We should revisit what "Brick" *actually* means: "When used in reference to electronics, "brick" describes a device that cannot function in any capacity (such as a machine with damaged firmware)." (Wikipedia)
Lately several submissions have used this term incorrectly. Come on, we're supposed to be nerds, not Cringely.
"The criticism about that particular bug may not be apt as a generalizable example, but it is as a reminder that no project is perfect and complacency isn't an appropriate attitude for even the best of browsers."
Yeah, that was my point. Also however was the point that nothing is perfect - and that it has taken mozilla this long to replace a proprietary mozilla css attribute with the correct one.
IE is IE and has it's issues. I can only hope that in the face of such wide compliance with w3c standards that IE 8 will finally be fully compliant. I mean apple managed this years ago...
That is the bug for inline-block support. A very BASIC part of the CSS standard. For example it is useful for making a span tag retain a fixed predetermined width.
Yes, there was some anecdote from one of the pilots - when they were forced to exceed normal cruise due to a missle, the pilots found they had more fuel left than they should have after landing.
I though the same thing for years. However it appears that the POH for the Blackbird has become public record. This manual basically describes how to fly the plane. The manual is now online @ http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/
The manual clearly shows that the planes design speed is mach 3.2 - exceeding this speed requires authorization from command. The thing that not everyone realizes is that unlike other planes that can go mach 2 or 3, they cannot sustain this speed due to excessive heating and or fuel consumption constraints. The blackbird is different in that it is designed to fly for ~ 3 hours at these speeds. In fact there are several guages dedicated to external heating for the plane. http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/5/5-9.php
So with all that said, the flat out top speed may be higher, but the operating manual usually wins out.
The summary for the article is mostly incorrect regarding the blackbird. The engine design of the blackbird is a hybrid design. The engine is a turbojet but there is a ramjet bypass for higher speeds. Ramjets are also known to work at speeds of up to Mach 5+. Though the scramjet engine is not much different it's just that the characteristics of the shockwaves change so much that the shape of the engine needs to change to achieve the same effect. So the limitation is not its engines, it mostly has to do with heating of the aircraft surfaces. Of the many topics discussed in the manual for the blackbird, external and internal heating was a major area of attention.
So if the Blackbird has issues with heating - you can bet that any other plane operating at that speed or higher will have the same problem. Unfortunately it is difficult to find a place to dump the excess heat. Any surface that comes into contact with the airstream causes friction, and heat buildup. You can use the fuel as a coolant, and the blackbird did. The JP-7 fuel that the blackbird used had an extremely high flashpoint. So it could be used to absorb some of the internal heat before being burned off. The blackbird is also much more like today's aircraft in construction - it was one of the first aircraft to use titanium alloys extensively in its construction.
The bottom line is that you don't just build a scram jet powered plane. It's not just about the engine, but about the entire plane. The challenges run the entire range from thermal to mechanical. To simply throw out a number like mach 15 and think that it's feasible to obtain any lasting operation at that speed using today's technology shows a distinct lack of understanding of the subject matter.
It took me 5 minutes to set up media center on XBox 360, it took me an additional 3 minutes to find a show that I enjoyed, that played, streaming, albeit with some lame commericals to my console over the internet. It was also free.
It also took me 5 minutes to start downloading a remastered original star trek episode, not free. Also, if it get erased from my XBox hard drive I can download it again.
Apple hasn't really figured out that the set top box in the style that they have, that is no tuner and DVR, needs to do more than just music and content.
So Apple TV is not really ahead of it's time, it is just inadequite and that is the purpose of the lack of adoption.
This whole "bidding" process on the spectrum doesn't create compeition, it makes the government money. If it were truly competitive there would be no fee for spectrum use. Instead we are left with a new spectrum with someone spending billions of dollars to "own" it.
Lame.
I'm also skeptical that this can become a useful resouce in a reasonable amount of time. It's great that Google et al buys up spectrum, but what about build out? How long is that going to take? What about radios? It's probably not that much of a change from current technology but it takes time.
Also, can the radios that use this network roam gloablly?
What would be cool is if Google bought it and let everyone "use" it.
"and you just gave real terrorists a way to evade suspicion."
What is so sad about this is that this only applies to people who cross legally. So ultimately the only people who are going to get "caught" by this effort are the people who don't cause michief.
The reason of course is that if the government makes it so hard or risky to get into our country via normal means, then they will enter illegally, via a border crossing or some such.
