Toyota got unwanted acceleration because people stepped on the gas pedal, thinking it was the brake. Just like every other "unwanted acceleration" problem in automotive history. It is a design flaw if you let people shift out of park without their foot already on the brake, of course, but not a programmer error.
Plenty of credentialed dumbasses in the world. Are you one? If you're a working professional anywhere, and you're not saving a significant portion of your salary each month, you done fucked up.
Any "colony" this century is going to be higher dependent on Earth for resources, don't kid yourself. The nice thing about Venus is you don't have to solve the serious problems of humans living in a low-g, high-rad environment. People could actually come back from Venus.
First,use an extremely efficient propulsion system like electric propulsion to shed said energy and provide the mundane control needed for the system.
Adding more energy seems unlikely to help.
Second, you can run payloads down the tether at the same time as your run them up the tether. That would keep the energy balance stable.
Again, not a freshman-physics pendulum. We're not talking spherical cows uniformly radiating milk here. The upwards and downwards payloads would be in different places on the tether (except momentarily) and so would each be doing there own thing to complicate the system.
You might find it entertaining to watch some youtube videos of 2- and 3-section pendulum, elastic pendulums, and so on. They don't work and play well with others.
Venus is the only target that makes sense. Much easier in the long run than Mars or Luna, but the initial stake is high, as you have to get a fairly sizeable dirigible there to start things off. Once you do, though: proper gravity, proper pressure, reasonable temps, plenty of atmospheric rad shielding, plenty of oxygen, trace elements there for the scavenging so you don't need a "perfect" sealed colony that would never work. It's a great idea, really.
Half the energy to obit at GEO comes from lateral acceleration. A space elevator would be a giant pendulum. And not a nice freshman-physics harmonic oscillator, but a nasty chaotic system with multiple modes of vibration. The energy stored in the system would increase with every payload until it destroyed itself, because there's no way to shed that unwanted energy - minimal friction, trivial air resistance, and so on.
Not in the sense of a mirror, but yes, it does, nondirectionally. More importanty, it tends to radiate at frequencies not absorbed by the material.
Look, "reflection" is a specific concept, OK? It's a different thing than absorption and emission. They are two different effects, which is why we use different words to describe them. There is some refraction by clouds, and I'm sure some trivial percentage is refracted multiple times to end up headed back towards the surface, but that's about it.
Why does the distinction matter? Actual reflection of IR nearly blocks radiative cooling (at some point the reflective surface, not being perfect, heats up and starts radiating). This is why a really good thermos needs a reflective layer in addition to a vacuum gap. If IR were being reflected close to the emitter, which it's not, changing the frequency to one not reflected would make a huge difference.
Absorption is very different. Sure, the atmosphere absorbs IR and becomes warmer as a result, but it's not like that happens meaningfully within a few yards of the ground! Changing the frequency of your thermal radiation a bit will not make a meaningful difference in cooling. OTOH, covering something sitting in the sun with a reflective surface makes a significant difference.
Outer space is at ~3K/-270C: having that as your cold sink *day and night* is really quite significant.
Radiative cooling doesn't work that way: all that matters is your temperature. You don't radiate more into a cold area than a hot (a hot area sends more thermal radiation to warm you up, but that's orthogonal). It would be different if the atmosphere reflected IR, but that's not the case.
It's arguably a major Bug in Git if the Git software keeps track of an object Solely by Hash, and lazily assumes that the Hash uniquely identifies a specific version of the file,
A hash of 128 bits or more is a more reliable unique ID than anything custom you could code up. Safe vs malicious attackers is different, and as others have pointed out, sign your commits. But as just a way to get a reliably unique ID for a document (or set thereof)? It's a very solid approach.
His point was that this AI didn't use the same inputs and controls a human does, so it's not a fair test. Adapt this AI to use only the screen buffer, and give it input lag to match a mechanical controller, and you'll have something.
While more people find Trump credible than the old-school media, it still less than half the people who find him credible. The destruction of credibility of the old-school media was self-inflicted - Trump merely comments on the obvious fact. Have you never been directly involved in something that was reported by a journalist?
A 128-bit hash (from a common library or hardware implementation) is more likely to be unique than any code you write in the attempt to create a unique ID. Why? Because the risk of an accidental 128-bit hash collision within a pool of, say 1 billion items, is lower than the risk of a bug in your code.
