Considering the enormous energy generators required to get very far in space any truly warlike race would likely destroy themselves long before escaping their solar systems.
Constructing a stable containment system for antimatter would be necessary for both space propulsion and as a bomb of unimaginable power.
Lets just hope we dont turn out to be one of those warlike races.
both canon and nikon have committed to to APS frame sized lenses that newer DSLR's are using. While canon is sticking with 35mm full frame with the 1DSmk II, nikon's new D2X is APS sized. Canon's lower-end DSLR's also use APS sized.
The history of the 35mm film format is a weird one. Its continuing existance is mainly due to inertia.
Theres a bunch of reasons for APS. First, you don't lose much in the way of absolute resolution. at 27mm vs. 35mm. Second, the chips are MUCH cheaper to produce. The cost of a full frame CCD has not gone down at all in a decade. They've crammed more pixels on them, but the cost remains the same for production - exorbitant.
Also, your lenses can be more compact and lighter weight. But, with APS you can still use 35mm styled lenses decades old.
amusingly enough, that is pretty much whats going on. Gravity is pulling the object down, but its going so fast that the ground slips out from under it before it hits.
in the same sense as a lens. Larger sensors will give you much less noise however, as they're calibrated to require much more light before they're considered lit pixels. You'll also get better luminance range.
Smaller sensors with small photosites receive much less light, and thus are susceptible to stray photons (particularly infrared) from the electronics and ambient air. This is why your point and shoots have a max ISO of 400 and look utterly terrible, while a DSLR can go up to ISO 1600 or higher, and have considerably less noise!
This is why a 6 megapixel DSLR has pictures vastly better than one of those new 8mp.
Or check out the nasa rovers.. large sensors, excellent optics, superb electronics, but with only 1 megapixel. Ultra sharp pictures!
For photographers on the move (like myself), the following make up the initial capital investment of a digital camera:
-instant feedback on exposure. If you know how to read a histogram, you can get vastly better pictures.
-no film/development cost
-the ability to shoot different ISOs on the fly. Some cameras allow you to set a minimum shutter speed and will increase (or decrease) the ISO incrementally if lighting conditions change rapidly. This is invaluable.
Shooting RAW requires more post processing work by the photographer, but at least you dont have to deal with scanning slides/negatives and cleaning up dust and scratches.
It is difficult to compare the resolution of film to digital because film "resolution" varies greatly.
If we consider "resolution" to be the maximum size one can blow up an image before noticable grain (in the case of film) or pixelation (in the case of digital), low-ISO film still "wins". I still don't think this a fair comparison though because pixels are not grains.
Digital cameras, regardless of ISO used, output the same resolution across all speeds. Film on the other hand, changes. At higher ISO's, the grain becomes visible at much smaller print sizes.
There are some specialty films out there that can easily create a many meter sized print without noticible grain.
But, in the end, for general purpose film, even a 6 mp digital SLR camera will give you better performance. Especially at higher ISO's, if you shoot in RAW. The real catch so far has been competing with the likes of velvia...
The more you have, the better. And it is better to have some than none.
The problem here is not google, it is china's government policy. Google has no say in what the government there does. Imagine if google were a food distributor and the chinese government limited people to 2 cups of rice per day - if google offered more, they would not be allowed access to the country. People would have no cups of rice per day.
There is nothing google could possibly do, except perhaps do no business with china. I doubt the chinese government would care if they left.
But that surely would screw the chinese people out of an invaluable service - regardless of the rules placed upon it.
There sure are a whole lot of people on here who think in black and white, its good or its "evil". WIthout even thinking of the practical reality that there is. Google censored by the government is better than no google at all - and that isnt google's fault.
Who are you to say "we dont need this"? You can forsee all applications of a technology before its made? And you automatically assume just because the money is initially military its going to be used to "kill people"? What nonsense.
This would useful for finding people in a burning building full of smoke. Or imagine putting it onto a car as a warning system in heavy fog that you're approaching an obstacle too fast. Same with planes. Surely more creative people than I can dream up a dozen applications for this.
Here's a tip about research: The military has a ton of money, and they spend it on all kinds of things that have nothing to do with "killing people". As pointed out already, the internet was a defense project. So was GPS. So was radar. So was a million other extremely useful things.
"We dont need this" - we don't need you and your cluelessness.
They dont put those things in because it would drive the cost beyond what the average consumer wants to pay for a basic digital camera.
Want really good zoom? Get a DSLR and a nice lens. The nikon D70's 18-70mm kit lens is worth $500 but only costs a bargain $250 in the kit.
More battery power = bigger battery = bigger camera. Size is a purchase factor for many people.
Most DSLR's can shoot well over 1000 shots between charges and theres no need to turn the camera off. Heck, my D70 *never* turns off completely, even with the switch on Off. It always at least displays the shots remaining on the card.
All electronic cameras have fixed noise patterns. They vary from camera to camera usually, but with several frames and now commonly available software, you can detect the pattern, clean it up, and interpolate the data from where it was with a good deal of precision.
Yeah, its way harder. At least high quality image interpolation is. Theres been decades of research into it and dozens of different methods have been the topic of phd papers. Lots of high end math and very complex algorithms.
