The sound stage bit doesn't work. The Soviets were tracking the lunar module on its way to the moon and landing there.
They didn't say "we believe them" they said "we saw them land".
Being in on it though... a bit more plausible, but then you'd have to make the Cuban missile crisis a staged conflict. And obviously they've been keeping up charades ever since as the US hasn't lifted the embargoes on them.
Actually the best way to stump the "it was made in a studio" chumps is asking a simple question:
"Seeing how the Soviet Union was the US' biggest enemy at the time, why didn't they score a major PR coup by claiming and providing data showing, that the modules never landed on the Moon?"
In fact, the Soviet Union acknowledged that the US put men on the moon. But hey - they were probably in on it too?
Obviously, requires you to have Silverlight installed. I'm using Windows, so I don't have a chance to try it with Moonlight. Somewhat disappointing that Moonlight isn't aimed at Windows. Could probably pick up some more users for those of us, who aren't fans of IE or Firefox
IE 8 - works (duh) Firefox 3 - works (surprise) Opera 9/10 - doesn't work Chrome 2 - doesn't work Safari 4 - doesn't work
Then go and find the papers. The site has the lectures as videos. I don't know about you, but I cannot translate any kind of video format (outside of animated ASCII) in my head. Same for audio formats.
Intel's X25-M seems to perform 200 MB/s constant throughput. Granted that's "only" 2/3rds of the 3 Gbps that SATA 2 delievers, but the quote was "nearly saturate".
And if we're already at 2/3rds, that's a fairly compelling argument to upgrading. On laptops it can become an issue much quicker, as you usually only have 1 eSATA port, and port multipliers do not increase bandwidth. Hooking two X25-Ms onto a single eSATA 2 port can saturate it while doing non-random transfers easily but still have room left over on eSATA 3.
But if we're merely talking SSD in general, we can always point to Fusion-io ioDrive which bottoms out at 429 MB/s.
The PCIe versions of SSDs I've see so far doesn't seem to support booting. That's a major crimp in their usefulness. Also, they're not all that useful in laptops.
Using multiple receivers in a phone or regular handheld GPS (which is what the argument is about) works how?
GPS can get you within inches.
I put 2 mm as the lower boundary for GPS accuracy with carrier phase change. That's not only within inches, it's 1/12th of an inch.
If you mean with regular code receivers, I doubt you'll get more accurate than half a meter with those, but you're more than welcome to source that claim which you haven't done out in your post at all. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying "show me".
To properly set up using multiple linke receivers is certainly doable. As you say yourself: "Surveyors use it all the fucking time.". But, that is using phase change receivers (I suspect surveyors only use code receivers to get a rough starting point and finding their way). Not something you'll be doing with a mobile phone or regular code receivers. Simply put, they are too inaccurate. It's like using multiple rulers that doesn't have fractions vs one that has mm marks - the accuracy of the cheap receivers simply isn't good enough for surveying anything accuractely.
To get that kind accuracy in those units, you'd need coverage from a lot of pseudollites. Do that and you can get down to merely the precision of the receiver's clock. But to get those set up properly, you're still going to be using phase change receivers
As for doing copy/paste from Wikipedia that's not entirely correct. I wrote my rant first, double checked my text book and then sourced the links to Wikipedia as me using "GPS", 3rd Edition, ISBN 87 571 2555 4 by Keld Dueholm, Mikkel Laurentzius and Anna B. O. Jensen (not kidding about the BO part either) isn't really all that useful to anyone who doesn't have that particular book (which I also pointed out in my original post).
I'm fairly certain you can settle for the four on-board SATA ports for that. And those four drives combined will more or less eat a few thousand IO/s as horderves.
Not only did you get it wrong, but most of the people replying to your post got it wrong as well.
GPS comes in several varieties. The common one used in cheap handheld units are using the C/A signal. This gives you an accuracy down to about 5 meters (due to multipath and atmospheric interference). The accuracy is determined by the precision of the built in clock which in term determines the size of your unit. C/A gets you down to about 5 meters accuracy.
