Mildly interesting trivia note: in the current half-season cliffhanger, the captain of the other Battlestar played the female leader of the resistance movement on Mars in Babylon 5.
What your source? Number One; Admiral Cain.
I want to be able to fire up an X session at home, disconnect from it but leave the clients running, and then reattach to it from elsewhere. Ideally I'd want it tunneled over ssh.
I use X11VNC. Of course, for a conceptual equivalent to screen (which requires you to start all applications inside of it), just run a VNC server on your local box and fullscreen the viewer.
How can I help? I'm willing to give a couple of hours a week, I don't have a scanner, but I'm willing to type...if this is truly "open", I will be more than willing to contribute my time.
As a few others have mentioned, jump in to Distributed Proofreaders. We take the raw images (either scanned specifically for DP or taken from scanning projects like this) and produce checked, corrected text, which then goes to Project Gutenberg. A few hours a week can help a lot.
On a more serious note, has anyone done a calculation for the ratio of sun temperature changes to the expected rise or fall of temperatures here on earth?
Yes; on the back of an envelope (it's a simple calculation). The variation from solar min to solar max would be very small and dwarfed by the changes we've seen on Earth in the past thirty years. Unless you can suggest a mechanism for a sudden solar heating or enlargement, there's not much point to proposing it as an explanation for global warming. And if the solar flux were changing significantly, we'd know--SOHO's a great spacecraft.
Umm, no - it's the CO2 lines that are mostly saturated. H2O lines are not saturated - you got that backwards.
Absorption of Earth's atmosphere. Note it's the lines under the 255K curve that determine if heat gets from the ground to space (so look at c, b is for the 5780 curve and solar heating). The principal CO2 line is well away from saturation; the H20 lines are pegged.
Yes, water is a greenhouse gas. What the OP doesn't mention, however, is that the water lines are already saturated in Earth's atmosphere--adding more water to the atmosphere won't increase the greenhouse effect one bit.
That wasn't nearly as bad as when a co-worker didn't pay attention to the xterm he was typing in and did and rm -rf * in the/usr/bin directory of a heavily used machine(literally 100+ users on it at the time)
Happens to me way too often, fortunately in the form of "Wait, which machine did I just reboot?"
After all, the gas taxes are supposed to pay for the roads and such, and electric cars use the roads too.
Common misconception, although with some truth. Most roadways are funded primarily through property and income tax (and sales, to a lesser extent). Gasoline taxes go partially to the interstate system...and to oil subsidies. Nice loop there.
The summary makes it sound like this is something new. It isn't. SKR has been known for decades. The aurora have been directly imaged in the UV. What's new is cool audio files (nothing wrong with that) from a very good instrument in Saturn orbit, an instrument that should lead to a better understanding of aurora and magnetospheric processes.
Would you care to demonstrate your knowledge and explain how the COP is measured? (I'm guessing it's joules moved / joules in and neither a fraction of Carnot efficiency nor energy out / energy in, as neither of those can exceed unity).
One could say the same thing about DVD playback...they're like $30 nowadays. The promise of convergence is "this here device will do it all for you, no need to have piles of boxes." As other posters have pointed out, that also means single point of contact for tech support--boon for the consumer, nightmare for Sony.
You're right though that most people willing to drop the $300-$500 on this console probably don't need another router--another problem with the convergence idea. It's the buried-deep-in-gadgets techheads who are drooling over convergence devices:)
Space isn't a perfect vacuum. Sound waves and shocks can exist anywhere there's enough gas to act in an ordered, collective fashion, and on solar system scales that doesn't require a very high density.
The solar wind is supersonic--it travels faster than sound waves will travel in it (which is why there's a bow shock upstream of the Earth). In the case of a comet, as you quoted, it's expelling material, and sound waves can travel in that.
Somebody makes a crack like this every time a space fluids topic gets posted on slash.
(Incidentally, why the heck is this posted under "Science" instead of "It's Funny, Laugh"? These are absolute crackpots.)
Precision is the number of significant figures in a result. Accuracy is how close it comes to a norm (usually as a multiple of the precision). 23.000+/-.001 hours is a very precise but horribly inaccurate measure of the length of a day on Earth--it's off by 1000 standard deviations. By contrast, 23.5+/-1 is far less precise, but more accurate.
So a rock-solid 100kHz clock is less precise (broader timeslices) but more accurate than a drifty 1MHz clock.
Surely there are more advances between the PPro and the Pentium-M than there are between the Pentium and the PPro.
PPro was a complete architecture redesign. After that it's all been incremental (with the exception of the now-abandoned Netburst architecture). So there's a lot of accumulated changes, but the basic structure and execution approach remain based in the P6. The P6 architecture has proven remarkably robust, surviving the addition of four vector instruction sets, a decade, and an order of magnitude clock speed increase.
