Finally, an answer to the problem!! I've been dealing with the same grief, and the folks at TD have been unable to give me an answer. I've switched between gnome & kde, loaded older Netscape versions, and lots of other things, and none of it fixed the problem. I can finally do my banking from home again... not just from work.
Sorry, I missed that part of the article, what I saw was... "This finding is central to understanding when and how super-massive black holes, quasars, and other structures condensed from large, high-density clouds of hydrogen soon after the Big Bang."
<RANT> BTW: for intelligent conversation starting with "Duh," you should
ALWAYS PRESS THE "CAPS LOCK" BUTTON BEFORE TYPING
check for embedded <SARCASM> tags (Check your "Web Browsing for Dummies" book... you can't see the tags without viewing source)
log in so we can read your posts without having to lower our standards
In the article, they postulate that quasars are actually the observable castoffs of black holes... If this is true, then it's probably still a black hole....
This raises interesting questions on its own, considering that the page links to an article which estimates the age of the universe at 12 billion years...:+)
Do a hardware variation of the GPL. If they don't, it's going to bleed them dry. If they do, sure, there'll be clones, but Intel will still exist.
Historically, not a very good argument. Remember the original IBM PC? They published all the specs openly, and then were immediately surpassed in the market by a startup known as Compaq, who could build on (& tweak) the design without having to recoup the millions (or more?) that went into the original research. IBM all but died in the PC market, shortly after initiating it.
Of course, then there's also the Apple story. Keep it all locked up & sue anybody whose product shows the slightest resemblance to yours. I remember reading a quote several years ago that went "You're nobody in the computer industry until you've been sued by Apple."
This seems to indicate that neither strategy is a good way to go. The companies that end up the winners are the ones that wait for somebody else to make a breakthrough, then make a small improvement (be it speed, on-board cache, or whatever) and sell at discounted prices. The only expenses to be recouped are the costs of reverse engineering the original, not development from scratch.
Java has not replaced Oracle's internal procedural language (PL-SQL)
True. Poor phrasing on my part. Should have been "Java as AN internal procedure language." There's too much PL/SQL and (I forget what Sybase calls theirs) out there to just stop supporting it all of a sudden.
Maybe interesting to you or not.
On a personal level, it's not that interesting. My philosophy is that the logic belongs outside the DB wherever possible. This allows for ease of change-over when the corporate wind changes direction. There is a speed penalty to be paid for this, but it's rarely significant. If you can justify the penalty for O-O & event-driven programming, you can probably justify this.
However, for those who must embed the logic in the database, the Java aspect makes the task of porting apps to new DB's simpler. If all you have to do is re-write the wrappers, you needn't waste as much time as re-writing all the procedures would require.
I hate to have to break this to you, seeing the amount of work you've already had to do, but JServ isn't it any more. The new reference implementation for servlets is Tomcat from the Jakarta Project.
I had hopes that by now it would be faster and more pervasive than it has become--especially outside the browser cage
About the "faster" part, it will probably never be suitable for OS development, but you CAN get platform-specific compilers for it.
Regarding the "pervasive" & "outside the browser" parts, I think you're just not looking.
Oracle & Sybase (also SQL Anywhere) now ship their DB software with Java as the internal procedure language.
At JavaOne last year, the Palm Pilots for sale so inexpensively were loaded with a JVM.
The Apache organization has embraced Java Servlets and Java Server Pages in their Jakarta Project.
IBM's AlphaWorks is pouring out java resources like mad.
Embedded Java is a super-hot trend for everything from cell phones to web kiosks.
Admittedly the start was slow, due to the fact that Java's original target platforms were toasters and TV's. But there are no shortage of Java applications you can't see until you look for them.
a series of strips made of a metal with a sufficiently low melting point as to melt under prolonged exposure to exhaust gasses
I don't know what metal you're proposing, but lead would make a reasonable choice here. Of course, the cost of lifting lead makes it prohibitive... And then there's the issue of re-entry heat. While the shields should absorb most of the initial heat, this thing's still going to be falling pretty quick. The sensor could activate due to the heat of friction, or just from falling through the exhaust...
tipping could be detected via a mechanism similar to a common mercury switch
It's a pretty safe bet that something falling on a parachute will activate the tipping sensor well before grounding.