If you doubt it, ask yourself this: what's the occurrence of bugs, per million lines of code, in high quality software? I bet there's a better than 1:1 million chance of a bug in any code you write to generate a unique ID. But even if you're the greatest coder ever, in all of time and space, I bet the risk of a bug is higher than 1:1 trillion.
Time for Torvalds to drop the attitude and fix this
As far as I can tell, this is a non-cryptographic use of hashing. I've used MD5 in plenty of places just to get a fast (hardware-accelerated) unique ID for a chunk of data, or as a checksum. No security purpose at all.
when it has clearly devolved into one of the worst, most openly racist and least interesting communities on the internet
So he's clearly new here. We get far fewer GNAA posts here today than the early days. The political stories that don't belong here are, in fact, clickbait to broaden the appeal of/. beyond "news for nerds", since "news for nerds" is what's makes it the least interesting community for more people out there.
Sure, it's well coved by the old-school news. But are there any credible sources? Doesn't matter how many fiction authors are writing about it, after all.
Ah yes, the old conservative party of self-responsibility.
Self-responsibility is a concept that applies to responsible adults, not to young children or the mentally ill. I'm not buying that this guy was crazy -- I think he was just drunk and angry -- but if he were crazy then, yeah, blame sticks to those with a duty to provide him care, that didn't.
Man has a point. If you only hire H1-Bs, you won't get many Trump supporters.
About TFA: is a sad commentary on the US education system that our rednecks can't tell the races they're supposed to hate apart. But then, I guess it's not the smart ones who do this sort of shit in the first place.
It's normal to have javascript running in the background when you're at a site. How else do you think Google knows how long you spent looking at any page on the Web or where your mouse pointer was millisecond-by-millisecond. This attack is special because it keeps happening after you navigate away from the site.
Slashdot Mirror
Toyota got unwanted acceleration because people stepped on the gas pedal, thinking it was the brake. Just like every other "unwanted acceleration" problem in automotive history. It is a design flaw if you let people shift out of park without their foot already on the brake, of course, but not a programmer error.
Ah, sure, non-inertial reference frames are tricky.
Plenty of credentialed dumbasses in the world. Are you one? If you're a working professional anywhere, and you're not saving a significant portion of your salary each month, you done fucked up.
You do realize the context here is "space elevator", right? Or were you emphasizing my point? (If so, sorry, /. is so confrontational these days.)
Any "colony" this century is going to be higher dependent on Earth for resources, don't kid yourself. The nice thing about Venus is you don't have to solve the serious problems of humans living in a low-g, high-rad environment. People could actually come back from Venus.
First,use an extremely efficient propulsion system like electric propulsion to shed said energy and provide the mundane control needed for the system.
Adding more energy seems unlikely to help.
Second, you can run payloads down the tether at the same time as your run them up the tether. That would keep the energy balance stable.
Again, not a freshman-physics pendulum. We're not talking spherical cows uniformly radiating milk here. The upwards and downwards payloads would be in different places on the tether (except momentarily) and so would each be doing there own thing to complicate the system.
You might find it entertaining to watch some youtube videos of 2- and 3-section pendulum, elastic pendulums, and so on. They don't work and play well with others.
Venus is the only target that makes sense. Much easier in the long run than Mars or Luna, but the initial stake is high, as you have to get a fairly sizeable dirigible there to start things off. Once you do, though: proper gravity, proper pressure, reasonable temps, plenty of atmospheric rad shielding, plenty of oxygen, trace elements there for the scavenging so you don't need a "perfect" sealed colony that would never work. It's a great idea, really.
Half the energy to obit at GEO comes from lateral acceleration. A space elevator would be a giant pendulum. And not a nice freshman-physics harmonic oscillator, but a nasty chaotic system with multiple modes of vibration. The energy stored in the system would increase with every payload until it destroyed itself, because there's no way to shed that unwanted energy - minimal friction, trivial air resistance, and so on.
You live in a scary world of imaginary threats, my friend.
Not in the sense of a mirror, but yes, it does, nondirectionally. More importanty, it tends to radiate at frequencies not absorbed by the material.
Look, "reflection" is a specific concept, OK? It's a different thing than absorption and emission. They are two different effects, which is why we use different words to describe them. There is some refraction by clouds, and I'm sure some trivial percentage is refracted multiple times to end up headed back towards the surface, but that's about it.
