How many of thes things have we seen that are supposed to put your hand in a more natural position? They all end up at Big Lots for $9 after six months... From the looks of that scroll wheel, it's going to be a banner year for RSI - grab the top of a bottle and roll your thumb straight back and forth over the top like the pictures show for the scroll wheel. If you can do that for more than a minute, you're not put together right.
Upside down is cute, but blurry is just too fantastic. You know they were on the horn to the vendor after punching every monitor control and several loud screaming matches and an expensive service call for a monitor that then worked just fine on the bench... As a webmaster I can now say April 1 just got very far away...
Seriously, if they could do it with a nano... But their chart shows that only the 2 and 4 gig nanos work, so 1 gig must be too little Oddly, no 60 gig ipods are compatible.
It's also been described as a short circuit between short-term-store (the sort of memory used to get the phone number from the book to the keypad) and long term memory. That's a description and block-diagram explanation, but it's nice to see that they can control it and get beyond this understanding.
We don't know how the brain works. We know it's not a binary digital stored program computer. They should have some success modeling how the brain behaves, though. Maybe then they can contribute to the real question of how the mind works. (Hey, wait a minute - this isnt thos two white mice again, izzit?)
I have a commemorative "Vermont's Swinest" Ben and Jerry's T-shirt (complete with holstein styled pigs), they made them when they started a deal to supply a local pig farm (I believe near the Waterbury plant) with milk waste. The milk waste would be fed to the pigs along with the ususal feed, I don't recall where the pig waste / methane was headed. IIRC The first three pigs, by contract, were to be named "Ben", "Jerry" and "Ed" in honor of Ben Cohen, Jerry Greenfield and Ed Stanek - the Vermont EPA official who brokered the deal. When I worked on the old NSF Student Originated Studies program, one of the 1980 projects out of Iowa was to use manure methane to fire a still, ferment leftover corn waste into alcohol, feed the leftovers from the fermentation back into the pig feed, and use the alcohol in the machinery. Decent efficiencies in the pilot, but a hard sell to the farmers, as they needed smaller farms to go in together to get the delta-t they needed for peak efficiency, and it smacked of big entities twisting little family farm arms. In fact despite the NSF badge, it was just a bunch of undergrads, but still no sale.
This is primarily a replacement for the eMac, aimed at the educational insitutions. We've been running a dozen iMac G5 iSights for the past year, and what they've left out to get th prioce down are largely not going to be missed.
- this will drop the HD capacity (schools don't generally load up boxes with the photos and songs that end users do) - drop the remote (you can drive FrontRow from the keyboard) - 20" (for students in a lab up close, 17" is plenty big) - bluetooth (not a big deal in a classroom) - graphics for gamers - DVD burner (as long as you have one or two of these per lab, you'll do fine)
They got it right. Expressive face on top of lots of well-done motion. Of course they stayed on the other side of the valley by virtue of animating a robot. Polar Express was 'dead people talking'.
They never delivered so much as a can of beans to useful orbit. One flight. Two orbits. No passengers. They were disabused by a program that can barely function. The only flight vehicle was destroyed because they couldn't so much as fix a hangar roof. They will never return. It was a copy of the STS with modifications - largely the result of watching the development of a largely feature-frozen STS and making changes with the benefit of hindsight. The shuttle fleet HAS had upgrades in its performance - most publicly the avionics, but in carrying capacity due to external tank and airframe redesigns (each orbiter save Challenger was rebuilt from the ground up) and three phases of main engines - which are now nearly 10% more powerful than the originals. My original point stands. We're not just talking LEO - you have to think of a progression of vehicles, and despite its shortcomings, STS does that. It points tht way to making space travel a wider path than its predecessors. There is a continuum of US vehicles that points the way to the designs needed for more space exploration. Not so Soyuz. They tried a shuttle, failed, and are now back to a ship from the 60s. I fear we may go down the same path.
