I'm willing to bet that they will recover at least some of the sample material despite the crash. When you have your spacecraft on the ground and human ingenuity to spare, results usually follow.
I wonder if they ever considered an airbag system. Of course if you're not going to deploy your deceleration hardware in the first place, it hardly matters which kind you don't deploy.
Regardless of what Wikipedia (itself a public wikipedia, come to think of it) says, "Internet" was intended to refer to the specific internet of publicly accessible computers in the US and beyond, while "internet" refers to any routed/addressible collection of IP based networks. Wired will now be wrong.
It's obvious how Kirk meets the ST:Enterprise crew.
After his retirement from Starfleet, Kirk exploits his Galaxy-wide fame by appearing as a spokesman for PRICETIME, the new commercial venture set up to exploit the dozen or so different time-travel mechanisms Trek has come up with. "Name Your Own Stardate" becomes an irresistible slogan.
Unfortunately, while shooting a PriceTime ad on location in the past, Kirk's film crew is ambushed and nearly wiped out by a team from PriceTime's fierce competitor, KHANPEDIA. Only Kirk survives, marooned on the World of Suzie Wong. His teeth chattering amid the plastic snow and rubber rocks, the delirious Kirk mutters "Kirk to Enterprise" which is miraculously picked up by the prequel vessel cruising nearby.
This episode, "Margin of Promise," is the highest rated of the season, losing only to CRANK YANKERS and a TBS rerun of "The Cable Guy."
I use Firefox for browsing of course, and I keep checking and trying the various Mozilla.org mail/news client releases, but so far nothing touches Mulberry for ease of use and functionality with my IMAP mail stores.
If you are using the HTPC to play DVD's and media files like many people, PowerDVD makes a nice little remote that you can use to run all the necessary player functions.
What I do is put that remote up in the viewing area, and a real keyboard/mouse/LCD panel in the back of the room attached to the HTPC. The monitor is actually slaved to my Mitsubishi X400 projector, which gets the primary XGA feed from the Radeon card.
This lets me play "maximum projectionist" from the back of the room when needed (I like to make trailer reels from Apple.com for example), but watch media from the couch with just a remote like the good old days.
Well, the single-use card number would be better than what we have now, because regardless of the physical process involved in using the card, you wouldn't be revealing information that thieves could reuse.
Eliminating the physical swipe across a magstripe would be an improvement because magstripes wear out and get demagnetized. Chip-in-card systems have basically taken over the building-security business for this reason.
It could work...
on
RFID MasterCard
·
· Score: 2, Informative
This would be better with a Smart MasterCard and a microswitch on the card.
The Smart MasterCard would exchange single-use credit card numbers a la Citibank's Virtual Account Numbers. That way the number would be useless as soon as the retailer has charged it, so that a bystander "sniffing" the information would not get anything of value.
The microswitch would simply allow you to control WHEN the card can be interrogated, so that passersby can't much with it. You'd squeeze a spot on the card when you held it up to the retailer's reader, and thereby allow the transaction.
DL - since you're working on the TPS inspection thing - what's wrong with using the Aercam Sprint? Isn't it designed for exactly this kind of remote eyeball work?
For broader discussion of the game - without worrying about Sony's moderators deleting or locking threads or banning posters - there are some other choices that will probably be more heavily used from now on.
Then perhaps you should have posted a URL to your own brilliant essays....
Again, a URL to my own essays (brilliant or otherwise) would not be of use in evaluating whether J. Bowery is a bit of a net.kook. The link to Bowery's postings is.
The difference is that I do follow and care about the space shuttle disaster, without overmuch worrying whether J. Random User thinks I'm a cheery fellow. So perhaps we should agree to ride our separate ways.
I doubt you'll ask Henry or any other source of "common sense on this stuff". You're coming across as a troll.
With all due respect to your concerns over my identity, species etc, should I take that as a "no" on the question of whether you heard anything about the APU's in the NASA briefing?
That is what started all this, isn't it? The amazingly prescient prediction from J. Bowery that the APU was the most likely failure mode? And mean old troll 'anser' saying his stuff is mostly bunk.
Why don't you show it to him if you're so convinced he's the authority of choice to determine the validity of these scenarios?
I don't know about "authority of choice," but Henry is a peerless source of common sense on this stuff.
By the way, after sitting through the lengthy NASA briefing this afternoon where they went through the latest information on the scenarios, I am searching my notes in vain for any mention of the APU's. Did you happen to catch one?
Supplying nothing but an ad hominem attack like that tells us who the 'bit of a net kook' is.
Actually, it doesn't, but I'll let that easy comeback pass.
Bile isn't much of an argument.
No, it's more of a digestive fluid. But the previous posting was not intended as an argument - only a suggestion. Show Jim's lists to Henry Spencer. He won't bite, I promise.
It's one thing to say after the fact that "It's always been known that APUs can fail..." -- it's another to put forth scenarios 15 years early which portray it as the primary failure mode.
