A gram of hydrogen contains about 6x10^23 atoms. Therefore, a "few thousand" weighs about 10^-20 grams -- much less than even the smallest virus.
As for energy release -- it'd take about a gram of anti-hydrogen suitably reacted with normal matter to produce the equivalent of a small nuclear bomb (if released all at once) or the energy expended by an largish satellite launch vehicle (if released over a period of several minutes).
Make the math simple, call what they've got the equivalent of 10^-20 of a 10 kiloton nuke (10^10 gm TNT equivalent), then they've got the equivalent of about 1/10 nanogram of TNT. I wouldn't be too worried just yet.
Tron references aside, MCP (Master Control Program) actually was the name of the OS (kernel) for Burroughs Large Systems (B6700 et al) back in the early 1970s, and for all I know may still be the name on the A-series.
This OS is based on multiple tiny extremely reliable components
Unfortunately that doesn't necessarily make the OS itself reliable. The emergent behaviour of a system is different from the behaviours of its components.
After all, all software is based on multiple tiny extremely reliable components (F00F and FDIV bugs aside)-- the processors op-codes -- and look how flakey most software is.
Sure, you've got to start with reliable components, but you have to combine them in just the right way, too.
I signed up for some mailing lists, got a passport and I have no idea what random crap I pasted into the password field, deleted the crap it dumped to my hard drive and moved on.
Now there's an interesting thought.
I have no interest in getting such a passport, but presumably if it's done on line, it can be done by some automated program. I wonder what would happen to the Passport system if it started getting (tens of?) millions of new registrations a day...
If Microsoft employees sent out emails with headers that made them unviewable in Eudora or other email programs, people on here would be throwing a fit.
If so, then only because such emails would be violating internet standards for formatting email.
If, on the other hand, those MS-originated emails conformed to RFC-2822, and Eudora still broke on them, then people would be bitching about Eudora fixing whatever stupid bug made it non-standards-compliant.
See the difference?
All the people here who have been pissing and moaning about Nick's Outlook-breaking email are pissing and moaning in the wrong place: they should be griping to Microsoft to fix their damn software. (Or, just use an email client that works properly.)
What was our reaction to MS disabling access to the MSN sites?
I don't know about yours, bucko, but I couldn't give a damn. If MSN has anything interesting to say (unlikely), odds are that somebody else will be saying it.
And this is different exactly how?
Microsoft's move was part of an effort to coerce lock-in to a non-standards-compliant protocol. This locks out non-standards-compliant clients. Totally opposite.
This is immature and childish.
Not at all. It makes the point very clearly. If more people did it, more users would realize just how broken MS software is.
And you think Microsoft isn't into that whole scary media empire thing?
Microsoft has been trying to buy its way into cable companies for years, with some success (they're starting to figure out how to do it right). They -- or another company owned by Bill Gates -- have been buying up digital rights to images and artwork for years. They've been investing in their own satellite communications network. There's that Qwest-MSN deal, there's MSNBC, Microsoft Press, etc, etc.
Nothing really new here, except for tying the information into a web server rather than a local DB.
The concept certainly has its uses. For example, an aviation GPS system linked to a digital elevation model of the terrain will warn you if you're currently flying at an altitude lower than some of the rocks in the area. That can be helpful. Ditto for warning about restricted airspace, or dangerous areas while backpacking or boating (eg old mine shafts, possible dangerous concentrations of volcanic gasses, old toxic waste dumps, etc, etc.)
The web connection allows for dynamic updating of the data, which is cool, it also means you don't need to carry the whole database around with you.
Of course the advertising/spam aspect is a real down side. And just wait till they start building the stuff into everything: do you really want your digital camera telling you there's a Kodak Picture Point coming up?
Yep, if you tell Qwest you're using MacOS or Linux or anything but certain versions of Windows, they won't (in theory) switch you. Apparently MSN only supports a limited range of client OS's (guess whose). Indeed, I think NT 4 is not even supported (could be wrong on that though.)
I made the mistake of telling them initially I had Win98 so I could get the free USB modem instead of forking out another $100 for the Cisco modem, because I had an old PC I could run WinProxy on and use as a gateway. That's worked fine for me, but I wish now I'd spent the $100.
Yes, switch now. I did earlier this week (still waiting for the actual cutover to take effect.)
Go to the Qwest DSL partners web page and find a few ISPs in your area, click through to check out their web sites. Some will have, right on the first page, instructions as to how to switch to them rather than get stuck with MSN. In my case, 4DV.net listed the Qwest phone number that got me right through (well, after some automated phone menus) to a rep to do the switch
Not only that, but depending on the ISP you'll probably get a better price than Qwest.net (and definitely better than MSN, which is higher), and some of them will throw in static IP numbers for a reasonable price if you want to run some kind of server.
That's okay, just losing the right to the logo is a Good Thing. For one, it could mean an injunction against distribution of any existing copy-protected discs mislabeled with that logo -- which hurts the recording/distribution companies responsible.
For another, it makes it obvious (well, in a subtle way:-) which silvery discs are the copy-protected ones -- namely the ones without the CD logo. We can just avoid buying those. (And encourage others likewise).