... and it's not a conspiracy theory - it's because there's enough room for three people and a few post-it notes. Getting in a Soyuz simulator un-suited is an unpleasant experience. Doing it for real is only for very dedicated people. This is not something that people are going to want to get into space with big-time. We've moved from something pointing to routine space travel (shuttle class vehicles) to glorified escape pods. Yes, their stuff is reliable - so is a 1955 GMC stepside pickup. You want to use one to get a current big budget construction job done? If we were still flying Gemini-era equipment, there'd be a crowd here yelling about how backwards we are. They have not distinguished themselves in expanding horizons, pushing the envelope, whatever you want to call it. Yes, they have far less resources, but that's like saying a kart racer is the real winner at LeMans, just cause he got out there.
As for "stayed technologically superior" - if by that you mean it auto-landed, then remember the only two-orbit flight was done with no environmentals or on-board software other than what was needed to complete a pre-programmed flight. And that was it. The rest are incomplete and never flew. You may want to factor in the fact that one of the vehicles and its launch equipment sat in an old hangar so long that they and the building they sat it rotted and collapsed, killing 8 people.
I'll take existing STS over Buran any day, I'll take a 99% STS over Soyuz or CEV. Before you bring up the safety issue - what do we find acceptable? NASCAR has had 32 drivers killed, and we still hand them $1.3B every year. NASA's FY 2007 request is $1.7B.
Slashdot Mirror
How many of thes things have we seen that are supposed to put your hand in a more natural position?
They all end up at Big Lots for $9 after six months...
From the looks of that scroll wheel, it's going to be a banner year for RSI - grab the top of a bottle and roll your thumb straight back and forth over the top like the pictures show for the scroll wheel. If you can do that for more than a minute, you're not put together right.
They did this in the Andromeda Strain.
OK maybe not "they" but something did...
Upside down is cute, but blurry is just too fantastic.
You know they were on the horn to the vendor after punching every monitor control and several loud screaming matches and an expensive service call for a monitor that then worked just fine on the bench...
As a webmaster I can now say April 1 just got very far away...
Blast!
Seriously, if they could do it with a nano...
But their chart shows that only the 2 and 4 gig nanos work, so 1 gig must be too little
Oddly, no 60 gig ipods are compatible.
From TFA: "Researcher Akira O'Connor presented the findings to an International Conference on Memory in Sydney, Australia."
Let me get this straight: someone named "Akira" is futzing with mind powers?
And very poorly understood ones (dejaa vu & hypnosis) at that?
It's also been described as a short circuit between short-term-store (the sort of memory used to get the phone number from the book to the keypad) and long term memory. That's a description and block-diagram explanation, but it's nice to see that they can control it and get beyond this understanding.
it's just a symbol - they don't really do that.
... are cheesy 10 ft tall silver curtains.
... Jurassic Dork!
(Yes, yes, I know, there were no hominids in the jurassic - it's a joke...)
.. they lived almost exclusively on a diet of roast duck with mango salsa.
... to artifical schizophrenia, in just a few short years.
What wonderful times we live in.
Seriously, though - if this thing can wait for the cable guy, he should sell a million of them.
This is marketing suicide. Bloody fools are missing the whole Walmart demog here.
We don't know how the brain works.
We know it's not a binary digital stored program computer.
They should have some success modeling how the brain behaves, though.
Maybe then they can contribute to the real question of how the mind works.
(Hey, wait a minute - this isnt thos two white mice again, izzit?)
Iceland - there's no stress because there's nothing to do excape ride some really cool horses, drink, and outrun the occasional lava flow.
Spain - go to Bilbao. Just melt into the green hills. It's like Wales, except they don't talk funny.
Aruba - no 'toot' of the angry horn.
You'd live longer too.
... they send this biiiiiiiiiiiig white ball after you.
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed, or numbered! My life is my own!"
Cuz I was kinda thinking it was gonna be a tie between a Ferrari 365 GTS/4 Daytona Spyder and Morris Day.
I have a commemorative "Vermont's Swinest" Ben and Jerry's T-shirt (complete with holstein styled pigs), they made them when they started a deal to supply a local pig farm (I believe near the Waterbury plant) with milk waste.
The milk waste would be fed to the pigs along with the ususal feed, I don't recall where the pig waste / methane was headed.