Add in DGPS and you more or less eliminate atmospheric interference which can get you down to about half a meter. Technically 20 inches can count as a few inches when compared to the 200 otherwise.
P-code (the military) gives you down to about 2 meters accuracy by comparison. Not sure how much better they get with DGPS, but I'd suspect it'd get them to 1/10th just like the C/A does.
For the best accuracy you won't be relying on L1 and L2 directly (decoding the signals), but will be looking at the carrier phase change which requires bigger and better antennas as well as a much more precise clock which is why most of these are big, bulky and used for surveying more than anything.
If you're moving around (airplanes pictures and very likely road surveying as well) you can get down to about half a centimeter, but expect from 5 mm to 10 cm). When not moving for a significant amount of time, you can get down to 2 mm to about 3 cm)
As for one of the replies claiming that GPS only gives you a 2D location, this is rubbish. You need a clear view of a minimum of four satellites to get a proper height as well as longitude and latitude. The accuracy of each of these coordinates varies as well . However the biggest inaccuracy you're likely to face when dealing with GPS is using the wrong datum for your map. It's fairly easy to end up with coordinates several hundred meters from the correct one, merely by forgetting to switch datum when moving into a new area.
If you're not using the US GPS but instead rely on Glonass (not done yet) you get some advantages. Since each satellite is running its own discrete frequency, you're essentially able to rule out atmospheric errors. This adds to the cost of the unit though, as it now needs a much more advanced radio receiver. I can't remember if Galileo uses one or multiple frequencies. I think it's supposed to use two, but it's not that important.
Granted, it's been a while since I worked heavily with GPS theory, so feel free to correct me (if you can cite properly). I'm using Wikipedia because I doubt most of you are able to read Danish which is the language my text books on the subject.
I don't see the need for better graphics in those games.
The lack of "shiny" graphics means that in order to sell (the goal of all of those games) you have to make a really good and captivating game. How will games like Bejewled be improved by better graphics?
Make the graphics "better" and you'll cut off a large number of potential players, simply because their computer won't be able to play those graphics
I have a GPS for my bicycle (built in HR and cadence monitor as well) and it is very helpful in exploring new areas.
You do need a better map than the ones that come as standard. The one I have comes with a very basic map of Europe and only has the main roads. Not the best thing when you live out in the boondocks several miles from that road.
Better maps help, but I haven't found any units+maps that support navigating via bicycle lanes. Or even sidewalks and small paths. The ones I've seen and tried all act as if you're a car and while they do give you an option of staying off of main and unpaved roads as well as "navigate for pedestrian or bicycle" they have all been completely unable to navigate properly without using the roads. Like taking a 300 yard short cut by foot vs following the road for 6 km.
A second factor is that buying standalone devices increases the chances of someone breaking into the car to stealing it, often causing more damage than the device is worth.
Why? Or rather why would you buy a non-integrated GPS unit that is too big for you to bring along with you? Or hide in the glove box?
And if they're going to check your glove box anyway, what's to stop them from doing that in the car that doesn't have a GPS unit?
Sure, but to paraphrase one of the other posts: "What'll happen when it gets run over by a Hummer?"
The one of those things are built, they're pure death traps in traffic! Just imagine waiting for traffic to clear the intersection and a Hummer runs the red light, running over your pathetic Formula 1 car and the Hummer's wheels just happen to go into the driver's compartment?/End sarcasm
Here's what I'd like to know - what happens when a Hummer (or the like) gets t-boned by another Hummer? Or 18-wheeler? Anyone got any videos of that?
Try using most types of laptop display. They have some very narrow viewing angles if you want things to look okay.
Side to side isn't nearly as bad as up and down. The laptop I'm using (HP Pavilion dv9572) has a decent side to side angle, but if I reposition myself in the chair (moving it up/down or slumping/straightening my back) I have to readjust the display to get the proper look.
Well, as far as I can tell, none of those numbers include the metro areas. New York has about 19 million people living in the greater metro area, but only 8 in the city.
