That's been one of the things I've wondered about. How close were "we" to that galaxy when the light was emitted, how far have we traveled in the time since the light was emitted and "chasing us". How far back can we possibly see before any light emitted has overtaken us?
Actually if I understand special relativity correctly, time dilation only actually takes effect when something moving at relativistic speeds slows back down to the same speed as its reference. Since photons never slow, they don't actually experience time dilation. Not saying I actually know what I'm talking about...
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about but I question if genetic evolution is as important to humanity anymore as compared to the evolution of knowledge. Yes genetics have an effect but education seems to be the greater driving factor these days.
My perspective is calling yourself an expert of a programming language is foolish. A person can become an expert of an area of programming and find that particular languages work best for them but they need to understand that just because they like one particular language, there are cases where it is better to take what they know in one language and use it in another.
C/C++ for low level development, JS, PHP and Ruby for webdev (I hear), Perl for regex, C# and python for rapid development. These may be strengths (and I may have some wrong) but there is still overlap where a language can do more than its little slot in life.
Also if you know how to program real well in PHP you are also capable of writing a program in C/C++ with nothing more than a reference book. It may not be the best program in the world but it will work. The key thing is understanding issues that are universal to all languages, memory leaks (yes this happens in other languages if you abuse it badly enough), floating point mistakes and SQL injection is not an issue in one language but an understanding of programming in itself.
Which purposes do you find it inefficient for? Admittedly I do develop for a lot of high performance and low level type applications so high level languages don't work so well for me.
Very interesting, thanks for posting. I am curious from that website why people think that C++ often doesn't do what you think it should but maybe I've spent too much time developing it...
I think C/C++ languages will always be around when you want to know exactly what is happening with your memory. I'll agree the languages you mention are better for rapid and clean development but you lack some of the careful memory management capability.
Just my opinion but C++ isn't so much the code must work but more the code must do exactly what the developer thinks it is. Higher level languages may not implement a statement the way you think it is so requirement/code coverage is more difficult.
I think people need to learn that all languages just create a bunch of machine language and is mostly just statements, loops and branches so there isn't a great amount of difference between any language. Anything you can make in Java or C# (are these truly high level these days or more of a medium level?) I can do in C. The only difference is I have to implement how these features are done in C (or find a library) rather than using language features. Not saying its better, just saying it is all ultimately the same thing at the advanced level.
As long as I'm not paying for it (don't see how that can be avoided...) I'm good with people censoring what ever they damn well please as long as they give me a big ass I don't give a flying... switch so I can make all that censoring not affect me.
For $25, or even $35, the bulb looks like a good investment compared to an incandescent bulb. It uses only 10 watts of power, meaning saves about $8 per year in electricity if it's used four hours a day. It's expected to last at least 30,000 hours, or 30 times longer than an incandescent. At four hours per day, that's 20 years.
But the Philips bulb is not only up against $1 incandescent bulbs. CFL are nearly as energy efficient. They use about 15 watts for 60 watts worth of light. They're much cheaper too, typically costing around $5. The Philips bulb looks odd too -the light-emitting surfaces are yellow when the bulb isn't lit, yet shine white when it is.
Considering how often I see CFLs for $2 or less, I'll stick with CFLs at least until the total operating cost of that miracle bulb gets down near the CFL.
The B-1 bomber has a payload of 125,000 pounds and cost 300M in 98. The F-15 strike eagle has a payload of 24,000 pounds and cost 30M in 98. So the B-1 can carry five times the payload at ten times the cost, double the cost per pound. On the other hand I suspect the B-1 is stealthier than the F-15 and has a longer range as well as better loiter time so it can be used to provide near instant response times on demand. The F-22 and F-35 have lower payload capability compared to the F-15 and far greater cost.
I'm no expert, just going by what I read but it seems like the B-1's value is the ability to put a lot of ordinance on target faster than any other large bomber can. It can operate like a group of attack fighters in a single aircraft. This seems quite relevant today when dealing with a lot of mobile targets rather than large factories.