Name some, I checked and Jobs and Apple don't have their name attached to any significant level of giving. Out of the three, Apple is by far the worst in terms of philanthropy.
"I like the idea of not having to pay ten to fifty dollars for a fucking paperback book, because I'll now be able to buy it in digital form, without the expense of manufacturing and distributing"
Amazons current "electronic books" are a little baffling. Basically you pay 75.00 - 125.00 for a book (I'm talking textbooks). Then amazon will "let" you buy the electronic version of the same book for 20.00 dollars extra. Great! I've already bought the book, licensed it even and yet I still need to pay for it? It also appears that with some books you will only get the privilidge of purchasing the online version if you bought the paper version.
So amazon is pretty cool and I use them regularly, I just think that the electronic version of books, especially high end books, should be complimentary.
Nah - maybe 4/5 or 4.5/5. There are a number of aspects of this FPS that set it apart from others:
1 Physics. In the first level you are on a ship, as you walk around, run, and aim, you have to compensate for the roll of the ship. This is one of the first examples of this I've seen - it was a great effect and I'm pretty sure not super easy to do.
Bullet penetration through "soft" targets such as walls is really realistic - it also makes you re-think what "cover" really is.
2 Sneak. In most games of this genere it's kill or be killed. Taking a page out of metal gear solid, there are some levels where sneaking can keep you from getting into a fight - especially as a sniper.
3 There is one level entitled "Death from above" where you are a gunner on an AC-130. The level was very easy - but the dialog from the "crew" of the Spectre was really cool. When you scan over an area where there are bad guys the spotter will say "Get those guys" or "Yeah take them out". In some cases it's difficult to see because of cover and things - so the added verbal confirmation that you are about to kill the right guys was really impressive.
4 The enviroments flowed well.
5 Online play is challenging and engagning with a wide range of matches and game play, some lag though and "replay" is not always what you "saw" right before you died.
6 Wide range of weapons
7 Air support, UAV, and Helicopters as added bonuses for killing streaks
A FPS is an FPS but CoD 4 has really pushed the state of the art - you have to play with your eyes and ears not some crazy HUD that will always tell you where the bad guys are. There is the element of "maybe i can get that guy through a wall" - in a way this game redefines "cover" for the FPS genere. I also like the fact that dying is easy enough - it's not like it take a clip to take you down, three bullet strikes in a row is about all you can take.
Also, in the second to last level in the missle silo - there is a computer that looks remarkable like J.O.S.H.U.A. of war games. Mad props to the designers for including that.
I took a look at the SDK yesterday and some of the videos - having done windows mobile development it looks like it will be almost as easy and have a number of similar features.
My concern with all of this though - is that there is no hardware available.
One of the things about emulators is that they run really fast, much faster than the actual hardware runs - so it's hard to tell how responsive an application will be. So given that google has been plowing ahead on development but not been testing on real hardware, one has to wonder if things are going to get seriously challenging when they move to hardware...
"I'm not sure why NASA works this way (it seems less efficient to me), but I suppose it is easier to hire and fire and this way they don't have to deal with complicated government employment rules."
This is all crap. The supposed 64 GB drives are available from sony, there is reference on dells site as well but no link to buy and no machines that carry them - other than that you can't get them anywhere. The 32 GB drives are still ~ 600 bones. While I don't mind the price, the size is just to small. MTRON says "coming soon".
Nah, just didn't work like every other OS I've used, e.g. Linux, BSD, Unix, Solaris, Windows.
Destructive by default is really a poor philosphy. This actually shows itself in other areas, such as the default iPod nuke when plugging an iPod into another computer.
Slashdot Mirror
We should revisit what "Brick" *actually* means: "When used in reference to electronics, "brick" describes a device that cannot function in any capacity (such as a machine with damaged firmware)." (Wikipedia)
Lately several submissions have used this term incorrectly. Come on, we're supposed to be nerds, not Cringely.
"The criticism about that particular bug may not be apt as a generalizable example, but it is as a reminder that no project is perfect and complacency isn't an appropriate attitude for even the best of browsers."
Yeah, that was my point. Also however was the point that nothing is perfect - and that it has taken mozilla this long to replace a proprietary mozilla css attribute with the correct one.
IE is IE and has it's issues. I can only hope that in the face of such wide compliance with w3c standards that IE 8 will finally be fully compliant. I mean apple managed this years ago...
