Amnesty International estimated 24,000 dead Iraqis every year from a combination of Saddam Hussein and crippling sanctions.
Amnesty International also estimated about 500,000 iraq children dead from international sanctions, a figure that Rice said it was "worth it". So, instead of removing the sanctions, I guess the right solution is to start bombing the country. Funny how at the start of the war no one was talking about saving Iraqis, but only about making America safe from WMDs.
There is no such thing as a "British billion" in the modern world.
Hmm... another one who doesn't know that there's a fair amount of land outside the US borders. In most of Europe a "billion" is equivalent to a british billion. The same I suspect is true for most of previously Europe-dominated countries (say India for example).
That is what you pay for when you subscribe to scientific journals.
No, you don't pay for peer review, it's done for free by other scientists. What you pay is just the brand name. All the work, including page formatting, spelling check etc. is done for free by the scientists, who also pay to have their articles published. So I have finally found what's in step 2:
1. Start a scientific publishing company 2. Get volunteers who do the work and pay you for the privilege 3. PROFIT!!!
That's what drug companies do: cure people for a profit.
No, the company in this case is acting as a middleman: the research on the drug was already done, the only thing needed was mass-production, which can be quite cheap if the volumes are high.
So the company was bringing almost no added value, still it made a huge profit because it was the middleman. Remove the middleman and suddenly the drug would become much cheaper, and still save lives.
It happened, it still happens, and articles that result from copy&pasted text are deleted. It's anyway an ongoing problem, see Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
You are asking the wrong person. SETI doesn't get to point the Arecibo radio telescope. They piggyback the signal and look at the section of the sky the telescope is looking at (for different researchs), and analyze any signals coming down.
There are about a zillion research projects that compete for a scarce resource, telescope time. Each telescope has a time assignment committee, that will decide who will be able to point the telescope. SETI is the last in the list. So you should send your request to Arecibo, not to SETI.
No, the "xauth extract..." is the complex command example inside a man page that you asked for. It's in the xauth man page, and you can look at it immediately searching for "rsh" (type/rsh and press Enter).
Hard drives are pathetically slow. A seek takes 10 milliseconds, that's a factor of almost a million slower than a random memory access. The biggest noticeable delays (boot up time, firefox load time, open office load time, etc.) are all caused by the slow hard disk. Transfer speeds, which are now approaching 50MB/sec, are good enough. And size is still going up: two years ago 120 GB, one year ago 250 GB, this year 400 GB. No sign of slowing.
This makes me wonder how much a human would produce in a big wheel or several humans in a long wheel.
A moderately-trained human being can generate about 100 watts for several hours (in addition to the other 100 watts needed for the body to live). Top long-distance athletes (cycling, running) can go up to around 400 watts, but only for a limited amount of time (less than 1 hour). Peak power is of course higher (1 KW for a few seconds?).
Orbital velocities are usually of some tens of kilometers per second, which easily makes for hundreds of thousands mph. But such a small object would be slowed down by the atmosphere, and by the time it would hit the ground (assuming it would arrive intact at all) it wouldn't be much faster than terminal velocity - say 200 or 300 mph. Even on a populated area, it would do relatively little damage.
Look at what Wikipedia has to say on the subject. Some fusion reactions generate neutrons and thus radioactivity, many others not. Unfortunately the easier ones (deuterium ) actually generate lots of neutrons.
About natural resources consumption... eliminating all coal consumption, most of oil and natural gas, and removing assorted dams and wind power installations seems to me a big improvement.
Some types of fusion generate fast-moving neutrons, others do not. Proton-proton fusion reactions (the kind going on in the Sun), for example, do not generate any neutrons and thus no radioactivity. They are harder do to than deuterium or tritium reactions, that instead do generate neutrons and convert some of the building into radioactive walls.
This still leaves me wondering why an Opteron 250 (2.4GHz, 1MB L2 cache) seems to so seriously outperform an Athlon 64 3500+ (2.2GHz, 512KB L2 cache).
When people says that the first article was bad, it's because it was really bad: 64-bit binaries for Intel vs. 32-bit binaries for AMD, copy&pasted benchmark results from previous 32-bit benchmarks, tests (PI digit computation) that measured the libc optimization instead of the actual benchmark (when removing the printf() it got about a 10x boost). People on aceshardware forums were posting TSCP scores about 2x what Anandtech got, on the same processor. So the A64 3500+ scores you saw in that article are trash. Forget them.