Why does the distinction matter? Actual reflection of IR nearly blocks radiative cooling (at some point the reflective surface, not being perfect, heats up and starts radiating). This is why a really good thermos needs a reflective layer in addition to a vacuum gap. If IR were being reflected close to the emitter, which it's not, changing the frequency to one not reflected would make a huge difference.
Absorption is very different. Sure, the atmosphere absorbs IR and becomes warmer as a result, but it's not like that happens meaningfully within a few yards of the ground! Changing the frequency of your thermal radiation a bit will not make a meaningful difference in cooling. OTOH, covering something sitting in the sun with a reflective surface makes a significant difference.
Outer space is at ~3K/-270C: having that as your cold sink *day and night* is really quite significant.
Radiative cooling doesn't work that way: all that matters is your temperature. You don't radiate more into a cold area than a hot (a hot area sends more thermal radiation to warm you up, but that's orthogonal). It would be different if the atmosphere reflected IR, but that's not the case.
u dont
I stopped reading there, sorry.
It's arguably a major Bug in Git if the Git software keeps track of an object Solely by Hash, and lazily assumes that the Hash uniquely identifies a specific version of the file,
A hash of 128 bits or more is a more reliable unique ID than anything custom you could code up. Safe vs malicious attackers is different, and as others have pointed out, sign your commits. But as just a way to get a reliably unique ID for a document (or set thereof)? It's a very solid approach.
You're not helping your point any. Hashes (like MD5, which is 128 bits) are plenty unique.
His point was that this AI didn't use the same inputs and controls a human does, so it's not a fair test. Adapt this AI to use only the screen buffer, and give it input lag to match a mechanical controller, and you'll have something.
While more people find Trump credible than the old-school media, it still less than half the people who find him credible. The destruction of credibility of the old-school media was self-inflicted - Trump merely comments on the obvious fact. Have you never been directly involved in something that was reported by a journalist?
You think hashes are unique. You're insane.
A 128-bit hash (from a common library or hardware implementation) is more likely to be unique than any code you write in the attempt to create a unique ID. Why? Because the risk of an accidental 128-bit hash collision within a pool of, say 1 billion items, is lower than the risk of a bug in your code.
If you doubt it, ask yourself this: what's the occurrence of bugs, per million lines of code, in high quality software? I bet there's a better than 1:1 million chance of a bug in any code you write to generate a unique ID. But even if you're the greatest coder ever, in all of time and space, I bet the risk of a bug is higher than 1:1 trillion.
Time for Torvalds to drop the attitude and fix this
As far as I can tell, this is a non-cryptographic use of hashing. I've used MD5 in plenty of places just to get a fast (hardware-accelerated) unique ID for a chunk of data, or as a checksum. No security purpose at all.
Based on what, exactly? Obviously there would be a battery pack replacement along the way, but electric motors don't exactly wear out quickly.
Well-played, sir.
OP said:
when it has clearly devolved into one of the worst, most openly racist and least interesting communities on the internet
So he's clearly new here. We get far fewer GNAA posts here today than the early days. The political stories that don't belong here are, in fact, clickbait to broaden the appeal of /. beyond "news for nerds", since "news for nerds" is what's makes it the least interesting community for more people out there.
Sure, it's well coved by the old-school news. But are there any credible sources? Doesn't matter how many fiction authors are writing about it, after all.
Ah yes, the old conservative party of self-responsibility.
Self-responsibility is a concept that applies to responsible adults, not to young children or the mentally ill. I'm not buying that this guy was crazy -- I think he was just drunk and angry -- but if he were crazy then, yeah, blame sticks to those with a duty to provide him care, that didn't.
Pretty sure only the white racists, in the US, support Trump. Lotsa racists around, sadly.
Man has a point. If you only hire H1-Bs, you won't get many Trump supporters.
About TFA: is a sad commentary on the US education system that our rednecks can't tell the races they're supposed to hate apart. But then, I guess it's not the smart ones who do this sort of shit in the first place.
It's normal to have javascript running in the background when you're at a site. How else do you think Google knows how long you spent looking at any page on the Web or where your mouse pointer was millisecond-by-millisecond. This attack is special because it keeps happening after you navigate away from the site.