Yes, that was a very cool piece of hardware. It's also sad that n00b escort pilots caused one of the only working prototypes to crash.
Yeah how about firefox....
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9458
That is the bug for inline-block support. A very BASIC part of the CSS standard. For example it is useful for making a span tag retain a fixed predetermined width.
It works in every. other. browser.
Not only that - the bug has a 10 year history.
Yes, there was some anecdote from one of the pilots - when they were forced to exceed normal cruise due to a missle, the pilots found they had more fuel left than they should have after landing.
:)
Don't know where I read that either
yeah true, i was thinking more along the lines of military aircraft.
although, mach 2 is the concorde's upper limit - this is primarily due to the use of aluminum as the primary structural metal.
The operating cost per hour of the SR-71 was about $86,000/hr. Lol
I though the same thing for years. However it appears that the POH for the Blackbird has become public record. This manual basically describes how to fly the plane. The manual is now online @ http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/
The manual clearly shows that the planes design speed is mach 3.2 - exceeding this speed requires authorization from command.
The thing that not everyone realizes is that unlike other planes that can go mach 2 or 3, they cannot sustain this speed due to excessive heating and or fuel consumption constraints. The blackbird is different in that it is designed to fly for ~ 3 hours at these speeds. In fact there are several guages dedicated to external heating for the plane. http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/5/5-9.php
So with all that said, the flat out top speed may be higher, but the operating manual usually wins out.
The summary for the article is mostly incorrect regarding the blackbird. The engine design of the blackbird is a hybrid design. The engine is a turbojet but there is a ramjet bypass for higher speeds. Ramjets are also known to work at speeds of up to Mach 5+. Though the scramjet engine is not much different it's just that the characteristics of the shockwaves change so much that the shape of the engine needs to change to achieve the same effect. So the limitation is not its engines, it mostly has to do with heating of the aircraft surfaces. Of the many topics discussed in the manual for the blackbird, external and internal heating was a major area of attention.
So if the Blackbird has issues with heating - you can bet that any other plane operating at that speed or higher will have the same problem. Unfortunately it is difficult to find a place to dump the excess heat. Any surface that comes into contact with the airstream causes friction, and heat buildup. You can use the fuel as a coolant, and the blackbird did. The JP-7 fuel that the blackbird used had an extremely high flashpoint. So it could be used to absorb some of the internal heat before being burned off. The blackbird is also much more like today's aircraft in construction - it was one of the first aircraft to use titanium alloys extensively in its construction.
The bottom line is that you don't just build a scram jet powered plane. It's not just about the engine, but about the entire plane. The challenges run the entire range from thermal to mechanical. To simply throw out a number like mach 15 and think that it's feasible to obtain any lasting operation at that speed using today's technology shows a distinct lack of understanding of the subject matter.
Yes.
It took me 5 minutes to set up media center on XBox 360, it took me an additional 3 minutes to find a show that I enjoyed, that played, streaming, albeit with some lame commericals to my console over the internet. It was also free.
It also took me 5 minutes to start downloading a remastered original star trek episode, not free. Also, if it get erased from my XBox hard drive I can download it again.
Apple hasn't really figured out that the set top box in the style that they have, that is no tuner and DVR, needs to do more than just music and content.
So Apple TV is not really ahead of it's time, it is just inadequite and that is the purpose of the lack of adoption.
This whole "bidding" process on the spectrum doesn't create compeition, it makes the government money. If it were truly competitive there would be no fee for spectrum use. Instead we are left with a new spectrum with someone spending billions of dollars to "own" it.
Lame.
I'm also skeptical that this can become a useful resouce in a reasonable amount of time. It's great that Google et al buys up spectrum, but what about build out? How long is that going to take? What about radios? It's probably not that much of a change from current technology but it takes time.
Also, can the radios that use this network roam gloablly?
What would be cool is if Google bought it and let everyone "use" it.
"and you just gave real terrorists a way to evade suspicion."
What is so sad about this is that this only applies to people who cross legally. So ultimately the only people who are going to get "caught" by this effort are the people who don't cause michief.
The reason of course is that if the government makes it so hard or risky to get into our country via normal means, then they will enter illegally, via a border crossing or some such.
"As for Apple, they list many iniatives"
Name some, I checked and Jobs and Apple don't have their name attached to any significant level of giving. Out of the three, Apple is by far the worst in terms of philanthropy.
