TFS says that the online enrollment is open. I couldn't find any way to enroll, only a page where you can enter your name and email to "sign up [...] to receive more information about the online version when it becomes available". Am I missing something? Does anyone have a link to where you can truly enroll for the free version of the course?
Um, sorry, but I grew up in a neighboring country, so I know about GDR and DDR. All I got in the U.S. so far is a grad degree;) I just didn't get the reference. I know about Stasi,yet I didn't link that to the phrase "postwar abuses". And I think I have a good reason for that. The German law is somewhat an overreaction. Hell paved with good intentions, think of the children, pick your meme. Everyone posting here forgets that Stasi wasn't a business, nor a person -- it was a governmental entity. AFAIK, the German privacy laws give government a wide berth, so to speak. That's why I didn't think of Stasi -- had it existed today, it would be pretty much exempt from compliance with that law. Anyone who knows German law better, please chime in.
This is beyond silly..Net is not a language. Both CLR and JVM bytecodes can be interpreted when you're not on the beaten path. Once a piece of code gets hot, the JIT compiler compiles to native code and that's the end of interpreting that. There are plenty of flavors of Basic, some of them run on either CLR or JVM and thus automagically get compiled. There are also freestanding Basics that get compiled. Your whole rant about "interpreted" languages is based on some fantasy you have that is simply not true today, and hasn't been for a good while.
Pretty much all of Beckhoff's real-time controllers run on TwinCAT, and that runs in Windows (technically alongside of it). Last I checked, I can have 50us control cycles on off-the-shelf hardware, and it's rock solid, on both Windows XP and Windows CE. Of course you can't do it in barebone Windows, you need a framework that relegates Windows to the lowest priority task and so on. So I'd be careful with calling people names...
I have only a problem when people say "xxx misunderstands that poem". It's art. I don't give shits nor giggles about what the author wanted to achieve. If it needs explaining, or if I lack whatever context, too freaking bad. It's art. Everyone consumes it differently, some with chopsticks, some with bare hands, and some in microgravity. Yes, of course, every poem was written for a reason. Some authors will forget what it was, though, and some don't care if anyone else knows, though. If the author achieves some popularity within literary circles, there will be someone to write an analytical paper, or a biography. Then you can read what the paper's author/biographer thought that the author thought when writing the poem. I usually treat those 3rd person literary accounts with a sand bucket, not just a grain of sand.
I do agree somewhat with your analysis, but it's -- I think -- just a coincidence.
If you're in the U.S., law must be accessible to all, in its entirety -- this apparently has a long legal history. So if something is a code -- too bad for the organization that tries to bully you into paying, it's your right to get it at your library, and it's your right to copy and redistribute it as you please. This is in stark contrast to, say, Europe, where plenty of directives "include by reference" ISO and IEC standards that cost thousands of dollars.
For U.S. building law from pretty much every state, law that includes some international codes, see bulk.resource.org. Don't ever spend another dime on NEC or building codes that are law in some jurisdiction in the U.S. It's silly.
Yeah. Oracle supports x86 and 64 bit SPARC. The only "news" I could find about OpenJDK for ARM is that support is due to be dropped from IcedTea. So all I know is that whatever "Java" exists for ARM is abandoned at this point. Anyone who knows otherwise, please chime in. Do note that a full featured Java should IMHO have both interpreter and JIT, and perhaps be in somewhat widespread use so that there'll be enough real-life test coverage. I wouldn't use it for any major ARM-based project at this point, unless I had at least one experienced maintainer and a trainee on my payroll...
I don't think that's that big of a problem, once you plan for having that many from the get go. All of those servers must be automatically provisioned, and their names are irrelevant and are machine generated. No one ever needs to know those names. Their management software probably manages servers by function. Say they have so many storage nodes, so many storage indexers, so many load balancers, so many static content servers, so many web spiders, etc. The configurations for any particular server must be generated, too, from some sort of a global configuration for their whole "system".
I was trying to understand the part about the orbits.
