As to desk jockeys: why not have them be the scientists who you would otherwise be sending to operate the instruments directly. You admit you need the instruments, why is close physical proximity necessary. Are astronomers using remote access telescopes not doing real science? Are particle physicists not on site with their particle colliders not real scientists?
Finally, I never claimed that computers and probes make better scientists, I suggested that they make better instruments, which I stand by.
Well the troll moderation was undeserved IMO, and I figured given the content of your post that you would be interested to know about the aid update. Anyway, I'm in pretty much total agreement with you, so cheers.
Yes. Far better actually. Men with brains are far too general purpose instruments to collect the kinds of data that are most useful for modern science. For the cost of one man & his eyes, you could send at least 10, maybe 100 different cameras that can look at mars in whole ranges of different ways, spectrums, etc., and divide the risk over all of those missions. With the one man mission, if you blow it, you've lost the whole deal. Special purpose instrument packages just way outperform human beings in terms of data collection capabilities now.
Imagine if I asked you to perform science on a new microbe in Antarctica, would you rather:
a) send some guy to look at it with a microscope
or for the same cost
b) send a robot with a scanning tunneling electron microscope, a chemistry package, a DNA sequencer, and 10 other instruments related to the science of microbes, and then study the collected data remotely.
Assuming a and b can be done for the same price (and actually, b will tend to be cheaper), I would hope you would choose b. You don't choose a until you know so much that b is no longer the more effective option. And we aren't any where near that with either the moon or mars.
(Katrina aid is now up to $60+ billion, not $10 billion)
Not that I think your overall point is wrong, but I am mildly hopeful about the fact that so many people are pissed at the republicans over the Katrina screwup right now. Unfortunately, there is basically no chance that level of pissed off will last long enough to be remembered in any upcoming election.
The unmanned spaceflight mafia isn't really about saving human lives, its about sparing costs and avoiding unnecessary risks. If it was necessary to send humans to do these missions, then we'd be all for it. But bottom line, it's neither necessary nor effective. Robotic probes do the job cheaper and better. Why not spend 20 or 30 years doing more development on materials and technology using robotic craft, then send men to moon/mars for an overall cheaper project cost than trying to do it with men from the get go?
In the 1960s they had motivation... they thought, apparently seriously, that if the communists beat them in the space race, the world would pretty much end. So they were racing, taking various unnecessary risks, to get to the moon.
Now we're going to do it again, but this time, there's essentially no pressure beyond "We'd like to do it". So we'll take our time, try to develop a reliable technology, and ultimately build a platform to take us onward to mars.
So basically, we have very different goals and priorities on this attempt, and so it will take a different amount of time and a different kind of effort.
Well, you have to understand, the Bush administration needs to prove it is more macho than any previous administration, so they'll be going to the moon, but not using any 21st century technology. In fact, they're not planning to use any technology developed after 1776. The rockets will be moonshine powered, and made out of carved wood.
Problem is, intel is basically trying to derail the standards process, which was nearly finished, so that they can push their own technology (and try to bury airgo):
I really can't blame airgo for not wanting to sit on their working products for 2 more years, followed by having to make a conversion to intel compatibility.
I don't think most people care that much about computer to computer wireless. I think the typical usage model is:
computer -> wireless AP -> DSL/Cable -> internet
And all that people really really want is for
computer -> wireless AP
to be faster than
DSL/Cable -> internet
Computer to computer transfers that require high speeds are mainly restricted to a smaller crowd doing wireless video streaming. There you really only care that:
computer -> wireless AP -> computer
is faster than mpeg2/4/divx whatever needs, which typically isn't much more than 40 megabit, and having more than 2 computers involved in this is uncommon. In fact for this usage model,
computer -> wireless AP -> LAN -> video stream server
is the much smarter and more common setup, and will give you one less computer leaning on the wireless bandwidth.
Bottom line is that peer to peer activity with both ends on wireless is just not that common.
I've gotten 40 megabit out of 54 megabit across 20 feet of room in my apartment, using a dlink wireless router and the intel 2915 that came with my laptop.
Umm... just buy a G router and G card, combined cost, whopping $80 (or less). Replace them later when something comes out that is sufficiently better than what you have now. On the other hand, if all of your computers are tethered anyway, and that's fine with you, you should stick with gigabit, its faster. The only advantage to wireless is the lack of wires, not speed.