Los Angeles has about 3.8 million living in the city and 12.8 in the metro area. If we kill off everyone in the cities and expect half the metro area to be refugees, you end up with about 9 million refugees from those two cities alone.
Washington DC (mostly because that'd take out the politicians) New York Los Angeles Chicago Houston Philadelphia Phoenix San Antonio San Diego Dallas San Jose Detroit
These are the 11 largest cities in the US plus DC. If that killed everyone in those cities (unlikely) it'd cost 26.4 million lives in the US.
The economic outcome would be horrible, but taking out New York takes out all the Wall Street brokers and most of the bankers, so it'll probably come out as a wash
Each of those things are completely ridiculous, gain us nothing of value (outside of entertainment) and waste time and energy that could be drected at "the very real problems that do need to be solved".
Whatever happened to "because we can" as a mantra for why we build things that are completely unneeded? I'm not talking about making a catapult that launches criminals into a strong piano wire mesh, cutting them into tiny pieces that will then rain down into the crocodile cage at the local zoo. Building the Veyron didn't hurt you. Didn't hurt anyone (well, I did hear that one of the mechanics dropped a wheel onto his bad toe). Why so angry?
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on the bridge, doesn't it? If I'm stuck in the middle of the Tacoma Narrows bridge on November 7th 1940, I think I'd risk it.
Circumstances have an influence as well. Am I wearing base jumping gear? Am I part of a group being paid to do it? Are we being chased by bears?
The sound stage bit doesn't work. The Soviets were tracking the lunar module on its way to the moon and landing there.
They didn't say "we believe them" they said "we saw them land".
Being in on it though ... a bit more plausible, but then you'd have to make the Cuban missile crisis a staged conflict. And obviously they've been keeping up charades ever since as the US hasn't lifted the embargoes on them.
Actually the best way to stump the "it was made in a studio" chumps is asking a simple question:
"Seeing how the Soviet Union was the US' biggest enemy at the time, why didn't they score a major PR coup by claiming and providing data showing, that the modules never landed on the Moon?"
In fact, the Soviet Union acknowledged that the US put men on the moon. But hey - they were probably in on it too?
Obviously, requires you to have Silverlight installed. I'm using Windows, so I don't have a chance to try it with Moonlight. Somewhat disappointing that Moonlight isn't aimed at Windows. Could probably pick up some more users for those of us, who aren't fans of IE or Firefox
IE 8 - works (duh)
Firefox 3 - works (surprise)
Opera 9/10 - doesn't work
Chrome 2 - doesn't work
Safari 4 - doesn't work
Then go and find the papers. The site has the lectures as videos. I don't know about you, but I cannot translate any kind of video format (outside of animated ASCII) in my head. Same for audio formats.
Anyone know if/when powered eSATA is supposed to come online? As in power and data in the same single cable?
It feels somewhat silly that I have two options with my 2½ eSATA/USB:
USB - single cable, low speed
eSATA - two cables, high speed
Might even result in some interesting new types of flash storage devices. HD speeds in USB key sizes.
You left out Cups & Balls. Even though they show you how they do it, it's still insanely impressive.
This is the one where they use transparent cups.
*cough*Regular mints are better if it's just a cough. No point in taking allergy medicine if you aren't allergic.
Intel's X25-M seems to perform 200 MB/s constant throughput. Granted that's "only" 2/3rds of the 3 Gbps that SATA 2 delievers, but the quote was "nearly saturate".
And if we're already at 2/3rds, that's a fairly compelling argument to upgrading. On laptops it can become an issue much quicker, as you usually only have 1 eSATA port, and port multipliers do not increase bandwidth. Hooking two X25-Ms onto a single eSATA 2 port can saturate it while doing non-random transfers easily but still have room left over on eSATA 3.
But if we're merely talking SSD in general, we can always point to Fusion-io ioDrive which bottoms out at 429 MB/s.
*cough*Doesn't increase bandwidth*cough*
The PCIe versions of SSDs I've see so far doesn't seem to support booting. That's a major crimp in their usefulness. Also, they're not all that useful in laptops.
