More seriously, nuclear or solar power could do the job. It'd take a large team of small robots a long time to do it, but it could be done. I'd think it easier than all the infrastructure required to lay and heat a pipeline.
Then again, there are ways to make a pipeline work. Instead of pipe, it could be thin flexible tubing, and you could use parabolic mirrors at points along the way to heat the water. It'd be possible.
It's a great engineering problem from either side, but realistically, man-made structures are the way to go. A bunch of plastic panels and a little aluminum framing is probably way lighter than the equipment required for any of these crazy ideas.
In sport there is advantage in not taking an optimal strategy, because your opponent won't know which non optimal strategy you've chosen until it's too late. If you're going to use randomness to determine which strategy to use, then the computer is no better than a coach.
A strategy that's chosen because it's most likely to succeed *is* an optimal strategy, even if the reason is because it's harder for your opponent to guess. That's simply another variable, one that induces some recursive feedback loops, but which is still practically workable by a computer.
The real problem is that computers aren't yet good enough at collecting the broad-spectrum hard-to-quantify data that meat brains can process with ease.
I recall some pictures taken by NASA dumping black water tanks overboard, and it made a mixed phase spray, but google has failed me and I can't find them.
I'd expect the evaporative cooling to freeze some portion of it. It'd be subliming away on the trip over, but you only need to recover a small percentage for this to be economical.
Unfortunately a launch loop big enough to fling 1Mg would probably be harder to build and maintain than a pipeline. OTOH, I think a smaller brick would work well.
Plastic wrap would just pop, but a reusable metal container might do it. Using the vapor pressure for trajectory correction is a great idea.
I don't think the pipeline would work. 1700 miles is easy on earth, but a much tougher construction project in hard vacuum. Can you imagine welding though spacesuit gloves? Not to mention it'd be terribly expensive to lift 1700 miles of pipe. Even then you'll have to expend a lot of energy heating it so the water doesn't freeze.
I'd think it'd be easier to dig another cave in a more convenient location.
On the other hand, the words "Space fountain" gave me an awesome idea before I looked up what it really is. Here's what I thought: collect water at the poles, pressurize it, and squirt it through a nozzle on a ballistic trajectory toward the moon base. Lay out tarps all around the base. The water will freeze in flight and fall on the tarps. When you need more water, reel the tarps in and collect the ice.
You could improve the aim by making a specialized nozzle. After initially launching the drops, have them go down a long barrel, perhaps tens of meters long, with some kind of noncontacting guidance mechanism inside. Induction coils? Little microdroplet sprayers? It'd be like aiming the electron beam down a CRT. Depending how tight you can dial in the convergence, you might be able to make due with a giant funnel on the receiving end.
Keep in mind you don't need to bring back a lot of water. You only need enough to replenish what gets lost. Pipelines are great for big volume, but for these small amounts, I'd bet the "moon fountain" might cut it.
Or just send out an RC moon buggy to pick up a few barrels from time to time.
If he says that you can call one to visit you, call one, and tell them that your counsel will arrive at your location in 9 hours.
The cop's next actions will be: place you under arrest without interrogating you; take you downtown; leave you in a cell for a day or two until the proper arrangements can be made to interrogate you in the presence of your lawyer. As a bonus, they'll supply their own tape recorder.
Read the quote in the summary again. Even if it's not binding precedent, it's a very valuable thing to have a judge say on the record. It's going to be quoted a whole lot.
The way I do it is IMAP syncs whatever my provider has. I back up my side of it. If they delete everything, my IMAP mirror is deleted too, but I still have my backups.
I had to restore once, and it was easy: Restore everything into Local Folders; then drag and drop them back into the IMAP server.
I agree with most of this except opening the garage doors at the FD. It's really unnecessary. If the power is out, they can still open the doors by hand. If the doors jam, they drive the truck through the door. If for some reason they can't, keep in mind we're talking about firemen, who take pride in their ability to get through any stuck door *fast*, sitting at home base which is loaded with axes, jacks, saws, and jaws-of-life. I'd say it'll delay them 90 seconds even including the time to decide the door's busted and it's time to make a new one. Keep in mind it's rare that it'll get to that point.
The net cost of implementing auto-open doors plus the cost of false alarms (stolen gear or having to have a guy stand watch until the doors close, rain blowing in, etc) very likely outweighs the benefits by quite a lot.