According to NASA, they agree about high (100s of miles) circular orbits -- they "decay" quickly. But here's the interesting part:
Now for the good news. Ely and several colleagues have discovered a whole new class of "frozen" or stable high-altitude lunar orbits. Pictured right, they are all inclined at steep angles to the Moon's equatorial plane so they get far above the horizon at the lunar poles, and--surprise--they are all also quite elliptical. [...] How stable are they? Ely and his colleagues calculate that certain elliptical, high-inclination, high-altitude lunar orbits may remain stable for periods of at least a century. Indeed, Ely hypothesizes the orbits could last indefinitely.
So not all is lost, orbit-wise, but those are not orbits where you'd put any sort of a station methinks. And I agree about the pointlessness of getting ISS to the moon.
Why? Last time I checked, plenty of Nobel prizes were awarded when numerous people arrived independently at the same results. So what if someone publishes it a month or two before you -- it's not like you could redo all the research in that time frame if it's really that significant, so any claims of you cheating are out of the question. I think the community is wise enough to accept that clever people may think alike and people do discover things concurrently? How would it be bad for you personally?
Thanks. I still don't see anything that would back up the claim that such an orbit will decay so much as to impact or go parabolic in a "short" amount of time. If it happens on the scale of 100s or 1000s of years, who cares.
I'm worried someone else will publish similar conclusions to the ones I'm coming to.
That's what science is about. The opposite is what Feynman was lamenting about, and I agree with him. It'll be splendid if you come up, independently, with same conclusions as someone else. Especially if each of you gets it from your own data. Science in general could use some reproduction of experimental results. There's plenty of results, especially from data coming from high-priced equipment, that has only ever been done once, and no one can get funding to reproduce it on different equipment, or under more controlled conditions, etc.
You are assuming that the orbit would de-circularize due to perturbances, eventually getting the perilune to 0. Is that a valid assumption? Do you have any references where someone has calculated perchance how long it'd be expected to take? You have valid points, but they may well be "valid" in the sense that it'd take a million years for the orbit to intersect lunar surface...
The big boys cost pretty much the same if they use same propellants. It's all the other works that makes this cost insignificant, even if you have "completely reusable" launcher.
To put it bluntly: everyfuckingwhere. They got one thing very, very right: distaste for subcontractors. They figure they can control quality and leadtimes better if they do things in-house, and they don't have to support other companies' profits. It's simple, but it works wonders. There are plenty of simple business strategies that work very well out there, it seems.
That's not magic. They are run by competent people, and it has nothing to do with competition. Heck, they are, in fact, pretty much monopolists in their market niche. They have complete vertical integration -- all of the profits are basically theirs, because they try to make all the custom parts themselves. The big boys are so slow to change, that they'll be using their political clout to get contracts as long as they can while being run over slowly but surely by SpaceX. It's reckoning time for "big" boys and their leadership. I've been saying that for a good while now. I wish there was a way to invest small amounts of money in them...
It is not all that much smaller. 24 bits is what you need to listen to a 40dB conversation in 16 bits of resolution, duh. So, if you have a dynamic piece, you will appreciate the difference. Symphonic music recorded in 24 bits and played likewise, in a quiet room, sounds beautiful. The CD sounds worse, and I am no audiophile. It's easy to hear once you listen to the 24 bit system -- though the room has to be at least as quiet as a concert hall would be when they pause.
Dither helps with converter differential nonlinearlity, and helps make discretization noise become less obvious, but does not help in improving resolution. Filtering does the latter. The CD is sampled at 44kHz. Using ideal brickwall reproduction filter set at, say 20kHz, you gain log2(sqrt(22/20)) = 0.07 bits of resolution. That's it. Dithering on top of it will make you lose resolution.
I agree. Only thing I'm waiting for is the access for google apps users. Right now it's somewhat irritating: if you have a gmail account via google apps (tied to your domain), you can't sign up for Google+...
Slashdot Mirror
TFS says that the online enrollment is open. I couldn't find any way to enroll, only a page where you can enter your name and email to "sign up [...] to receive more information about the online version when it becomes available". Am I missing something? Does anyone have a link to where you can truly enroll for the free version of the course?