Using multiple receivers in a phone or regular handheld GPS (which is what the argument is about) works how?
I put 2 mm as the lower boundary for GPS accuracy with carrier phase change. That's not only within inches, it's 1/12th of an inch.
If you mean with regular code receivers, I doubt you'll get more accurate than half a meter with those, but you're more than welcome to source that claim which you haven't done out in your post at all. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying "show me".
To properly set up using multiple linke receivers is certainly doable. As you say yourself: " Surveyors use it all the fucking time.". But, that is using phase change receivers (I suspect surveyors only use code receivers to get a rough starting point and finding their way). Not something you'll be doing with a mobile phone or regular code receivers. Simply put, they are too inaccurate. It's like using multiple rulers that doesn't have fractions vs one that has mm marks - the accuracy of the cheap receivers simply isn't good enough for surveying anything accuractely.
To get that kind accuracy in those units, you'd need coverage from a lot of pseudollites. Do that and you can get down to merely the precision of the receiver's clock. But to get those set up properly, you're still going to be using phase change receivers
As for doing copy/paste from Wikipedia that's not entirely correct. I wrote my rant first, double checked my text book and then sourced the links to Wikipedia as me using "GPS", 3rd Edition, ISBN 87 571 2555 4 by Keld Dueholm, Mikkel Laurentzius and Anna B. O. Jensen (not kidding about the BO part either) isn't really all that useful to anyone who doesn't have that particular book (which I also pointed out in my original post).
GbE is 1,000 megabits/s in theory. That's no more than 125 megabytes/s. With four Intel X25-E drives you'll hit 226 MB/s random read and 127 MB/s random write throughput.
I'm fairly certain you can settle for the four on-board SATA ports for that. And those four drives combined will more or less eat a few thousand IO/s as horderves.
Not only did you get it wrong, but most of the people replying to your post got it wrong as well.
GPS comes in several varieties. The common one used in cheap handheld units are using the C/A signal. This gives you an accuracy down to about 5 meters (due to multipath and atmospheric interference). The accuracy is determined by the precision of the built in clock which in term determines the size of your unit. C/A gets you down to about 5 meters accuracy.
Add in DGPS and you more or less eliminate atmospheric interference which can get you down to about half a meter. Technically 20 inches can count as a few inches when compared to the 200 otherwise.
P-code (the military) gives you down to about 2 meters accuracy by comparison. Not sure how much better they get with DGPS, but I'd suspect it'd get them to 1/10th just like the C/A does.
For the best accuracy you won't be relying on L1 and L2 directly (decoding the signals), but will be looking at the carrier phase change which requires bigger and better antennas as well as a much more precise clock which is why most of these are big, bulky and used for surveying more than anything.
If you're moving around (airplanes pictures and very likely road surveying as well) you can get down to about half a centimeter, but expect from 5 mm to 10 cm). When not moving for a significant amount of time, you can get down to 2 mm to about 3 cm)
As for one of the replies claiming that GPS only gives you a 2D location, this is rubbish. You need a clear view of a minimum of four satellites to get a proper height as well as longitude and latitude. The accuracy of each of these coordinates varies as well . However the biggest inaccuracy you're likely to face when dealing with GPS is using the wrong datum for your map. It's fairly easy to end up with coordinates several hundred meters from the correct one, merely by forgetting to switch datum when moving into a new area.
If you're not using the US GPS but instead rely on Glonass (not done yet) you get some advantages. Since each satellite is running its own discrete frequency, you're essentially able to rule out atmospheric errors. This adds to the cost of the unit though, as it now needs a much more advanced radio receiver. I can't remember if Galileo uses one or multiple frequencies. I think it's supposed to use two, but it's not that important.
Granted, it's been a while since I worked heavily with GPS theory, so feel free to correct me (if you can cite properly). I'm using Wikipedia because I doubt most of you are able to read Danish which is the language my text books on the subject.