Thanks; never having been a father I did not know that. Which I suppose reinforces the point of the statement while undermining its pithiness;) 'tis become a knee-jerk response now to claims of something being "intuitive." I thought rather than just spit that out I'd elaborate with some real thoughts. Apparently some disagree about that...
'intuitivly'. which really mean, seen it so many times as a child it has become an ingrained habbit.
To me that means "familiar" not "intuitive." Using good ol' Google define: "spontaneously derived from or prompted by a natural tendency" or "obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation."
assuming no one ever creats a new need, but someone will and the first generation will learn
I thought we were talking about interfaces here, and the assertion that some are "intuitive." For the majority of users, Excel (to pick an example that's sometimes usable, sometimes not) isn't usable because they grew up watching Dad and Mom with it, it's usable because through use they've become familiar with its conventions, and those of the environment in which it's embedded.
The reason I rail against "intuitive!" is that it often comes down to "do it like I always did it!" which may be easier to learn but not necessarily easier to use than an alternative. And if somebody else hasn't "always done it" like that, it may be harder for them to learn as well.
Easy to say. The only truly intuitive interface is the nipple.
Convention leads to consistency leads to familiarity, which is not not the same thing as intuitiveness. Apple understood this--that's really why the platform works, not because it taps some Jungian archetype of computerness.
It also leads to stagnation, inertia, inefficiencies writ in stone, and claims of mindless copying.
There are more intuitive and less intuitive interfaces. There are ways to design so as to stay out of the way of the user, or hinder it. But nothing is flat-out, absolute, nonrelative, intuitive.
I find the most successful relationships I have are with guys who already have a decent level of self-confidence and several friends who respect and love them.
Well, I'm fucked! (no, not in the good way).
Seriously though, a lot of the woe of geekdom comes from the slightly sideways way of looking at the world and interacting with people. (Insert various hypothesized links to autism/Asperger's/ADD/whatever here.) All sorts of seeming paradoxes result: the deeply caring geek who unknowingly whips out incredibly hurtful words or actions, the guy who's willing and eager to talk about feelings and relating to each other but completely oblivious to what he and others are communicating nonverbally, others...
Some of the social traits of geekdom, such as the ability to be unabashedly enthused about something (even the most cynical geek has childlike moments) or a dry, gently self-deprecating humour can actually work pretty well for an initial spark of attraction. But after that, the emphasis on meritocracy and problem-solving really screws things up. The only solution I've found is to make a continual, conscious effort to pay gobs of attention to how I'm relating. Intelligence and problem-solving convert poorly to empathy, but you have to apply what you've got to the situations you're in...
Slashdot Mirror
Mildly interesting trivia note: in the current half-season cliffhanger, the captain of the other Battlestar played the female leader of the resistance movement on Mars in Babylon 5.
What your source? Number One; Admiral Cain.
I use X11VNC. Of course, for a conceptual equivalent to screen (which requires you to start all applications inside of it), just run a VNC server on your local box and fullscreen the viewer.
As a few others have mentioned, jump in to Distributed Proofreaders. We take the raw images (either scanned specifically for DP or taken from scanning projects like this) and produce checked, corrected text, which then goes to Project Gutenberg. A few hours a week can help a lot.
Yes; on the back of an envelope (it's a simple calculation). The variation from solar min to solar max would be very small and dwarfed by the changes we've seen on Earth in the past thirty years. Unless you can suggest a mechanism for a sudden solar heating or enlargement, there's not much point to proposing it as an explanation for global warming. And if the solar flux were changing significantly, we'd know--SOHO's a great spacecraft.
Actually, it's not shown publically--you can probably figure out my email from the URL; it's bog-standard. I'm definitely interested in references.
Absorption of Earth's atmosphere. Note it's the lines under the 255K curve that determine if heat gets from the ground to space (so look at c, b is for the 5780 curve and solar heating). The principal CO2 line is well away from saturation; the H20 lines are pegged.
Yes, water is a greenhouse gas. What the OP doesn't mention, however, is that the water lines are already saturated in Earth's atmosphere--adding more water to the atmosphere won't increase the greenhouse effect one bit.
Unfortunately the panel that Ken Kifer used isn't available anymore, but his page might be of use to you in putting together a system.
Happens to me way too often, fortunately in the form of "Wait, which machine did I just reboot?"
Common misconception, although with some truth. Most roadways are funded primarily through property and income tax (and sales, to a lesser extent). Gasoline taxes go partially to the interstate system...and to oil subsidies. Nice loop there.
I spent my Data Structures class reading the Count of Monte Cristo on my PalmPro. Where there's a will to slack, there's a way.
The summary makes it sound like this is something new. It isn't. SKR has been known for decades. The aurora have been directly imaged in the UV. What's new is cool audio files (nothing wrong with that) from a very good instrument in Saturn orbit, an instrument that should lead to a better understanding of aurora and magnetospheric processes.