Yeah then please explain to me why each countries media only focusses on their own athletes and on how many medals they will win.
They don't. Today I already saw two or three finals that didn't have any athlete of my country (Italy) in them, and the speaker was prasing a lot those "great athletes".
'' Is there an "optimal" speed for minimizing the time that Earth would perceive you as being gone?''
Yes, go as fast as possible. The time perceived on Earth is the one that results from your speed, as measured from Earth. So, if you are doing a 10 light years trip going at 0.5 c, it will take 20 years in Earth's time, and a bit less in yours. If you go at 0.9c, it will take about 11 years in Earth time, and much less for you.
The correct version of your 1 and 2 choices should be in the distance axis:
1) go somewhere relatively near, so that when you come back someone you know might still be around 2) go very far away, see the universe, and say goodbye to everyone before leaving.
In both cases, the faster you go, the less time will take for Earthlings to see you back, and also the less time will seem to you. The latter goes down much faster. The total time, measured from Earth, is time = distance / speed, no need to use relativity. That's for when you compute time for people aboard the ship.
Graphics is easily parallelizable, and SLI is actually almost perfect: have one card draw half of the scanlines, and the other card the rest. True, T&L and other stuff must be replicated, but that's a negligible part of the work nowadays.
Have a look at the servers Wikipedia is using! That's some hardware Slashdot will surely like - master db is a dual Opteron with Fedora Core 2 64-bit and 1+0 RAID. The cash seems well spent.
Slashdot Mirror
Amnesty International estimated 24,000 dead Iraqis every year from a combination of Saddam Hussein and crippling sanctions.
Amnesty International also estimated about 500,000 iraq children dead from international sanctions, a figure that Rice said it was "worth it". So, instead of removing the sanctions, I guess the right solution is to start bombing the country. Funny how at the start of the war no one was talking about saving Iraqis, but only about making America safe from WMDs.
Sorry for the last message, it seems a flamebait even if that wasn't the intention.
There is no such thing as a "British billion" in the modern world.
Hmm... another one who doesn't know that there's a fair amount of land outside the US borders. In most of Europe a "billion" is equivalent to a british billion. The same I suspect is true for most of previously Europe-dominated countries (say India for example).
That is what you pay for when you subscribe to scientific journals.
No, you don't pay for peer review, it's done for free by other scientists. What you pay is just the brand name. All the work, including page formatting, spelling check etc. is done for free by the scientists, who also pay to have their articles published. So I have finally found what's in step 2:
1. Start a scientific publishing company
2. Get volunteers who do the work and pay you for the privilege
3. PROFIT!!!
That's what drug companies do: cure people for a profit.
No, the company in this case is acting as a middleman: the research on the drug was already done, the only thing needed was mass-production, which can be quite cheap if the volumes are high.
So the company was bringing almost no added value, still it made a huge profit because it was the middleman. Remove the middleman and suddenly the drug would become much cheaper, and still save lives.
It happened, it still happens, and articles that result from copy&pasted text are deleted. It's anyway an ongoing problem, see Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
Dude, you're off by ten orders of magnitude. The sun is 2E30 Kg.
... only 15 meters high and 3 meters wide, with a weight of about 500 tons !!
Sounds like those 17" widescreen "portable computers " that I see in stores.
You are asking the wrong person. SETI doesn't get to point the Arecibo radio telescope. They piggyback the signal and look at the section of the sky the telescope is looking at (for different researchs), and analyze any signals coming down.
There are about a zillion research projects that compete for a scarce resource, telescope time. Each telescope has a time assignment committee, that will decide who will be able to point the telescope. SETI is the last in the list. So you should send your request to Arecibo, not to SETI.
No, the "xauth extract..." is the complex command example inside a man page that you asked for. It's in the xauth man page, and you can look at it immediately searching for "rsh" (type /rsh and press Enter).
The coolant is the safety system. It was shut OFF. That's the whole point. The reactor will not experience core meltdown. It's just a safer design.
Itanium is completely different from the x86 line, and its FPU unit absolutely crushes the P4 one.