Going 24-bit will make no practical difference on 99% of popular music. It lowers the theoretical noise floor, but that's only relevant if the master tapes are good enough (rare), and more importantly, the music actually has that much dynamic range... Which the vast majority of music does not. How much music in the iTunes store has passages so soft you can barely hear them? It happens occasionally in classical, but virtually never in rock.
I think the point of this is to get over the stigma of compressed audio. Now instead of people saying that CDs are better because they're uncompressed, Apple has an answer: "Yeah, but ours are 24 bit!". It's meaningless, but now it's "debatable" which format is better, instead of the previous situation where CDs were objectively better and the only contention was if the difference was audible.
I recently cracked the screen on my MacBook Pro. No big deal, I thought, just buy a new screen for a hundred bucks on ebay, and install it.
Except the two screws to remove the bezel are blocked by the body, so I had to disassemble the whole thing, which involves a bazillion screws, and more annoyingly, plastic pop-together hooks all the way around the edges. It took four times longer than it should have.
I agree the best solution is to buy a new computer. I now own a ThinkPad.:)
IPv6 isn't a killer feature today. They won't sell a lot more routers by adding it. However, in the future when people need the feature, they'll sell a ton more routers to support it.
Why would they offer it now and miss out on all the future business?
They're valued highly because in a world of plenty of free alternatives, they've figured out a way to market a paid product. I don't care for their product either, but it's clearly worth something to people with money. In practical terms, that means they're good at corporate support, or their salespeople give good head. Either way they have something of value.
Not really. Ask Slashdot has always had a little niche for this.
It's a fun question, too. I'd suggest naming them directions that don't correspond to client-server relationships in such an obvious way. So, instead of Up and Down, go for North and South, whichever way feels more appropriate to the situation. In and Out might be a good pair, depending what you want to visualize.
I'm not sure if it's a deficiency of prose or if you're actually proposing that people are falling back on MIT because they can't clear the bar at DeVry. Either way, the main thread has been lost, so I'm just replying to this:
...tell people on the current thread that 20% of their doctors and their president are certified by a degree, there'd be switching and complaining...
In coding, when you fuck up: The build breaks It fails automated tests The bug gets caught in peer review It blows up in the lab It gets caught by methodical QA review And some small percentage of the time, the bug ships, so you patch it later.
When a doctor fucks up, people die or are crippled, and there often aren't second chances to fix a mistake made in the OR.
As for your basic premise that we need more degrees: Good work in almost every field correlates strongly with experience, and poorly with formal education. The counterexamples are usually where you're doing something new where no one has experience. In 2011, alarm clock software isn't groundbreaking, and doesn't require fresh minds to think up a way to solve a new problem. It needs experienced engineers who have seen all the ways it's gone wrong before, working methodically to prevent it from happening again.
never mind that not every CS degree makes you a programmer
No CS degree makes you a programmer. They make you a Computer Scientist.
Proper testing is a function of Software Engineering. This isn't some nitpick: they're completely different fields that both happen to often involve computers, and are frequently confused by many people who go to school to learn CS when what they really want is to be a programmer.
This is exactly the kind of bug I'd expect from someone with a CS degree, fresh out of college and working their first SE job.
That's why I said that we need more than 3 non-conflicting channels. I want a nice *wide* band where we can put tons of devices, and they'll be able to operate without contention.
Looking at the example side by side comparisons at the top, I think I was latching onto the wrong changes. I think they were trying to push the geometry around a little, but what *actually* caught my eye was the ones on the right look like they have a lower poly count and lower res textures. Was that actually what they were trying for? If not, they would have made a better test by similarly de-resing the originals.
It's a top-10 list that actually has insightful information on how to do software right, instead of being a random collection of ten things to make a fluff article. Bonus points for being things that I actually agree with.
I agree partly: This is the FCC's doing, and the president only has so much political capital to spend fighting such issues. I'd think this would be an issue to do it on, since it was emphasized so strongly in his campaign, but plenty of other promises have slipped too, and this is small political beans compared to the foreign policy issues.
Sure, I hoped for more from the president (I've gotten roughly what I expected... A mediocre showing), but I've NEVER had any optimism about the FCC.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a job for nuclear weapons.
More seriously, nuclear or solar power could do the job. It'd take a large team of small robots a long time to do it, but it could be done. I'd think it easier than all the infrastructure required to lay and heat a pipeline.
Then again, there are ways to make a pipeline work. Instead of pipe, it could be thin flexible tubing, and you could use parabolic mirrors at points along the way to heat the water. It'd be possible.