Um, sorry, but I grew up in a neighboring country, so I know about GDR and DDR. All I got in the U.S. so far is a grad degree ;) I just didn't get the reference. I know about Stasi,yet I didn't link that to the phrase "postwar abuses". And I think I have a good reason for that. The German law is somewhat an overreaction. Hell paved with good intentions, think of the children, pick your meme. Everyone posting here forgets that Stasi wasn't a business, nor a person -- it was a governmental entity. AFAIK, the German privacy laws give government a wide berth, so to speak. That's why I didn't think of Stasi -- had it existed today, it would be pretty much exempt from compliance with that law. Anyone who knows German law better, please chime in.
This is beyond silly. .Net is not a language. Both CLR and JVM bytecodes can be interpreted when you're not on the beaten path. Once a piece of code gets hot, the JIT compiler compiles to native code and that's the end of interpreting that. There are plenty of flavors of Basic, some of them run on either CLR or JVM and thus automagically get compiled. There are also freestanding Basics that get compiled. Your whole rant about "interpreted" languages is based on some fantasy you have that is simply not true today, and hasn't been for a good while.
Pretty much all of Beckhoff's real-time controllers run on TwinCAT, and that runs in Windows (technically alongside of it). Last I checked, I can have 50us control cycles on off-the-shelf hardware, and it's rock solid, on both Windows XP and Windows CE. Of course you can't do it in barebone Windows, you need a framework that relegates Windows to the lowest priority task and so on. So I'd be careful with calling people names...
The German government, which possesses perhaps the world's most adamant privacy laws as a result of postwar abuse [...]
Could someone please explain what is meant/implied by "postwar abuse" here? Post WW1? Sorry, I don't get it :(
And that is, ladies, gentlemen, and basement dwellers, why we need posts by people with 4 digit UIDs.
I have only a problem when people say "xxx misunderstands that poem". It's art. I don't give shits nor giggles about what the author wanted to achieve. If it needs explaining, or if I lack whatever context, too freaking bad. It's art. Everyone consumes it differently, some with chopsticks, some with bare hands, and some in microgravity. Yes, of course, every poem was written for a reason. Some authors will forget what it was, though, and some don't care if anyone else knows, though. If the author achieves some popularity within literary circles, there will be someone to write an analytical paper, or a biography. Then you can read what the paper's author/biographer thought that the author thought when writing the poem. I usually treat those 3rd person literary accounts with a sand bucket, not just a grain of sand.
I do agree somewhat with your analysis, but it's -- I think -- just a coincidence.
If you're in the U.S., law must be accessible to all, in its entirety -- this apparently has a long legal history. So if something is a code -- too bad for the organization that tries to bully you into paying, it's your right to get it at your library, and it's your right to copy and redistribute it as you please. This is in stark contrast to, say, Europe, where plenty of directives "include by reference" ISO and IEC standards that cost thousands of dollars.
For U.S. building law from pretty much every state, law that includes some international codes, see bulk.resource.org. Don't ever spend another dime on NEC or building codes that are law in some jurisdiction in the U.S. It's silly.
Yeah. Oracle supports x86 and 64 bit SPARC. The only "news" I could find about OpenJDK for ARM is that support is due to be dropped from IcedTea. So all I know is that whatever "Java" exists for ARM is abandoned at this point. Anyone who knows otherwise, please chime in. Do note that a full featured Java should IMHO have both interpreter and JIT, and perhaps be in somewhat widespread use so that there'll be enough real-life test coverage. I wouldn't use it for any major ARM-based project at this point, unless I had at least one experienced maintainer and a trainee on my payroll...
I don't think that's that big of a problem, once you plan for having that many from the get go. All of those servers must be automatically provisioned, and their names are irrelevant and are machine generated. No one ever needs to know those names. Their management software probably manages servers by function. Say they have so many storage nodes, so many storage indexers, so many load balancers, so many static content servers, so many web spiders, etc. The configurations for any particular server must be generated, too, from some sort of a global configuration for their whole "system".
They should only worry about enterprise/server market when there's a full featured JVM for ARM. So far, there isn't one.
This article from NASA gives a very nice example of the orbital decay from Apollo days.