Thats the nice thing about taking depositions... once you do that, if you eventually uncover the mole they've now committed an extra crime. This can help to put fear into the mole, and maybe make them think twice about continuing to expose information.
I think the key point here is that this was out of TiVos control, and in the hands of the broadcasters. I'm willing to give TiVo a little bit of trust, but do you trust the broadcasters?
Oh, it's you tom. No wonder this seemed like such a reasonable response.
The @Test annotation allows you to drop the test from your test method name. This is a minor help it:
a) reduces the method name length slightly, there are various tools that aren't up to handling super long method names.
b) more importantly, can simplify your naming conventions
way way way more important is that extends TestCase
is no longer necessary, which since Java is single inhertiance model now means you can extend something else with your test classes. As one significant example, think about writing tests that extend the tested class, and how that helps to better maintain the protection mechanism.
No doubt about it, this will be a big step forward in JUnits power.
On the other hand, it is quite illegal if you post false information, claiming to have had negative experiences with some doctor which aren't true. In which case the Doctors' claims would have merit.
However, the bug unfortunately proves that the content protection flag can be added to non-ppv content, which means that broadcasters can start adding it to anything they'd like. Maybe from now on you'll find more and more of your shows can't be time shifted by more than a day.
I think you'll find that from their point of view what they sell is a device which provides the most up to date TiVo service, and that their device continues to do that as well as it ever has.
The problem is that the bug proves that it's possible for the flag to be interpreted on regular TV shows, which means that it is now possible for the TV show producers to go ahead and add that flag to any content they want. How long do you really think it will be before this is used by some broadcaster to prevent time shifting by more than a year, a month, a week, a day, an hour...
The flag may be for PPV shows, but this proves that it can be applied to regular shows as well.
Slashdot Mirror
As to STEM vs STM:
a ps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.32.6131a ps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.67.075405s a.org/ViewMedia.cfm%3Fid%3D67030%26seq%3D0
http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=http://link.
http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=http://link.
http://scholar.google.com/url?sa=U&q=http://jot.o
That's a start, there are plenty.
As to desk jockeys: why not have them be the scientists who you would otherwise be sending to operate the instruments directly. You admit you need the instruments, why is close physical proximity necessary. Are astronomers using remote access telescopes not doing real science? Are particle physicists not on site with their particle colliders not real scientists?
Finally, I never claimed that computers and probes make better scientists, I suggested that they make better instruments, which I stand by.
Well the troll moderation was undeserved IMO, and I figured given the content of your post that you would be interested to know about the aid update. Anyway, I'm in pretty much total agreement with you, so cheers.
Yes. Far better actually. Men with brains are far too general purpose instruments to collect the kinds of data that are most useful for modern science. For the cost of one man & his eyes, you could send at least 10, maybe 100 different cameras that can look at mars in whole ranges of different ways, spectrums, etc., and divide the risk over all of those missions. With the one man mission, if you blow it, you've lost the whole deal. Special purpose instrument packages just way outperform human beings in terms of data collection capabilities now.
Imagine if I asked you to perform science on a new microbe in Antarctica, would you rather:
a) send some guy to look at it with a microscope
or for the same cost
b) send a robot with a scanning tunneling electron microscope, a chemistry package, a DNA sequencer, and 10 other instruments related to the science of microbes, and then study the collected data remotely.
Assuming a and b can be done for the same price (and actually, b will tend to be cheaper), I would hope you would choose b. You don't choose a until you know so much that b is no longer the more effective option. And we aren't any where near that with either the moon or mars.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20050909/pl_afp/usweat hercostpolitics_050909003142
(Katrina aid is now up to $60+ billion, not $10 billion)
Not that I think your overall point is wrong, but I am mildly hopeful about the fact that so many people are pissed at the republicans over the Katrina screwup right now. Unfortunately, there is basically no chance that level of pissed off will last long enough to be remembered in any upcoming election.
The unmanned spaceflight mafia isn't really about saving human lives, its about sparing costs and avoiding unnecessary risks. If it was necessary to send humans to do these missions, then we'd be all for it. But bottom line, it's neither necessary nor effective. Robotic probes do the job cheaper and better. Why not spend 20 or 30 years doing more development on materials and technology using robotic craft, then send men to moon/mars for an overall cheaper project cost than trying to do it with men from the get go?
In the 1960s they had motivation ... they thought, apparently seriously, that if the communists beat them in the space race, the world would pretty much end. So they were racing, taking various unnecessary risks, to get to the moon.