It's a great engineering problem from either side, but realistically, man-made structures are the way to go. A bunch of plastic panels and a little aluminum framing is probably way lighter than the equipment required for any of these crazy ideas.
In sport there is advantage in not taking an optimal strategy, because your opponent won't know which non optimal strategy you've chosen until it's too late. If you're going to use randomness to determine which strategy to use, then the computer is no better than a coach.
A strategy that's chosen because it's most likely to succeed *is* an optimal strategy, even if the reason is because it's harder for your opponent to guess. That's simply another variable, one that induces some recursive feedback loops, but which is still practically workable by a computer.
The real problem is that computers aren't yet good enough at collecting the broad-spectrum hard-to-quantify data that meat brains can process with ease.
Massive computer-controlled Archimedes mirrors are awesome and cool:
http://ecofuture.net/aliceinwonderland/wp-content/blogs.dir/3/files/solar_power_plants/solar_two.jpg
I recall some pictures taken by NASA dumping black water tanks overboard, and it made a mixed phase spray, but google has failed me and I can't find them.
I'd expect the evaporative cooling to freeze some portion of it. It'd be subliming away on the trip over, but you only need to recover a small percentage for this to be economical.
Unfortunately a launch loop big enough to fling 1Mg would probably be harder to build and maintain than a pipeline. OTOH, I think a smaller brick would work well.
Plastic wrap would just pop, but a reusable metal container might do it. Using the vapor pressure for trajectory correction is a great idea.
I don't think the pipeline would work. 1700 miles is easy on earth, but a much tougher construction project in hard vacuum. Can you imagine welding though spacesuit gloves? Not to mention it'd be terribly expensive to lift 1700 miles of pipe. Even then you'll have to expend a lot of energy heating it so the water doesn't freeze.
I'd think it'd be easier to dig another cave in a more convenient location.
On the other hand, the words "Space fountain" gave me an awesome idea before I looked up what it really is. Here's what I thought: collect water at the poles, pressurize it, and squirt it through a nozzle on a ballistic trajectory toward the moon base. Lay out tarps all around the base. The water will freeze in flight and fall on the tarps. When you need more water, reel the tarps in and collect the ice.
You could improve the aim by making a specialized nozzle. After initially launching the drops, have them go down a long barrel, perhaps tens of meters long, with some kind of noncontacting guidance mechanism inside. Induction coils? Little microdroplet sprayers? It'd be like aiming the electron beam down a CRT. Depending how tight you can dial in the convergence, you might be able to make due with a giant funnel on the receiving end.
Keep in mind you don't need to bring back a lot of water. You only need enough to replenish what gets lost. Pipelines are great for big volume, but for these small amounts, I'd bet the "moon fountain" might cut it.
Or just send out an RC moon buggy to pick up a few barrels from time to time.
If he says that you can call one to visit you, call one, and tell them that your counsel will arrive at your location in 9 hours.
The cop's next actions will be: place you under arrest without interrogating you; take you downtown; leave you in a cell for a day or two until the proper arrangements can be made to interrogate you in the presence of your lawyer. As a bonus, they'll supply their own tape recorder.
Read the quote in the summary again. Even if it's not binding precedent, it's a very valuable thing to have a judge say on the record. It's going to be quoted a whole lot.
Honestly, I'm a little surprised Disney didn't send in their lawyers to help. This decision has to scare the hell out of them.
The way I do it is IMAP syncs whatever my provider has. I back up my side of it. If they delete everything, my IMAP mirror is deleted too, but I still have my backups.
I had to restore once, and it was easy: Restore everything into Local Folders; then drag and drop them back into the IMAP server.
I agree with most of this except opening the garage doors at the FD. It's really unnecessary. If the power is out, they can still open the doors by hand. If the doors jam, they drive the truck through the door. If for some reason they can't, keep in mind we're talking about firemen, who take pride in their ability to get through any stuck door *fast*, sitting at home base which is loaded with axes, jacks, saws, and jaws-of-life. I'd say it'll delay them 90 seconds even including the time to decide the door's busted and it's time to make a new one. Keep in mind it's rare that it'll get to that point.
The net cost of implementing auto-open doors plus the cost of false alarms (stolen gear or having to have a guy stand watch until the doors close, rain blowing in, etc) very likely outweighs the benefits by quite a lot.
http://firefox.com/ , and then look for "Try the new Firefox 4 Beta! Free download" under the big green download link.
Yeah, it's not the standard software website UI, but I'd not call it "the most frustrating".