So now we have a situation where the legs sensors are tripped, the metal strips are melted, and the tipping sensor's activated, all prior to grounding. Not good.
Additional (read redundant) safety sensors are undesirable. How many levels of backup is enough? Aside from the weight issue, there's Murphy's Law to consider. More sensors means more possible failure modes as well.
scan the switches repeatedly, rather than just once
This is the best solution from a practical and simplistic point of view. Oh yeah, and have the different departments communicate. Maybe they ought to install something like bugzilla to ensure that all groups are aware of defects found by others.
I'd be much more interested in giving the EFF proxy
A good idea, as suggested in the original article. However, this ignores the huge potential capital pool from folks who want to contribute on the $5.00 level. Chances are that EvilMegaCorp shares trade well above that level, and the commission fees for Joe Protester to buy one share at a time make things even less attractive.
I don't see the two options as mutually exclusive. They could both be combined under one umbrella.
never design a system with a single point of failure
There was a sensor on each leg... they all failed. Lack of redundancy wasn't the problem, it was a lack of communication. The rockets are designed simply to slow the descent, so at least one of the leg sensors should have been activated at touch-down.
It's easy to play "armchair quarterback"
How apropos. Playing armchair quarterback with a failed touchdown problem...;-)
Do it on the cheap, cut corners, rush people and accept no dissention.
Reminds me of an interview with an astronaut several years ago. He commented on how scary it really is to be sitting on top of a billion dollars worth of hardware, all supplied by the lowest bidder...
remember Challenger
Challenger was a good example of the "accept no dissent" philosophy. One of the project engineers pointed out to them that they were operating outside the parameters for the o-rings, but was ignored. The higher-ups decided that the risk was minimal, and launched anyway. Then again, astronauts & test-pilots are very aware of the risks involved in their professions. They accept the risks (and the danger pay, and the glory) before the climb aboard.
Undoubtedly, some of the testing is done on computer, but most of it is probably done on actual hardware. However, the problem here isn't one of testing, it's one of communication. The article points out that the deployment testing group knew of the problem, but the descent control group did not account for it.
Standard engineering practice is to gather the staff involved and hold a brainstorming session known as an FMEA (Failure Mode Effects Analysis). At this session, the idea is to identify all the possible ways in which something can go wrong, and determine the outcome if it were to happen. The most critical items are given the highest priority to ensure that they do not occur. Surely the consequences of sensor failure were identified at the session.
Since the second group did not account for the possibility of the sensor being prematurely activated, they must not have been informed of the results of the testing by the first group. What they need to work on is their inter-group communications, not their hardware testing.
Of course, I'm crediting the design group with following reasonable procedures. They may not have done it exactly like that, but it's a pretty standard approach in industry. Every part on an automobile goes through such an analysis (even down to the headlight switch), so it just stands to reason that a multi-million dollar one-off space probe should...
You don't have to have a large block of stock to be heard. All you need is one share. All shareholders are ostensibly treated equally at the meetings. The chairman may decide to expedite matters, if (s)he doesn't like what you have to say, but you are still entitled to speak.
IRT the second comment...(you would have to have voting stock): you don't need voting stock. If you are a shareholder, you are entitled to speak.
no hedging strategy is valid even in the short term
How about selling options on the stock for the same price at which it was bought? Ever looked at options?
While I agree that it's not generally a good money-making venture, that's not the goal here. The goal is hedging. Since it's a "charitable cause," the fund is expecting to lose money. The hedge is just to limit the loss.
How about donating 50 cents from every registration towards making the 'net a better place? There's no shortage of companies that embrace the open source philosophy. Some of them would surely contribute.
And how about $1 per Slashdot reader? There are enough people here to cripple high-powered web servers whenever a new cool article is posted (e.g The Lego Machine Gun). Surely this must translate into a few thousand dollars (<RANT>after you discount the 31337 haxx0r doodz whose sole contribution to the 'net is allowing us to be in the presence of f1r5t p05t'ers</RANT>).
If you buy a large block of the company's stock, you raise its price.