We agree that those are two separate things, but perhaps not that the distinction is an interesting one.:)
It's good to watch out for "hindsight selection factor," wherein we back-scan for some random prediction that happened to hit and say, there, see? Told you so. People have written all kinds of stuff in the last fifteen years on Usenet. There is nothing Bowery pointed out that isn't either (a) well known to NASA engineers and the rest of the space community or (b) bunk. That's all I was getting at.
Who can trust you if you aren't willing to back your "assessment" of a mere "net kook" with your true identity?
I don't really want you to trust me personally, I want you to see for yourself. Identities don't back assessments anyway.
It's always been known that APUs can fail - and they occasionally have. But there is a difference between a destructive and non-destructive failure mode for the APU. If you start with three good APUs and one fails nondestructively, even during reentry, the Orbiter is designed to return safely on the remaining two APUs. (Acrobat reader required.)
If the APU fails destructively, the potential for damage to the Orbiter is obviously much greater. Nobody would be happier than I (whatever happiness means in such a tragic context) if the incident analysis for this mission concludes that they caught the rare unstoppable failure for which no reasonable contingency mode can be designed. But I wouldn't put any money on it.
We need to start doing more of the things that advances in technology allow us to do (in the 30 years since STS was designed) to insure on-orbit crew and craft survivability. There are projects that basically can't compete for funding during times when everybody's coming home healthy and the budget crunch is worry #1. Now we're in different times. I hope we press for more safety while we can.
PS Trust me on the Bowery assessment, I was there.
Nevertheless, some kind of EVA inspection/repair capability is probably what we should implement. It would not be THAT difficult or THAT dangerous, especially when compared with the difficulty and danger of reentry in a damaged orbiter.
The Aercam Sprint is a 35-lb remotely piloted spherical robot with a camera. It has already flown and is being developed primarily for the Station, but it could easily be carried on Shuttle missions as well, and used in an inspection pass over the exterior of the orbiter as a normal part of the on-orbit maintenance routine.
If damage is found, an EVA would be done to repair it. Payload-bay-filling modules like Spacehab-RDM (which now has to be rebuilt anyway) should be modified to permit EVA egress through the lab bulkhead. Tethered operation and handholds are difficult on the underside of the orbiter, but we already have Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) capability and we could train to use it.
Replacing a tile (pulling the old, regluing a new one) might be difficult to do in space, plus you have thousands of different shapes and you can't carry them all. But you could design an epoxy "spackle" that could be applied to fill the hole created by a missing or damaged tile.
We could also develop a bigger "repair kit" that could be launched by an unmanned rocket (a la Progress, but based at the Cape for easier orbit match) on short notice.
All of these suggestions carry a certain amount of cost and inconvenience, but again, compared with the cost and inconvenience of burning up on re-entry, it's a better choice.
Slashdot Mirror
wow, she was tied up with the motor city online debacle. talk about picking winner jobs...
...not to mention the Star Wars Galaxies debacle!
Everybody seems to love her, but the next game I see her crunchy ketchup dragon .sig on, I think I'll go month-by-month on the sub :)
The security problem is not that you can relog to iDisk without a password, it is that iDisk data remains in your browser cache.
It just stood to reason.
I'm willing to bet that they will recover at least some of the sample material despite the crash. When you have your spacecraft on the ground and human ingenuity to spare, results usually follow.
I wonder if they ever considered an airbag system. Of course if you're not going to deploy your deceleration hardware in the first place, it hardly matters which kind you don't deploy.
Finally, someone who got it right!
Regardless of what Wikipedia (itself a public wikipedia, come to think of it) says, "Internet" was intended to refer to the specific internet of publicly accessible computers in the US and beyond, while "internet" refers to any routed/addressible collection of IP based networks. Wired will now be wrong.
It's obvious how Kirk meets the ST:Enterprise crew.
After his retirement from Starfleet, Kirk exploits his Galaxy-wide fame by appearing as a spokesman for PRICETIME, the new commercial venture set up to exploit the dozen or so different time-travel mechanisms Trek has come up with. "Name Your Own Stardate" becomes an irresistible slogan.
Unfortunately, while shooting a PriceTime ad on location in the past, Kirk's film crew is ambushed and nearly wiped out by a team from PriceTime's fierce competitor, KHANPEDIA. Only Kirk survives, marooned on the World of Suzie Wong. His teeth chattering amid the plastic snow and rubber rocks, the delirious Kirk mutters "Kirk to Enterprise" which is miraculously picked up by the prequel vessel cruising nearby.
This episode, "Margin of Promise," is the highest rated of the season, losing only to CRANK YANKERS and a TBS rerun of "The Cable Guy."
Oops, that was supposed to be tell it TO Mulberry :)
I use Firefox for browsing of course, and I keep checking and trying the various Mozilla.org mail/news client releases, but so far nothing touches Mulberry for ease of use and functionality with my IMAP mail stores.