Neat. In addition to the obvious high-speed photography applications, a system like this coupled with a similarly short duration flash system could make a vision system capable of seeing through some kinds of particle clouds. Might be more applicable underwater, where the particles are bigger.
Basically, the problem in low-visibility situations like that is that the particles near you scatter so much of your light back at you that you can't see the stuff further away. If you send out a 10 ns pulse of light and don't open the shutter until it has had time to go out some distance (say 100 ns for 100 feet, divided by whatever the refractive index of water is), then you only see the light that has bounced off whatever is 100 feet away (well, mod multiple reflections from silt particles).
Won't work in really thick clouds, of course, but it has possibilities. (Consider, for example, driving in a snowstorm at night -- you don't need or want the snow immediately in front of the headlights lit up.)
Yes, I'd thought of mentioning that. Depends where on Farside the observatory is, though. At the exact center both L5 and L4 are about 30 degrees below the horizon.
(Simple geometry, L4 and L5 are each 60 degrees away from the Moon in the Moon's orbit. That still leaves about 30 degrees beyond where Earth is below the lunar horizon that either L4 or L5 is visible.)
(I'm a former L5 Society member. I know this stuff cold.:-)
Not any more than having the Moon there disrupts Earth satellites.
Well, considering that the Earth masses about 81 times as much as the Moon, then yes, it does have something more of an effect on Lunar satellites than the Moon does on Earth satellites.
Another major consideration is that the Moon's gravity is less uniform -- you can't simply treat it as a point source at the Moon's centre except as a first approximation. There are what're called "mascons" (mass concentrations) under some of the maria which have locally slightly higher gravity than lunar average. Messes up the orbits a bit.
Slashdot Mirror
A gram of hydrogen contains about 6x10^23 atoms. Therefore, a "few thousand" weighs about 10^-20 grams -- much less than even the smallest virus.
As for energy release -- it'd take about a gram of anti-hydrogen suitably reacted with normal matter to produce the equivalent of a small nuclear bomb (if released all at once) or the energy expended by an largish satellite launch vehicle (if released over a period of several minutes).
Make the math simple, call what they've got the equivalent of 10^-20 of a 10 kiloton nuke (10^10 gm TNT equivalent), then they've got the equivalent of about 1/10 nanogram of TNT. I wouldn't be too worried just yet.
Kind of ironic that the "Father of ASCII" worked for IBM, that bastion of EBCDIC.
Tron references aside, MCP (Master Control Program) actually was the name of the OS (kernel) for Burroughs Large Systems (B6700 et al) back in the early 1970s, and for all I know may still be the name on the A-series.
This OS is based on multiple tiny extremely reliable components
Unfortunately that doesn't necessarily make the OS itself reliable. The emergent behaviour of a system is different from the behaviours of its components.
After all, all software is based on multiple tiny extremely reliable components (F00F and FDIV bugs aside)-- the processors op-codes -- and look how flakey most software is.
Sure, you've got to start with reliable components, but you have to combine them in just the right way, too.
Walking downstairs is all very well, but the standard slinky isn't quite long enough for what's really fun ... putting slinkies on 'up' escalators...
What a wonderful combination!
I signed up for some mailing lists, got a passport and I have no idea what random crap I pasted into the password field, deleted the crap it dumped to my hard drive and moved on.
Now there's an interesting thought.
I have no interest in getting such a passport, but presumably if it's done on line, it can be done by some automated program. I wonder what would happen to the Passport system if it started getting (tens of?) millions of new registrations a day...
...is paved with good intentions.
;-)
I don't send HTML mail out of malice, I do it because I think it adds value
Have a nice trip
If Microsoft employees sent out emails with headers that made them unviewable in Eudora or other email programs, people on here would be throwing a fit.
If so, then only because such emails would be violating internet standards for formatting email.
If, on the other hand, those MS-originated emails conformed to RFC-2822, and Eudora still broke on them, then people would be bitching about Eudora fixing whatever stupid bug made it non-standards-compliant.
See the difference?
All the people here who have been pissing and moaning about Nick's Outlook-breaking email are pissing and moaning in the wrong place: they should be griping to Microsoft to fix their damn software. (Or, just use an email client that works properly.)
All he's doing is formatting his email to conform with the RFCs. Open standards, dating back almost 20 years (in the case of RFC-822).
If some vendor's bug-ridden client can't handle that -- no matter how many people use that client -- his action is neither arrogant nor snobby.
However, it is both arrogant and snobby for the users of those broken email clients to insist that he change his behaviour.
What was our reaction to MS disabling access to the MSN sites?
I don't know about yours, bucko, but I couldn't give a damn. If MSN has anything interesting to say (unlikely), odds are that somebody else will be saying it.
And this is different exactly how?
Microsoft's move was part of an effort to coerce lock-in to a non-standards-compliant protocol. This locks out non-standards-compliant clients. Totally opposite.
This is immature and childish.
Not at all. It makes the point very clearly. If more people did it, more users would realize just how broken MS software is.
