeing purpose, or for very limited business activities (like a trade show.)
It probably will start as a voluntary, convenience measure - that proverbial carrot. There are enough people who do not care, or do not understand what they are subjected to. Many people today are just consumers of goods and services, and they will gladly take 10% discount on airfares (or something) for using a fingerprint-based identity check.
Once part of the population is hooked, that will be played against the rest of people, placating them as "OBL's helpers" or something else, equally ridiculous and equally effective. A "Red Corridor" can be set up for refusniks, for example, and it will be much slower. The attrition will move the plank from the original 30% to maybe 80%, since people will just submit and continue with their lives.
The rest, 20% or less, will be then forced into the new groove. A mandatory body cavity probing, complete with X-ray, in every airport would be a good start; after some time, cumulative dose of X rays will be deadly anyhow. And to clean things up, a little-known rider will be inserted into an agriculture bill to completely outlaw travel and some other activities unless positively ID'ed with biometrics.
You may say it is too dark a future. I say, if it can be done, it will be done.
His intent to terrorize was not printed in any of his documents; and he probably produced his driver's license anyway, with his name and address. How would a green card / visa check matter? He was in the country legally, and his visa was extended even after he died.
The only logical answer is that your assertion is wrong; evidently, not too many people actually want to hurt you even though they might not like you.
I'd say, your fingers would be very useful to terrorists. Guard them well!
Since there will be false matches, once the suspect visitor arrives next time, the border guard will slap the big red button, sirens start wailing, and (like in Stargate SG-1) troops run in and take positions around the visitor... the visitor's heart then fails, so that the justice is complete.
But more seriously, this database will create more confusion than help. Nobody cares about 1e6 fingerprints from people who were most likely not here, but could possibly, technically, be. It will only pollute the database, and will infinitely expand the scope of probable suspects. What Detective Smith is going to do if his burglary scene in Chicago has probable fingerprints of a Malaysian who was visiting LA for three days, and already left?
Unless the fingerprint is accompanied by your photo, and a complete record of who you are - as it just happens in this case.