The idea isn't to buy controlling interest in the company, it's just to buy enough to
not go broke on commissions
have a chance to speak at general meetings
We're talking about BIG companies here, not thinly traded Mom'n'Pop startups. For most of them, you can buy thousands or even hundreds of thousands of shares without the market noticing the action (millions might start to show...). Check the financial section tomorrow to see the daily volumes involved.
In fact, this entire post is not my opinion at all.
Nicely done. If only you could put it in small print with an asterisk which requires the reader to look at the other side of the page...
Slashdot Mirror
- - - -
- - - -
Thanks johne!!!
- - - -
- - - -
Sorry, I missed that part of the article, what I saw was...
"This finding is central to understanding when and how super-massive black holes, quasars, and other structures condensed from large, high-density clouds of hydrogen soon after the Big Bang."
<RANT>
BTW: for intelligent conversation starting with "Duh," you should
- ALWAYS PRESS THE "CAPS LOCK" BUTTON BEFORE TYPING
- check for embedded <SARCASM> tags (Check your "Web Browsing for Dummies" book... you can't see the tags without viewing source)
- log in so we can read your posts without having to lower our standards
</RANT>- - - -
Ran the numbers... I got 42.
What's the question?
- - - -
- - - -
This raises interesting questions on its own, considering that the page links to an article which estimates the age of the universe at 12 billion years... :+)
- - - -
Historically, not a very good argument. Remember the original IBM PC? They published all the specs openly, and then were immediately surpassed in the market by a startup known as Compaq, who could build on (& tweak) the design without having to recoup the millions (or more?) that went into the original research. IBM all but died in the PC market, shortly after initiating it.
Of course, then there's also the Apple story. Keep it all locked up & sue anybody whose product shows the slightest resemblance to yours. I remember reading a quote several years ago that went "You're nobody in the computer industry until you've been sued by Apple."
This seems to indicate that neither strategy is a good way to go. The companies that end up the winners are the ones that wait for somebody else to make a breakthrough, then make a small improvement (be it speed, on-board cache, or whatever) and sell at discounted prices. The only expenses to be recouped are the costs of reverse engineering the original, not development from scratch.
- - - -
Well, you could get a unicycle, and put one of those generators on the wheel...
- - - -
i.e. It's not quite ready for prime-time.
- - - -
True. Poor phrasing on my part. Should have been "Java as AN internal procedure language." There's too much PL/SQL and (I forget what Sybase calls theirs) out there to just stop supporting it all of a sudden.
Maybe interesting to you or not.
On a personal level, it's not that interesting. My philosophy is that the logic belongs outside the DB wherever possible. This allows for ease of change-over when the corporate wind changes direction. There is a speed penalty to be paid for this, but it's rarely significant. If you can justify the penalty for O-O & event-driven programming, you can probably justify this.
However, for those who must embed the logic in the database, the Java aspect makes the task of porting apps to new DB's simpler. If all you have to do is re-write the wrappers, you needn't waste as much time as re-writing all the procedures would require.
- - - -
I must have an old version of NOTHING. Mine only works on ETHERnet.
- - - -
I hate to have to break this to you, seeing the amount of work you've already had to do, but JServ isn't it any more. The new reference implementation for servlets is Tomcat from the Jakarta Project.
My condolences...
- - - -
About the "faster" part, it will probably never be suitable for OS development, but you CAN get platform-specific compilers for it.
Regarding the "pervasive" & "outside the browser" parts, I think you're just not looking.
Admittedly the start was slow, due to the fact that Java's original target platforms were toasters and TV's. But there are no shortage of Java applications you can't see until you look for them.
- - - -
Isn't Visual Basic at about 6? Based on industry trends, Java 1.3 should be released as Java 7.
- - - -
I don't know what metal you're proposing, but lead would make a reasonable choice here. Of course, the cost of lifting lead makes it prohibitive... And then there's the issue of re-entry heat. While the shields should absorb most of the initial heat, this thing's still going to be falling pretty quick. The sensor could activate due to the heat of friction, or just from falling through the exhaust...
tipping could be detected via a mechanism similar to a common mercury switch
It's a pretty safe bet that something falling on a parachute will activate the tipping sensor well before grounding.
So now we have a situation where the legs sensors are tripped, the metal strips are melted, and the tipping sensor's activated, all prior to grounding. Not good.