"I like the idea of not having to pay ten to fifty dollars for a fucking paperback book, because I'll now be able to buy it in digital form, without the expense of manufacturing and distributing"
Amazons current "electronic books" are a little baffling. Basically you pay 75.00 - 125.00 for a book (I'm talking textbooks). Then amazon will "let" you buy the electronic version of the same book for 20.00 dollars extra. Great! I've already bought the book, licensed it even and yet I still need to pay for it? It also appears that with some books you will only get the privilidge of purchasing the online version if you bought the paper version.
So amazon is pretty cool and I use them regularly, I just think that the electronic version of books, especially high end books, should be complimentary.
The safety of this machine had nothing to do with the programming and everything to do with the creators who failed to test their system sufficiently.
Ha ha - thanks for the correction. for some reason i remember it as joshua.
Nah - maybe 4/5 or 4.5/5. There are a number of aspects of this FPS that set it apart from others:
1 Physics. In the first level you are on a ship, as you walk around, run, and aim, you have to compensate for the roll of the ship. This is one of the first examples of this I've seen - it was a great effect and I'm pretty sure not super easy to do.
Bullet penetration through "soft" targets such as walls is really realistic - it also makes you re-think what "cover" really is.
2 Sneak. In most games of this genere it's kill or be killed. Taking a page out of metal gear solid, there are some levels where sneaking can keep you from getting into a fight - especially as a sniper.
3 There is one level entitled "Death from above" where you are a gunner on an AC-130. The level was very easy - but the dialog from the "crew" of the Spectre was really cool. When you scan over an area where there are bad guys the spotter will say "Get those guys" or "Yeah take them out". In some cases it's difficult to see because of cover and things - so the added verbal confirmation that you are about to kill the right guys was really impressive.
4 The enviroments flowed well.
5 Online play is challenging and engagning with a wide range of matches and game play, some lag though and "replay" is not always what you "saw" right before you died.
6 Wide range of weapons
7 Air support, UAV, and Helicopters as added bonuses for killing streaks
A FPS is an FPS but CoD 4 has really pushed the state of the art - you have to play with your eyes and ears not some crazy HUD that will always tell you where the bad guys are. There is the element of "maybe i can get that guy through a wall" - in a way this game redefines "cover" for the FPS genere. I also like the fact that dying is easy enough - it's not like it take a clip to take you down, three bullet strikes in a row is about all you can take.
Also, in the second to last level in the missle silo - there is a computer that looks remarkable like J.O.S.H.U.A. of war games. Mad props to the designers for including that.
Overall - a ton of fun to play.
Hoorah.
Almost as easy as developing for windows mobile...
I took a look at the SDK yesterday and some of the videos - having done windows mobile development it looks like it will be almost as easy and have a number of similar features.
My concern with all of this though - is that there is no hardware available.
One of the things about emulators is that they run really fast, much faster than the actual hardware runs - so it's hard to tell how responsive an application will be. So given that google has been plowing ahead on development but not been testing on real hardware, one has to wonder if things are going to get seriously challenging when they move to hardware...
"I'm not sure why NASA works this way (it seems less efficient to me), but I suppose it is easier to hire and fire and this way they don't have to deal with complicated government employment rules."
One reason: Government pay blows.
Not a good comparison.
Each of the things you have mentioned are on a continum. SETI is not, you either have a signal not of this world or you don't.
Fusion is a wide specrtum of states with a negative output, positive output, optimal, suboptimal. etc.
You can kill some cancers and not other others.
You can have some forms of AI but not others.
SETI is truly a two state item, it is as the posted stated a binary set, signal or no signal.
I was speaking strictly about Samsung, they have been very vocal about announcing "breakthroughs" and not delivering... almost worse than AMD lol.
Yeah it's good, once there are enough devices out there prices will fall.
This is all crap. The supposed 64 GB drives are available from sony, there is reference on dells site as well but no link to buy and no machines that carry them - other than that you can't get them anywhere. The 32 GB drives are still ~ 600 bones. While I don't mind the price, the size is just to small. MTRON says "coming soon".
Samsungs PR department needs to slow down...
Nah, just didn't work like every other OS I've used, e.g. Linux, BSD, Unix, Solaris, Windows.
Destructive by default is really a poor philosphy. This actually shows itself in other areas, such as the default iPod nuke when plugging an iPod into another computer.
Give this man a prize - I think that's the best answer I've heard so far...