Think of what that platform would be like if they brought the Phoenix missile back or created an advanced version of it. The F-14 could track up to what, 24 targets at 100 miles and fire on six of them simultaneously? Put that in a B-1 with 20 Phoenix (assuming no size constraint issues) and a squadron of those could wipe out an enemy air force beyond the range most fighter radar's can even detect aircraft.
Not entirely sure why long range aerial engagement has more or less been eliminated. Wonder if its for political reasons and the need to visually identify the target before taking it out. Maybe just send in a bunch of stealth drones to identify the target then kill it at long range. Guess they probably figure if a drone can see it, it can shoot it down.
The B-1 Lancer has nearly double the bomb load of the B-52, higher speed and better stealth. Also the B-1 has excellent loiter times so it can sit near a target area and when a high priority target is identified, accelerate in at high speed and take out the target with a heavy bomb load in minutes.
Unfortunately all this increased capability has a tradeoff of increased complexity, and from what I hear poor and low cost construction, so costs and maintenance time are greatly increased.
Its not value per click that they should care about, its value per minute. You could have 20 people worth 100x the rest of the population but if the rest of the population is 10,000x bigger than that small population, which group is really going to provide more profit?
If India forces low price and other countries still have higher prices, even ignoring what the company selling the drug thinks, I hope they have plans to control this carefully or I can foresee an increase in legal drug smuggling...
Just my $0.02
Yep and if my company ever gives me an ipad to develop on I quit, IRC with a droid touch screen is hard enough.
Now if they give me an ipad or smartphone to replace my current email usage... maybe. Reading is fine, sending long complex e-mails just leads to me writing it on my PC and forwarding it onto the appropriate device.
Homophobe or describing an act he would prefer not performed on him? I prefer not to be robbed at gunpoint, does that make me biased against everyone who has a gun but chooses not to use it?
Slashdot Mirror
That's been one of the things I've wondered about. How close were "we" to that galaxy when the light was emitted, how far have we traveled in the time since the light was emitted and "chasing us". How far back can we possibly see before any light emitted has overtaken us?
Actually if I understand special relativity correctly, time dilation only actually takes effect when something moving at relativistic speeds slows back down to the same speed as its reference. Since photons never slow, they don't actually experience time dilation. Not saying I actually know what I'm talking about...
But cutting funding to R&D looks better to the bottom line!
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about but I question if genetic evolution is as important to humanity anymore as compared to the evolution of knowledge. Yes genetics have an effect but education seems to be the greater driving factor these days.
My perspective is calling yourself an expert of a programming language is foolish. A person can become an expert of an area of programming and find that particular languages work best for them but they need to understand that just because they like one particular language, there are cases where it is better to take what they know in one language and use it in another.
C/C++ for low level development, JS, PHP and Ruby for webdev (I hear), Perl for regex, C# and python for rapid development. These may be strengths (and I may have some wrong) but there is still overlap where a language can do more than its little slot in life.
Also if you know how to program real well in PHP you are also capable of writing a program in C/C++ with nothing more than a reference book. It may not be the best program in the world but it will work. The key thing is understanding issues that are universal to all languages, memory leaks (yes this happens in other languages if you abuse it badly enough), floating point mistakes and SQL injection is not an issue in one language but an understanding of programming in itself.
Just curious...
I can agree with that, I considered C++ for a web game back end and decided that was a bad idea.
Which purposes do you find it inefficient for? Admittedly I do develop for a lot of high performance and low level type applications so high level languages don't work so well for me.
Very interesting, thanks for posting. I am curious from that website why people think that C++ often doesn't do what you think it should but maybe I've spent too much time developing it...
I think C/C++ languages will always be around when you want to know exactly what is happening with your memory. I'll agree the languages you mention are better for rapid and clean development but you lack some of the careful memory management capability.
Just my opinion but C++ isn't so much the code must work but more the code must do exactly what the developer thinks it is. Higher level languages may not implement a statement the way you think it is so requirement/code coverage is more difficult.