If you are using the HTPC to play DVD's and media files like many people, PowerDVD makes a nice little remote that you can use to run all the necessary player functions.
What I do is put that remote up in the viewing area, and a real keyboard/mouse/LCD panel in the back of the room attached to the HTPC. The monitor is actually slaved to my Mitsubishi X400 projector, which gets the primary XGA feed from the Radeon card.
This lets me play "maximum projectionist" from the back of the room when needed (I like to make trailer reels from Apple.com for example), but watch media from the couch with just a remote like the good old days.
Well, the single-use card number would be better than what we have now, because regardless of the physical process involved in using the card, you wouldn't be revealing information that thieves could reuse.
Eliminating the physical swipe across a magstripe would be an improvement because magstripes wear out and get demagnetized. Chip-in-card systems have basically taken over the building-security business for this reason.
This would be better with a Smart MasterCard and a microswitch on the card.
The Smart MasterCard would exchange single-use credit card numbers a la Citibank's Virtual Account Numbers. That way the number would be useless as soon as the retailer has charged it, so that a bystander "sniffing" the information would not get anything of value.
The microswitch would simply allow you to control WHEN the card can be interrogated, so that passersby can't much with it. You'd squeeze a spot on the card when you held it up to the retailer's reader, and thereby allow the transaction.
I hope Vader bites Obi-Wan's finger off before he falls into the lava pit! Then the Eagles can come and take Obi-Wan and R2D2 away...
DL - since you're working on the TPS inspection thing - what's wrong with using the Aercam Sprint? Isn't it designed for exactly this kind of remote eyeball work?
Reply via email is OK.
There is a Yahoo! Group, the Allakhazam forum, SWG Warcry, the Stratics SWG board, and even the Lucasforums boards, among quite a few others. If you're thinking of learning more about the game, don't let Sony stiff-arm you, visit one of the other forums and start reading.
Not all DSL accounts have dynamic IP addresses, although that's the recent trend.
Coding jobs will double by 2010 after we finish cutting them in half in 2003.
The difference is that I do follow and care about the space shuttle disaster, without overmuch worrying whether J. Random User thinks I'm a cheery fellow. So perhaps we should agree to ride our separate ways.
That is what started all this, isn't it? The amazingly prescient prediction from J. Bowery that the APU was the most likely failure mode? And mean old troll 'anser' saying his stuff is mostly bunk.
Do stay tuned.
By the way, after sitting through the lengthy NASA briefing this afternoon where they went through the latest information on the scenarios, I am searching my notes in vain for any mention of the APU's. Did you happen to catch one?
It's good to watch out for "hindsight selection factor," wherein we back-scan for some random prediction that happened to hit and say, there, see? Told you so. People have written all kinds of stuff in the last fifteen years on Usenet. There is nothing Bowery pointed out that isn't either (a) well known to NASA engineers and the rest of the space community or (b) bunk. That's all I was getting at.
I don't really want you to trust me personally, I want you to see for yourself. Identities don't back assessments anyway.If the APU fails destructively, the potential for damage to the Orbiter is obviously much greater. Nobody would be happier than I (whatever happiness means in such a tragic context) if the incident analysis for this mission concludes that they caught the rare unstoppable failure for which no reasonable contingency mode can be designed. But I wouldn't put any money on it.
We need to start doing more of the things that advances in technology allow us to do (in the 30 years since STS was designed) to insure on-orbit crew and craft survivability. There are projects that basically can't compete for funding during times when everybody's coming home healthy and the budget crunch is worry #1. Now we're in different times. I hope we press for more safety while we can.
PS Trust me on the Bowery assessment, I was there.
The Aercam Sprint is a 35-lb remotely piloted spherical robot with a camera. It has already flown and is being developed primarily for the Station, but it could easily be carried on Shuttle missions as well, and used in an inspection pass over the exterior of the orbiter as a normal part of the on-orbit maintenance routine.
If damage is found, an EVA would be done to repair it. Payload-bay-filling modules like Spacehab-RDM (which now has to be rebuilt anyway) should be modified to permit EVA egress through the lab bulkhead. Tethered operation and handholds are difficult on the underside of the orbiter, but we already have Manned Maneuvering Unit (MMU) capability and we could train to use it.
Replacing a tile (pulling the old, regluing a new one) might be difficult to do in space, plus you have thousands of different shapes and you can't carry them all. But you could design an epoxy "spackle" that could be applied to fill the hole created by a missing or damaged tile.
We could also develop a bigger "repair kit" that could be launched by an unmanned rocket (a la Progress, but based at the Cape for easier orbit match) on short notice.
All of these suggestions carry a certain amount of cost and inconvenience, but again, compared with the cost and inconvenience of burning up on re-entry, it's a better choice.
Jim Bowery was a bit of a net.kook then and probably still is today. Show this posting to Henry Spencer and get his response.