There are actually 2 identical 1750As on NEAR, both running the Guidance and Control code (in Ada).
There are rad-hard versions of Power PC processors that could fly in space. However, these are emphatically not Macs. JPL flies and rad-hard RS6000, I believe, which has common lineage with the Power PC.
If I'm reading a rumors site, I want to know that they're independent of Apple and other major players in the Mac market: IBM, Motorola, M$, Adobe, etc. Therefore, I will drop them from my bookmarks and link pages if they accept advertising from same. I'm also deeply suspicious of publications that sign NDAs.
I see this problem all over the product journalism field, whether it be computers, cars, stereo gear, or movie reviewing quote whores. Big advertisers have power to influence content, and it's hard to put together a publication without their sponsorship. The solution is that we consumers have to demand independence.
I think Brazil qualifies as "Somewhat Reasonable," and they have a vast stretch of equator running across their country. If we could build it there without tearing up more rainforest, that should work. It could even be used as a"carrot" to encourage rainforest conservation.
The Supercollider's costs were in the multiple billions. They had overruns that cost much more than this telescope. After the last huge overrun, Congress had had enough and cancelled it.
See Freeman Dyson's book Infinite in all Directions for evidence on how it's often the lower cost science that pays off best.
I was a little surprised to hear that there are companies out there who forego code walkthroughs. In my field, at least 2 walkthroughs are conducted for most code, and it's not an option. It's also valuable; if for no other reason than that the programmer knows he or she's going to have to present it at a walkthrough.
Open Source software (which I think we should have more of in my community) does have the virtue that anyone anywhere anytime can review it, but as the amount of Open Source code expands, it seems less and less likely that a suitably clever and knowledegable person is going to discover and download my code and take the time to have a look. You also have the work of filtering out the "help" you're not looking for.
So, walkthroughs continue, and I don't ever see them going away.
In my view, destructive robots are inevitable. Howver, if my neighbor has one, I'd like to be able to call the cops (who'd probably have to send in one of their own 'bots to deactivate it). If the 3 Laws of Robotics were law, then at least legitimate robots would be inhibited from picking up a gun.
2-3 problems with this:
police and military will want exemptions.
How do define a robot exactly?
Could a robot harm another robot to obey the First Law? If so, can it reliably identify other robots?
How would robots decide who lives and who dies when a tradeoff must be made (robot driver swerves into a tree to avoid a pedestrian, killing his passenger)?
The over marketing of the Simpsons, was of course, a parody of the whole merchandising silliness. I mean, there were Simpsons nightlights (hang on to them - valuable someday), Simpsons shampoo, and on and on...This was done for a laugh at the expense of the suckers who bought the stuff. And this was even before The World's Most Expensive Toy Commercial, aka Phantom Menace. This kind of self-referential humor is one of the things I like most about the Simpsons.
Slashdot Mirror
There are rad-hard versions of Power PC processors that could fly in space. However, these are emphatically not Macs. JPL flies and rad-hard RS6000, I believe, which has common lineage with the Power PC.
I see this problem all over the product journalism field, whether it be computers, cars, stereo gear, or movie reviewing quote whores. Big advertisers have power to influence content, and it's hard to put together a publication without their sponsorship. The solution is that we consumers have to demand independence.
I think Brazil qualifies as "Somewhat Reasonable," and they have a vast stretch of equator running across their country. If we could build it there without tearing up more rainforest, that should work. It could even be used as a"carrot" to encourage rainforest conservation.
See Freeman Dyson's book Infinite in all Directions for evidence on how it's often the lower cost science that pays off best.
Open Source software (which I think we should have more of in my community) does have the virtue that anyone anywhere anytime can review it, but as the amount of Open Source code expands, it seems less and less likely that a suitably clever and knowledegable person is going to discover and download my code and take the time to have a look. You also have the work of filtering out the "help" you're not looking for.
So, walkthroughs continue, and I don't ever see them going away.
2-3 problems with this:
The over marketing of the Simpsons, was of course, a parody of the whole merchandising silliness. I mean, there were Simpsons nightlights (hang on to them - valuable someday), Simpsons shampoo, and on and on...This was done for a laugh at the expense of the suckers who bought the stuff. And this was even before The World's Most Expensive Toy Commercial, aka Phantom Menace. This kind of self-referential humor is one of the things I like most about the Simpsons.
Apple more or less has always had a policy to aggressively protect their trade secrets, i.e. sic the legal boys on anyone who steals Steve's thunder.