I think people need to learn that all languages just create a bunch of machine language and is mostly just statements, loops and branches so there isn't a great amount of difference between any language. Anything you can make in Java or C# (are these truly high level these days or more of a medium level?) I can do in C. The only difference is I have to implement how these features are done in C (or find a library) rather than using language features. Not saying its better, just saying it is all ultimately the same thing at the advanced level.
As long as I'm not paying for it (don't see how that can be avoided...) I'm good with people censoring what ever they damn well please as long as they give me a big ass I don't give a flying ... switch so I can make all that censoring not affect me.
For $25, or even $35, the bulb looks like a good investment compared to an incandescent bulb. It uses only 10 watts of power, meaning saves about $8 per year in electricity if it's used four hours a day. It's expected to last at least 30,000 hours, or 30 times longer than an incandescent. At four hours per day, that's 20 years.
But the Philips bulb is not only up against $1 incandescent bulbs. CFL are nearly as energy efficient. They use about 15 watts for 60 watts worth of light. They're much cheaper too, typically costing around $5. The Philips bulb looks odd too -the light-emitting surfaces are yellow when the bulb isn't lit, yet shine white when it is.
Considering how often I see CFLs for $2 or less, I'll stick with CFLs at least until the total operating cost of that miracle bulb gets down near the CFL.
The B-1 bomber has a payload of 125,000 pounds and cost 300M in 98. The F-15 strike eagle has a payload of 24,000 pounds and cost 30M in 98. So the B-1 can carry five times the payload at ten times the cost, double the cost per pound. On the other hand I suspect the B-1 is stealthier than the F-15 and has a longer range as well as better loiter time so it can be used to provide near instant response times on demand. The F-22 and F-35 have lower payload capability compared to the F-15 and far greater cost.
I'm no expert, just going by what I read but it seems like the B-1's value is the ability to put a lot of ordinance on target faster than any other large bomber can. It can operate like a group of attack fighters in a single aircraft. This seems quite relevant today when dealing with a lot of mobile targets rather than large factories.
Think of what that platform would be like if they brought the Phoenix missile back or created an advanced version of it. The F-14 could track up to what, 24 targets at 100 miles and fire on six of them simultaneously? Put that in a B-1 with 20 Phoenix (assuming no size constraint issues) and a squadron of those could wipe out an enemy air force beyond the range most fighter radar's can even detect aircraft.
Not entirely sure why long range aerial engagement has more or less been eliminated. Wonder if its for political reasons and the need to visually identify the target before taking it out. Maybe just send in a bunch of stealth drones to identify the target then kill it at long range. Guess they probably figure if a drone can see it, it can shoot it down.
The B-1 Lancer has nearly double the bomb load of the B-52, higher speed and better stealth. Also the B-1 has excellent loiter times so it can sit near a target area and when a high priority target is identified, accelerate in at high speed and take out the target with a heavy bomb load in minutes. Unfortunately all this increased capability has a tradeoff of increased complexity, and from what I hear poor and low cost construction, so costs and maintenance time are greatly increased.
Its not value per click that they should care about, its value per minute. You could have 20 people worth 100x the rest of the population but if the rest of the population is 10,000x bigger than that small population, which group is really going to provide more profit?
If India forces low price and other countries still have higher prices, even ignoring what the company selling the drug thinks, I hope they have plans to control this carefully or I can foresee an increase in legal drug smuggling... Just my $0.02
Thank you, I failed to even notice the difference...
36000? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-Mobile
Um, excuse me, my exercise bike in my basement has an excellent laptop mount...
Got reports from a friend that works at Penn State that his building was shaking before the news reports started popping up.
Yep and if my company ever gives me an ipad to develop on I quit, IRC with a droid touch screen is hard enough.
Now if they give me an ipad or smartphone to replace my current email usage... maybe. Reading is fine, sending long complex e-mails just leads to me writing it on my PC and forwarding it onto the appropriate device.
Homophobe or describing an act he would prefer not performed on him? I prefer not to be robbed at gunpoint, does that make me biased against everyone who has a gun but chooses not to use it?