Now we're going to do it again, but this time, there's essentially no pressure beyond "We'd like to do it". So we'll take our time, try to develop a reliable technology, and ultimately build a platform to take us onward to mars.
So basically, we have very different goals and priorities on this attempt, and so it will take a different amount of time and a different kind of effort.
Well, you have to understand, the Bush administration needs to prove it is more macho than any previous administration, so they'll be going to the moon, but not using any 21st century technology. In fact, they're not planning to use any technology developed after 1776. The rockets will be moonshine powered, and made out of carved wood.
Problem is, intel is basically trying to derail the standards process, which was nearly finished, so that they can push their own technology (and try to bury airgo):
a rticleID=170703368
http://www.eetuk.com/tech/news/showArticle.jhtml?
I really can't blame airgo for not wanting to sit on their working products for 2 more years, followed by having to make a conversion to intel compatibility.
Yeah, and we as a society should just stand by and let parents harm their children like that. Sounds like a good idea to me.
I don't think most people care that much about computer to computer wireless. I think the typical usage model is:
computer -> wireless AP -> DSL/Cable -> internet
And all that people really really want is for
computer -> wireless AP
to be faster than
DSL/Cable -> internet
Computer to computer transfers that require high speeds are mainly restricted to a smaller crowd doing wireless video streaming. There you really only care that:
computer -> wireless AP -> computer
is faster than mpeg2/4/divx whatever needs, which typically isn't much more than 40 megabit, and having more than 2 computers involved in this is uncommon. In fact for this usage model,
computer -> wireless AP -> LAN -> video stream server
is the much smarter and more common setup, and will give you one less computer leaning on the wireless bandwidth.
Bottom line is that peer to peer activity with both ends on wireless is just not that common.
I've gotten 40 megabit out of 54 megabit across 20 feet of room in my apartment, using a dlink wireless router and the intel 2915 that came with my laptop.
Umm ... just buy a G router and G card, combined cost, whopping $80 (or less). Replace them later when something comes out that is sufficiently better than what you have now. On the other hand, if all of your computers are tethered anyway, and that's fine with you, you should stick with gigabit, its faster. The only advantage to wireless is the lack of wires, not speed.
Thats the nice thing about taking depositions ... once you do that, if you eventually uncover the mole they've now committed an extra crime. This can help to put fear into the mole, and maybe make them think twice about continuing to expose information.
I think the key point here is that this was out of TiVos control, and in the hands of the broadcasters. I'm willing to give TiVo a little bit of trust, but do you trust the broadcasters?
Oh, it's you tom. No wonder this seemed like such a reasonable response.
The @Test annotation allows you to drop the test from your test method name. This is a minor help it:
a) reduces the method name length slightly, there are various tools that aren't up to handling super long method names.
b) more importantly, can simplify your naming conventions
way way way more important is that
extends TestCase
is no longer necessary, which since Java is single inhertiance model now means you can extend something else with your test classes. As one significant example, think about writing tests that extend the tested class, and how that helps to better maintain the protection mechanism.
No doubt about it, this will be a big step forward in JUnits power.
You're obviously a young one, that was an early 90s buzzword once already.
No, but compared to his post, my post is more funny, and less trollish advocacy, and also more original, as it was posted sooner.
Oh come on, troll? The python guy is already up to +5 funny!
Don't use perl.
On the other hand, it is quite illegal if you post false information, claiming to have had negative experiences with some doctor which aren't true. In which case the Doctors' claims would have merit.
Or you could do things the other way, which is bound to be the way we have to go anyway:
Anyone can say anything anonymously, but no one will take an anonymous statement seriously.
Libel will happen left and right, but no one will care.
It's because cats typically won't attack a chicken, a chicken is a little too big to look like prey to a housecat.
However, the bug unfortunately proves that the content protection flag can be added to non-ppv content, which means that broadcasters can start adding it to anything they'd like. Maybe from now on you'll find more and more of your shows can't be time shifted by more than a day.
I think you'll find that from their point of view what they sell is a device which provides the most up to date TiVo service, and that their device continues to do that as well as it ever has.
The problem is that the bug proves that it's possible for the flag to be interpreted on regular TV shows, which means that it is now possible for the TV show producers to go ahead and add that flag to any content they want. How long do you really think it will be before this is used by some broadcaster to prevent time shifting by more than a year, a month, a week, a day, an hour ...
The flag may be for PPV shows, but this proves that it can be applied to regular shows as well.