I don't see the need for better graphics in those games.
The lack of "shiny" graphics means that in order to sell (the goal of all of those games) you have to make a really good and captivating game. How will games like Bejewled be improved by better graphics?
Make the graphics "better" and you'll cut off a large number of potential players, simply because their computer won't be able to play those graphics
Well, quite a lot of kids thinks ASBOs are a somewhat cool badge to get.
Call gaybos or bender badges instead and see how kids react to them.
Apologies to, I think, Frankie Boyle
I have a GPS for my bicycle (built in HR and cadence monitor as well) and it is very helpful in exploring new areas.
You do need a better map than the ones that come as standard. The one I have comes with a very basic map of Europe and only has the main roads. Not the best thing when you live out in the boondocks several miles from that road.
Better maps help, but I haven't found any units+maps that support navigating via bicycle lanes. Or even sidewalks and small paths. The ones I've seen and tried all act as if you're a car and while they do give you an option of staying off of main and unpaved roads as well as "navigate for pedestrian or bicycle" they have all been completely unable to navigate properly without using the roads. Like taking a 300 yard short cut by foot vs following the road for 6 km.
Why? Or rather why would you buy a non-integrated GPS unit that is too big for you to bring along with you? Or hide in the glove box?
And if they're going to check your glove box anyway, what's to stop them from doing that in the car that doesn't have a GPS unit?
Sure, but to paraphrase one of the other posts: "What'll happen when it gets run over by a Hummer?"
The one of those things are built, they're pure death traps in traffic! Just imagine waiting for traffic to clear the intersection and a Hummer runs the red light, running over your pathetic Formula 1 car and the Hummer's wheels just happen to go into the driver's compartment? /End sarcasm
Here's what I'd like to know - what happens when a Hummer (or the like) gets t-boned by another Hummer? Or 18-wheeler? Anyone got any videos of that?
Try using most types of laptop display. They have some very narrow viewing angles if you want things to look okay.
Side to side isn't nearly as bad as up and down. The laptop I'm using (HP Pavilion dv9572) has a decent side to side angle, but if I reposition myself in the chair (moving it up/down or slumping/straightening my back) I have to readjust the display to get the proper look.
And from what I understand, others are desperately seeking quality displays as well.
Well, as far as I can tell, none of those numbers include the metro areas. New York has about 19 million people living in the greater metro area, but only 8 in the city.
Los Angeles has about 3.8 million living in the city and 12.8 in the metro area. If we kill off everyone in the cities and expect half the metro area to be refugees, you end up with about 9 million refugees from those two cities alone.
Depends on which cities you hit I suspect:
Washington DC (mostly because that'd take out the politicians)
New York
Los Angeles
Chicago
Houston
Philadelphia
Phoenix
San Antonio
San Diego
Dallas
San Jose
Detroit
These are the 11 largest cities in the US plus DC. If that killed everyone in those cities (unlikely) it'd cost 26.4 million lives in the US.
The economic outcome would be horrible, but taking out New York takes out all the Wall Street brokers and most of the bankers, so it'll probably come out as a wash
And how do you feel when you read about people who build browsers for the Commodore 64? Or build a RAID'ed floppy setup? Turn buildings into low res displays?
Each of those things are completely ridiculous, gain us nothing of value (outside of entertainment) and waste time and energy that could be drected at "the very real problems that do need to be solved".
Whatever happened to "because we can" as a mantra for why we build things that are completely unneeded? I'm not talking about making a catapult that launches criminals into a strong piano wire mesh, cutting them into tiny pieces that will then rain down into the crocodile cage at the local zoo. Building the Veyron didn't hurt you. Didn't hurt anyone (well, I did hear that one of the mechanics dropped a wheel onto his bad toe). Why so angry?
Why so serious?
That's fairly obvious - it's a Suicide Rabbit. Obviously it hitched a ride on the LRO
Matthew Weigman? Or how about Joe Engressia?
Both legally blind (so no interest in the shiny shiny) and fireworks without the shiny are just annoying to listen to.