IIRC The first three pigs, by contract, were to be named "Ben", "Jerry" and "Ed" in honor of Ben Cohen, Jerry Greenfield and Ed Stanek - the Vermont EPA official who brokered the deal.
When I worked on the old NSF Student Originated Studies program, one of the 1980 projects out of Iowa was to use manure methane to fire a still, ferment leftover corn waste into alcohol, feed the leftovers from the fermentation back into the pig feed, and use the alcohol in the machinery. Decent efficiencies in the pilot, but a hard sell to the farmers, as they needed smaller farms to go in together to get the delta-t they needed for peak efficiency, and it smacked of big entities twisting little family farm arms. In fact despite the NSF badge, it was just a bunch of undergrads, but still no sale.
I'm heading over now to re-read the gripping story of the Google plane!
This is primarily a replacement for the eMac, aimed at the educational insitutions. We've been running a dozen iMac G5 iSights for the past year, and what they've left out to get th prioce down are largely not going to be missed.
- this will drop the HD capacity (schools don't generally load up boxes with the photos and songs that end users do)
- drop the remote (you can drive FrontRow from the keyboard)
- 20" (for students in a lab up close, 17" is plenty big)
- bluetooth (not a big deal in a classroom)
- graphics for gamers
- DVD burner (as long as you have one or two of these per lab, you'll do fine)
They got it right. Expressive face on top of lots of well-done motion.
Of course they stayed on the other side of the valley by virtue of animating a robot.
Polar Express was 'dead people talking'.
They never delivered so much as a can of beans to useful orbit. One flight. Two orbits. No passengers. They were disabused by a program that can barely function. The only flight vehicle was destroyed because they couldn't so much as fix a hangar roof. They will never return. It was a copy of the STS with modifications - largely the result of watching the development of a largely feature-frozen STS and making changes with the benefit of hindsight. The shuttle fleet HAS had upgrades in its performance - most publicly the avionics, but in carrying capacity due to external tank and airframe redesigns (each orbiter save Challenger was rebuilt from the ground up) and three phases of main engines - which are now nearly 10% more powerful than the originals. My original point stands. We're not just talking LEO - you have to think of a progression of vehicles, and despite its shortcomings, STS does that. It points tht way to making space travel a wider path than its predecessors. There is a continuum of US vehicles that points the way to the designs needed for more space exploration. Not so Soyuz. They tried a shuttle, failed, and are now back to a ship from the 60s. I fear we may go down the same path.
if that was the original point, I'd agree with you.
... welcome our gum-wrapper overlords!
That's about as much as an additional 7 ft by 7 ft by 7 ft cube. A little over a body length in each dimension. For three people. Enjoy.
... and it's not a conspiracy theory - it's because there's enough room for three people and a few post-it notes.
Getting in a Soyuz simulator un-suited is an unpleasant experience. Doing it for real is only for very dedicated people.
This is not something that people are going to want to get into space with big-time.
We've moved from something pointing to routine space travel (shuttle class vehicles) to glorified escape pods.
Yes, their stuff is reliable - so is a 1955 GMC stepside pickup. You want to use one to get a current big budget construction job done?
If we were still flying Gemini-era equipment, there'd be a crowd here yelling about how backwards we are.
They have not distinguished themselves in expanding horizons, pushing the envelope, whatever you want to call it.
Yes, they have far less resources, but that's like saying a kart racer is the real winner at LeMans, just cause he got out there.
As for "stayed technologically superior" - if by that you mean it auto-landed, then remember the only two-orbit flight was done with no environmentals or on-board software other than what was needed to complete a pre-programmed flight. And that was it. The rest are incomplete and never flew. You may want to factor in the fact that one of the vehicles and its launch equipment sat in an old hangar so long that they and the building they sat it rotted and collapsed, killing 8 people.
I'll take existing STS over Buran any day, I'll take a 99% STS over Soyuz or CEV.
Before you bring up the safety issue - what do we find acceptable? NASCAR has had 32 drivers killed, and we still hand them $1.3B every year. NASA's FY 2007 request is $1.7B.