And you think Microsoft isn't into that whole scary media empire thing?
Microsoft has been trying to buy its way into cable companies for years, with some success (they're starting to figure out how to do it right). They -- or another company owned by Bill Gates -- have been buying up digital rights to images and artwork for years. They've been investing in their own satellite communications network. There's that Qwest-MSN deal, there's MSNBC, Microsoft Press, etc, etc.
Don't kid yourself.
Nothing really new here, except for tying the information into a web server rather than a local DB.
The concept certainly has its uses. For example, an aviation GPS system linked to a digital elevation model of the terrain will warn you if you're currently flying at an altitude lower than some of the rocks in the area. That can be helpful. Ditto for warning about restricted airspace, or dangerous areas while backpacking or boating (eg old mine shafts, possible dangerous concentrations of volcanic gasses, old toxic waste dumps, etc, etc.)
The web connection allows for dynamic updating of the data, which is cool, it also means you don't need to carry the whole database around with you.
Of course the advertising/spam aspect is a real down side. And just wait till they start building the stuff into everything: do you really want your digital camera telling you there's a Kodak Picture Point coming up?
Yep, if you tell Qwest you're using MacOS or Linux or anything but certain versions of Windows, they won't (in theory) switch you. Apparently MSN only supports a limited range of client OS's (guess whose). Indeed, I think NT 4 is not even supported (could be wrong on that though.)
I made the mistake of telling them initially I had Win98 so I could get the free USB modem instead of forking out another $100 for the Cisco modem, because I had an old PC I could run WinProxy on and use as a gateway. That's worked fine for me, but I wish now I'd spent the $100.
Yes, switch now. I did earlier this week (still waiting for the actual cutover to take effect.)
Go to the Qwest DSL partners web page and find a few ISPs in your area, click through to check out their web sites. Some will have, right on the first page, instructions as to how to switch to them rather than get stuck with MSN. In my case, 4DV.net listed the Qwest phone number that got me right through (well, after some automated phone menus) to a rep to do the switch
Not only that, but depending on the ISP you'll probably get a better price than Qwest.net (and definitely better than MSN, which is higher), and some of them will throw in static IP numbers for a reasonable price if you want to run some kind of server.
Just look at those gears. Man, with technology like that we can finally reduce Babbage's Analytical Engine to something that'll fit on a chip.
Now that's a microcomputer!
...to the fabled HCF -- Halt and Catch Fire -- opcode.
That's okay, just losing the right to the logo is a Good Thing. For one, it could mean an injunction against distribution of any existing copy-protected discs mislabeled with that logo -- which hurts the recording/distribution companies responsible.
:-) which silvery discs are the copy-protected ones -- namely the ones without the CD logo. We can just avoid buying those. (And encourage others likewise).
For another, it makes it obvious (well, in a subtle way
Indeed, some us were speculating about this very possibility when 'NSync's protected CD was announced about three months ago.
Neat. In addition to the obvious high-speed photography applications, a system like this coupled with a similarly short duration flash system could make a vision system capable of seeing through some kinds of particle clouds. Might be more applicable underwater, where the particles are bigger.
Basically, the problem in low-visibility situations like that is that the particles near you scatter so much of your light back at you that you can't see the stuff further away. If you send out a 10 ns pulse of light and don't open the shutter until it has had time to go out some distance (say 100 ns for 100 feet, divided by whatever the refractive index of water is), then you only see the light that has bounced off whatever is 100 feet away (well, mod multiple reflections from silt particles).
Won't work in really thick clouds, of course, but it has possibilities. (Consider, for example, driving in a snowstorm at night -- you don't need or want the snow immediately in front of the headlights lit up.)
Yes, I'd thought of mentioning that. Depends where on Farside the observatory is, though. At the exact center both L5 and L4 are about 30 degrees below the horizon.
:-)
(Simple geometry, L4 and L5 are each 60 degrees away from the Moon in the Moon's orbit. That still leaves about 30 degrees beyond where Earth is below the lunar horizon that either L4 or L5 is visible.)
(I'm a former L5 Society member. I know this stuff cold.
The last time I checked, the moon rotated.
Correct. Once per orbit.
If i am incorrect about this, please Xplain why.
Look at it this way -- when was the last time you looked up at the Moon and saw the far side?
Not any more than having the Moon there disrupts Earth satellites.
Well, considering that the Earth masses about 81 times as much as the Moon, then yes, it does have something more of an effect on Lunar satellites than the Moon does on Earth satellites.
Another major consideration is that the Moon's gravity is less uniform -- you can't simply treat it as a point source at the Moon's centre except as a first approximation. There are what're called "mascons" (mass concentrations) under some of the maria which have locally slightly higher gravity than lunar average. Messes up the orbits a bit.
Nah...
Nor by the fact that this has been about the worst year in a decade for a lot of other industries, too.
Or does RIAA think themselves exempt from a recession?
DVD might have been easier to sell to the general population
Easier sell?! DVD has been the technology with the fastest rate of adoption in the history of consumer electronics! How much easier did you want?