Would you care to demonstrate your knowledge and explain how the COP is measured? (I'm guessing it's joules moved / joules in and neither a fraction of Carnot efficiency nor energy out / energy in, as neither of those can exceed unity).
So if I turn on the A/C, gas goes back into the tank? "In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"
Don't you mean blurry, transparent, and/or rainbow-coloured genitals?
I guess she should go after George Lucas next.
Or JMS. "Not the One. Not the One."
One could say the same thing about DVD playback...they're like $30 nowadays. The promise of convergence is "this here device will do it all for you, no need to have piles of boxes." As other posters have pointed out, that also means single point of contact for tech support--boon for the consumer, nightmare for Sony.
:)
You're right though that most people willing to drop the $300-$500 on this console probably don't need another router--another problem with the convergence idea. It's the buried-deep-in-gadgets techheads who are drooling over convergence devices
Space isn't a perfect vacuum. Sound waves and shocks can exist anywhere there's enough gas to act in an ordered, collective fashion, and on solar system scales that doesn't require a very high density.
The solar wind is supersonic--it travels faster than sound waves will travel in it (which is why there's a bow shock upstream of the Earth). In the case of a comet, as you quoted, it's expelling material, and sound waves can travel in that.
Somebody makes a crack like this every time a space fluids topic gets posted on slash.
(Incidentally, why the heck is this posted under "Science" instead of "It's Funny, Laugh"? These are absolute crackpots.)
Precision is the number of significant figures in a result. Accuracy is how close it comes to a norm (usually as a multiple of the precision). 23.000+/-.001 hours is a very precise but horribly inaccurate measure of the length of a day on Earth--it's off by 1000 standard deviations. By contrast, 23.5+/-1 is far less precise, but more accurate.
So a rock-solid 100kHz clock is less precise (broader timeslices) but more accurate than a drifty 1MHz clock.
PPro was a complete architecture redesign. After that it's all been incremental (with the exception of the now-abandoned Netburst architecture). So there's a lot of accumulated changes, but the basic structure and execution approach remain based in the P6. The P6 architecture has proven remarkably robust, surviving the addition of four vector instruction sets, a decade, and an order of magnitude clock speed increase.
No.
It is possible to buy DVD players that'll convert on the fly, but they tend to be expensive or have lousy video quality in the conversion.
Thanks; never having been a father I did not know that. Which I suppose reinforces the point of the statement while undermining its pithiness ;) 'tis become a knee-jerk response now to claims of something being "intuitive." I thought rather than just spit that out I'd elaborate with some real thoughts. Apparently some disagree about that...
'intuitivly'. which really mean, seen it so many times as a child it has become an ingrained habbit.
To me that means "familiar" not "intuitive." Using good ol' Google define: "spontaneously derived from or prompted by a natural tendency" or "obtained through intuition rather than from reasoning or observation."
assuming no one ever creats a new need, but someone will and the first generation will learn
I thought we were talking about interfaces here, and the assertion that some are "intuitive." For the majority of users, Excel (to pick an example that's sometimes usable, sometimes not) isn't usable because they grew up watching Dad and Mom with it, it's usable because through use they've become familiar with its conventions, and those of the environment in which it's embedded.
The reason I rail against "intuitive!" is that it often comes down to "do it like I always did it!" which may be easier to learn but not necessarily easier to use than an alternative. And if somebody else hasn't "always done it" like that, it may be harder for them to learn as well.
Easy to say. The only truly intuitive interface is the nipple.
Convention leads to consistency leads to familiarity, which is not not the same thing as intuitiveness. Apple understood this--that's really why the platform works, not because it taps some Jungian archetype of computerness.
It also leads to stagnation, inertia, inefficiencies writ in stone, and claims of mindless copying.
There are more intuitive and less intuitive interfaces. There are ways to design so as to stay out of the way of the user, or hinder it. But nothing is flat-out, absolute, nonrelative, intuitive.
"Specifically, today I learned that the VP is an idiot." (or was that really something new?)
Well, I'm fucked! (no, not in the good way).
Seriously though, a lot of the woe of geekdom comes from the slightly sideways way of looking at the world and interacting with people. (Insert various hypothesized links to autism/Asperger's/ADD/whatever here.) All sorts of seeming paradoxes result: the deeply caring geek who unknowingly whips out incredibly hurtful words or actions, the guy who's willing and eager to talk about feelings and relating to each other but completely oblivious to what he and others are communicating nonverbally, others...
Some of the social traits of geekdom, such as the ability to be unabashedly enthused about something (even the most cynical geek has childlike moments) or a dry, gently self-deprecating humour can actually work pretty well for an initial spark of attraction. But after that, the emphasis on meritocracy and problem-solving really screws things up. The only solution I've found is to make a continual, conscious effort to pay gobs of attention to how I'm relating. Intelligence and problem-solving convert poorly to empathy, but you have to apply what you've got to the situations you're in...