Going 24-bit will make no practical difference on 99% of popular music. It lowers the theoretical noise floor, but that's only relevant if the master tapes are good enough (rare), and more importantly, the music actually has that much dynamic range... Which the vast majority of music does not. How much music in the iTunes store has passages so soft you can barely hear them? It happens occasionally in classical, but virtually never in rock.
I think the point of this is to get over the stigma of compressed audio. Now instead of people saying that CDs are better because they're uncompressed, Apple has an answer: "Yeah, but ours are 24 bit!". It's meaningless, but now it's "debatable" which format is better, instead of the previous situation where CDs were objectively better and the only contention was if the difference was audible.
I recently cracked the screen on my MacBook Pro. No big deal, I thought, just buy a new screen for a hundred bucks on ebay, and install it.
Except the two screws to remove the bezel are blocked by the body, so I had to disassemble the whole thing, which involves a bazillion screws, and more annoyingly, plastic pop-together hooks all the way around the edges. It took four times longer than it should have.
I agree the best solution is to buy a new computer. I now own a ThinkPad. :)
IPv6 isn't a killer feature today. They won't sell a lot more routers by adding it. However, in the future when people need the feature, they'll sell a ton more routers to support it.
Why would they offer it now and miss out on all the future business?
not free .... How could they be valued so high?
You say those like they're contradicting somehow.
They're valued highly because in a world of plenty of free alternatives, they've figured out a way to market a paid product. I don't care for their product either, but it's clearly worth something to people with money. In practical terms, that means they're good at corporate support, or their salespeople give good head. Either way they have something of value.
Not really. Ask Slashdot has always had a little niche for this.
It's a fun question, too. I'd suggest naming them directions that don't correspond to client-server relationships in such an obvious way. So, instead of Up and Down, go for North and South, whichever way feels more appropriate to the situation. In and Out might be a good pair, depending what you want to visualize.
How about Hitherwise and Yonderborne?
I'm not sure if it's a deficiency of prose or if you're actually proposing that people are falling back on MIT because they can't clear the bar at DeVry. Either way, the main thread has been lost, so I'm just replying to this:
...tell people on the current thread that 20% of their doctors and their president are certified by a degree, there'd be switching and complaining ...
In coding, when you fuck up:
The build breaks
It fails automated tests
The bug gets caught in peer review
It blows up in the lab
It gets caught by methodical QA review
And some small percentage of the time, the bug ships, so you patch it later.
When a doctor fucks up, people die or are crippled, and there often aren't second chances to fix a mistake made in the OR.
As for your basic premise that we need more degrees: Good work in almost every field correlates strongly with experience, and poorly with formal education. The counterexamples are usually where you're doing something new where no one has experience. In 2011, alarm clock software isn't groundbreaking, and doesn't require fresh minds to think up a way to solve a new problem. It needs experienced engineers who have seen all the ways it's gone wrong before, working methodically to prevent it from happening again.
never mind that not every CS degree makes you a programmer
No CS degree makes you a programmer. They make you a Computer Scientist.
Proper testing is a function of Software Engineering. This isn't some nitpick: they're completely different fields that both happen to often involve computers, and are frequently confused by many people who go to school to learn CS when what they really want is to be a programmer.
This is exactly the kind of bug I'd expect from someone with a CS degree, fresh out of college and working their first SE job.
That's why I said that we need more than 3 non-conflicting channels. I want a nice *wide* band where we can put tons of devices, and they'll be able to operate without contention.
Looking at the example side by side comparisons at the top, I think I was latching onto the wrong changes. I think they were trying to push the geometry around a little, but what *actually* caught my eye was the ones on the right look like they have a lower poly count and lower res textures. Was that actually what they were trying for? If not, they would have made a better test by similarly de-resing the originals.
It's a top-10 list that actually has insightful information on how to do software right, instead of being a random collection of ten things to make a fluff article. Bonus points for being things that I actually agree with.
Open spectrum would be a free pony for everyone.
I thought this guy predated Obama. You're right, he came with the package. There's no excuse.
I agree partly: This is the FCC's doing, and the president only has so much political capital to spend fighting such issues. I'd think this would be an issue to do it on, since it was emphasized so strongly in his campaign, but plenty of other promises have slipped too, and this is small political beans compared to the foreign policy issues.
Sure, I hoped for more from the president (I've gotten roughly what I expected... A mediocre showing), but I've NEVER had any optimism about the FCC.