Hard drives are pathetically slow. A seek takes 10 milliseconds, that's a factor of almost a million slower than a random memory access. The biggest noticeable delays (boot up time, firefox load time, open office load time, etc.) are all caused by the slow hard disk. Transfer speeds, which are now approaching 50MB/sec, are good enough. And size is still going up: two years ago 120 GB, one year ago 250 GB, this year 400 GB. No sign of slowing.
This makes me wonder how much a human would produce in a big wheel or several humans in a long wheel.
A moderately-trained human being can generate about 100 watts for several hours (in addition to the other 100 watts needed for the body to live). Top long-distance athletes (cycling, running) can go up to around 400 watts, but only for a limited amount of time (less than 1 hour). Peak power is of course higher (1 KW for a few seconds?).
Orbital velocities are usually of some tens of kilometers per second, which easily makes for hundreds of thousands mph. But such a small object would be slowed down by the atmosphere, and by the time it would hit the ground (assuming it would arrive intact at all) it wouldn't be much faster than terminal velocity - say 200 or 300 mph. Even on a populated area, it would do relatively little damage.
Look at what Wikipedia has to say on the subject. Some fusion reactions generate neutrons and thus radioactivity, many others not. Unfortunately the easier ones (deuterium ) actually generate lots of neutrons.
About natural resources consumption... eliminating all coal consumption, most of oil and natural gas, and removing assorted dams and wind power installations seems to me a big improvement.
Some types of fusion generate fast-moving neutrons, others do not. Proton-proton fusion reactions (the kind going on in the Sun), for example, do not generate any neutrons and thus no radioactivity. They are harder do to than deuterium or tritium reactions, that instead do generate neutrons and convert some of the building into radioactive walls.
This still leaves me wondering why an Opteron 250 (2.4GHz, 1MB L2 cache) seems to so seriously outperform an Athlon 64 3500+ (2.2GHz, 512KB L2 cache).
When people says that the first article was bad, it's because it was really bad: 64-bit binaries for Intel vs. 32-bit binaries for AMD, copy&pasted benchmark results from previous 32-bit benchmarks, tests (PI digit computation) that measured the libc optimization instead of the actual benchmark (when removing the printf() it got about a 10x boost). People on aceshardware forums were posting TSCP scores about 2x what Anandtech got, on the same processor. So the A64 3500+ scores you saw in that article are trash. Forget them.
Yeah then please explain to me why each countries media only focusses on their own athletes and on how many medals they will win.
They don't. Today I already saw two or three finals that didn't have any athlete of my country (Italy) in them, and the speaker was prasing a lot those "great athletes".
Oh, you are talking about the US media...
We're all about as expert as anybody in terrorism surveillance, because it's only existed for three years, and we think about it as much as anyone.
There's a world outside the US, you know. Terrorism and related surveillance has existed for much more.
Hubble is also the only UV telescope in operation. Do you think you can paint blue an infrared image?
'' Is there an "optimal" speed for minimizing the time that Earth would perceive you as being gone?''
Yes, go as fast as possible. The time perceived on Earth is the one that results from your speed, as measured from Earth. So, if you are doing a 10 light years trip going at 0.5 c, it will take 20 years in Earth's time, and a bit less in yours. If you go at 0.9c, it will take about 11 years in Earth time, and much less for you.
The correct version of your 1 and 2 choices should be in the distance axis:
1) go somewhere relatively near, so that when you come back someone you know might still be around
2) go very far away, see the universe, and say goodbye to everyone before leaving.
In both cases, the faster you go, the less time will take for Earthlings to see you back, and also the less time will seem to you. The latter goes down much faster. The total time, measured from Earth, is time = distance / speed, no need to use relativity. That's for when you compute time for people aboard the ship.
Graphics is easily parallelizable, and SLI is actually almost perfect: have one card draw half of the scanlines, and the other card the rest. True, T&L and other stuff must be replicated, but that's a negligible part of the work nowadays.
Have a look at the servers Wikipedia is using! That's some hardware Slashdot will surely like - master db is a dual Opteron with Fedora Core 2 64-bit and 1+0 RAID. The cash seems well spent.
A white dwarf has a mass similar to our Sun, so the parent comment was right.