Additional (read redundant) safety sensors are undesirable. How many levels of backup is enough? Aside from the weight issue, there's Murphy's Law to consider. More sensors means more possible failure modes as well.
scan the switches repeatedly, rather than just once
This is the best solution from a practical and simplistic point of view. Oh yeah, and have the different departments communicate. Maybe they ought to install something like bugzilla to ensure that all groups are aware of defects found by others.
- - - -
A good idea, as suggested in the original article. However, this ignores the huge potential capital pool from folks who want to contribute on the $5.00 level. Chances are that EvilMegaCorp shares trade well above that level, and the commission fees for Joe Protester to buy one share at a time make things even less attractive.
I don't see the two options as mutually exclusive. They could both be combined under one umbrella.
- - - -
There was a sensor on each leg... they all failed. Lack of redundancy wasn't the problem, it was a lack of communication. The rockets are designed simply to slow the descent, so at least one of the leg sensors should have been activated at touch-down.
It's easy to play "armchair quarterback"
How apropos. Playing armchair quarterback with a failed touchdown problem... ;-)
- - - -
Reminds me of an interview with an astronaut several years ago. He commented on how scary it really is to be sitting on top of a billion dollars worth of hardware, all supplied by the lowest bidder...
remember Challenger
Challenger was a good example of the "accept no dissent" philosophy. One of the project engineers pointed out to them that they were operating outside the parameters for the o-rings, but was ignored. The higher-ups decided that the risk was minimal, and launched anyway. Then again, astronauts & test-pilots are very aware of the risks involved in their professions. They accept the risks (and the danger pay, and the glory) before the climb aboard.
- - - -
Undoubtedly, some of the testing is done on computer, but most of it is probably done on actual hardware. However, the problem here isn't one of testing, it's one of communication. The article points out that the deployment testing group knew of the problem, but the descent control group did not account for it.
Standard engineering practice is to gather the staff involved and hold a brainstorming session known as an FMEA (Failure Mode Effects Analysis). At this session, the idea is to identify all the possible ways in which something can go wrong, and determine the outcome if it were to happen. The most critical items are given the highest priority to ensure that they do not occur. Surely the consequences of sensor failure were identified at the session.
Since the second group did not account for the possibility of the sensor being prematurely activated, they must not have been informed of the results of the testing by the first group. What they need to work on is their inter-group communications, not their hardware testing.
Of course, I'm crediting the design group with following reasonable procedures. They may not have done it exactly like that, but it's a pretty standard approach in industry. Every part on an automobile goes through such an analysis (even down to the headlight switch), so it just stands to reason that a multi-million dollar one-off space probe should...
- - - -
You don't have to have a large block of stock to be heard. All you need is one share. All shareholders are ostensibly treated equally at the meetings. The chairman may decide to expedite matters, if (s)he doesn't like what you have to say, but you are still entitled to speak.
IRT the second comment...(you would have to have voting stock): you don't need voting stock. If you are a shareholder, you are entitled to speak.
- - - -
How about selling options on the stock for the same price at which it was bought? Ever looked at options?
While I agree that it's not generally a good money-making venture, that's not the goal here. The goal is hedging. Since it's a "charitable cause," the fund is expecting to lose money. The hedge is just to limit the loss.
- - - -
"Domains at $15/year"
How about donating 50 cents from every registration towards making the 'net a better place? There's no shortage of companies that embrace the open source philosophy. Some of them would surely contribute.
And how about $1 per Slashdot reader? There are enough people here to cripple high-powered web servers whenever a new cool article is posted (e.g The Lego Machine Gun). Surely this must translate into a few thousand dollars (<RANT>after you discount the 31337 haxx0r doodz whose sole contribution to the 'net is allowing us to be in the presence of f1r5t p05t'ers</RANT>).
- - - -
The idea isn't to buy controlling interest in the company, it's just to buy enough to
- not go broke on commissions
- have a chance to speak at general meetings
We're talking about BIG companies here, not thinly traded Mom'n'Pop startups. For most of them, you can buy thousands or even hundreds of thousands of shares without the market noticing the action (millions might start to show...). Check the financial section tomorrow to see the daily volumes involved.In fact, this entire post is not my opinion at all.
Nicely done. If only you could put it in small print with an asterisk which requires the reader to look at the other side of the page...
- - - -