I was trying to understand the part about the orbits.
According to NASA, they agree about high (100s of miles) circular orbits -- they "decay" quickly. But here's the interesting part:
Now for the good news. Ely and several colleagues have discovered a whole new class of "frozen" or stable high-altitude lunar orbits. Pictured right, they are all inclined at steep angles to the Moon's equatorial plane so they get far above the horizon at the lunar poles, and--surprise--they are all also quite elliptical. [...] How stable are they? Ely and his colleagues calculate that certain elliptical, high-inclination, high-altitude lunar orbits may remain stable for periods of at least a century. Indeed, Ely hypothesizes the orbits could last indefinitely.
So not all is lost, orbit-wise, but those are not orbits where you'd put any sort of a station methinks. And I agree about the pointlessness of getting ISS to the moon.
Why? Last time I checked, plenty of Nobel prizes were awarded when numerous people arrived independently at the same results. So what if someone publishes it a month or two before you -- it's not like you could redo all the research in that time frame if it's really that significant, so any claims of you cheating are out of the question. I think the community is wise enough to accept that clever people may think alike and people do discover things concurrently? How would it be bad for you personally?
Thanks. I still don't see anything that would back up the claim that such an orbit will decay so much as to impact or go parabolic in a "short" amount of time. If it happens on the scale of 100s or 1000s of years, who cares.
I'm worried someone else will publish similar conclusions to the ones I'm coming to.
That's what science is about. The opposite is what Feynman was lamenting about, and I agree with him. It'll be splendid if you come up, independently, with same conclusions as someone else. Especially if each of you gets it from your own data. Science in general could use some reproduction of experimental results. There's plenty of results, especially from data coming from high-priced equipment, that has only ever been done once, and no one can get funding to reproduce it on different equipment, or under more controlled conditions, etc.
Any references to back this up?
You are assuming that the orbit would de-circularize due to perturbances, eventually getting the perilune to 0. Is that a valid assumption? Do you have any references where someone has calculated perchance how long it'd be expected to take? You have valid points, but they may well be "valid" in the sense that it'd take a million years for the orbit to intersect lunar surface...
The big boys cost pretty much the same if they use same propellants. It's all the other works that makes this cost insignificant, even if you have "completely reusable" launcher.
I wonder where they will be able to cut costs.
To put it bluntly: everyfuckingwhere. They got one thing very, very right: distaste for subcontractors. They figure they can control quality and leadtimes better if they do things in-house, and they don't have to support other companies' profits. It's simple, but it works wonders. There are plenty of simple business strategies that work very well out there, it seems.
That's not magic. They are run by competent people, and it has nothing to do with competition. Heck, they are, in fact, pretty much monopolists in their market niche. They have complete vertical integration -- all of the profits are basically theirs, because they try to make all the custom parts themselves. The big boys are so slow to change, that they'll be using their political clout to get contracts as long as they can while being run over slowly but surely by SpaceX. It's reckoning time for "big" boys and their leadership. I've been saying that for a good while now. I wish there was a way to invest small amounts of money in them...
It is not all that much smaller. 24 bits is what you need to listen to a 40dB conversation in 16 bits of resolution, duh. So, if you have a dynamic piece, you will appreciate the difference. Symphonic music recorded in 24 bits and played likewise, in a quiet room, sounds beautiful. The CD sounds worse, and I am no audiophile. It's easy to hear once you listen to the 24 bit system -- though the room has to be at least as quiet as a concert hall would be when they pause.
Dither helps with converter differential nonlinearlity, and helps make discretization noise become less obvious, but does not help in improving resolution. Filtering does the latter. The CD is sampled at 44kHz. Using ideal brickwall reproduction filter set at, say 20kHz, you gain log2(sqrt(22/20)) = 0.07 bits of resolution. That's it. Dithering on top of it will make you lose resolution.
So, the backlash from the rest of the population would take care of the terrorists. That solves the problem, too.
I agree. Only thing I'm waiting for is the access for google apps users. Right now it's somewhat irritating: if you have a gmail account via google apps (tied to your domain), you can't sign up for Google+...