Ever printed a photo on an inkjet printer? You're seeing a pretty strenuous use of interpolation algorithms there. A typical resolution image coming off of a digital camera only prints at maybe 2 or 3 inches across at the resolution a typical printer operates. So if say, you want an 8x10, your printing software does some serious interpolating.
And not all printing software is equal, either. The algorithm makes all the difference. Its why you can get a so-so large image out of photoshop's print facilities (that uses bicubic) and a noticably better one from QImage (at the moment, pyramid)
A sad trend in the US for the last couple of decades has been that of "those who know better, do nothing". Or more recently, "those who know better do nothing but bitch on the internet"
Obviously, voting is something that should be left in the hands of the people and not some corporation with who knows what agenda.
But where are the volunteers to step up and implement and open and robust voting system?
Of all the people here who bitch about "our rights being thrown away" - how many of them have even volunteered to work in a polling place, much less talked with their state's election board members?
The boards know that all these systems SUCK! But nobody has tried to give them a reasonable alternative.
Rather than bitch on the internet, why doesn't anyone here, with the expertise and obsessive desire for openness, do something about it?
Our rights are being thrown away because you're too lazy to get out of your chair and stop it. Join an activist organization. Lobby your congresspeople. Make a nuisance of yourself with them!
Moaning on the internet does nothing.
Re:the fact if you cut into it...
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 1
Yeah because those kinds of robots are common tools of the terrorist trade.
And yeah, if you want to spend several weeks digging with shovels, sure. I would think someone might notice this by then, though.
the fact if you cut into it...
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 1
you'll be deathly irradiated within seconds after opening it makes it fairly 'tamper proof'.
Bury it in the ground and it guarantees it'll take anyone awhile and lots of heavy equipment to get into it.
Re:As a former nuclear navy reactor operator
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 1
The toshiba version of this buries the vessel in the ground and puts a 300 ton cap on top of it. To get the material, at the very least you need some extremely heavy industrial equipment and alot of time to lift and cut open the device.
Nevermind the fact that the material within is extremely radioactive and will kill someone right quick who is exposed to it.
A far easier "dirty bomb" can be made with the very radioactive elements contained in medical equipment in hospitals and doctor's offices the world over.
it is critical, somewhat
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Its a slow fission system that uses a neutron reflecting shield that gradually (over 30 years) descends via gravity over the material. The neutrons bounce back into the fissile material thus creating fission. The shield descends at the rate it takes to consume the fuel (a long time)
The benefit of this is if for some reason the shield stops moving, the worse that would happen is fission would cease entirely at some point, rather than run away.
Or so my understanding goes.
Reminds me of this toshiba reactor
on
Port-A-Nuke
·
· Score: 1
The nuclear "battery" - fully contained, sealed and autonomous. Its designed for remote areas.
The vessel is buried in the ground (thus explosives, car bombs wont touch it), and the nuclear material is sealed under a massive cap that would require very large heavy equipment and alot of time to get at.
nobody here takes their kids to the drafthouse downtown, on friday and saturday night. There are far worse things right outside the door, namely puddles of piss and spilled beer from the homeless drunks asking you for spare change.
Its a essentially a pub that shows movies (or a theater that serves beer, depending on your viewpoint) You cant get in if you're under 18 (unless you're with a parent).
the "transparent aluminum" of recent slashdotism was nothing of the sort. It was alumina - a ceramic material that has little in common from a material standpoint with its metallic cousin.
and it wasnt that new, either. sapphires are natural examples of translucent alumina.
This is all well and good and does make Word immediately available but, on the other hand, there's a whole heap of memory other programs cannot use as a result.
Nonsense. Memory management doesnt work this way. Even if the libraries somehow get loaded (which from other posts point out, they arent), if you don't use them their pages will get quickly swapped out by more demanding active programs.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering the enormous energy generators required to get very far in space any truly warlike race would likely destroy themselves long before escaping their solar systems.
Constructing a stable containment system for antimatter would be necessary for both space propulsion and as a bomb of unimaginable power.
Lets just hope we dont turn out to be one of those warlike races.
Its like being shocked that the US had plans for nuclear war with the soviet union.
both canon and nikon have committed to to APS frame sized lenses that newer DSLR's are using. While canon is sticking with 35mm full frame with the 1DSmk II, nikon's new D2X is APS sized. Canon's lower-end DSLR's also use APS sized.
The history of the 35mm film format is a weird one. Its continuing existance is mainly due to inertia.
Theres a bunch of reasons for APS. First, you don't lose much in the way of absolute resolution. at 27mm vs. 35mm. Second, the chips are MUCH cheaper to produce. The cost of a full frame CCD has not gone down at all in a decade. They've crammed more pixels on them, but the cost remains the same for production - exorbitant.
Also, your lenses can be more compact and lighter weight. But, with APS you can still use 35mm styled lenses decades old.
amusingly enough, that is pretty much whats going on. Gravity is pulling the object down, but its going so fast that the ground slips out from under it before it hits.
in the same sense as a lens. Larger sensors will give you much less noise however, as they're calibrated to require much more light before they're considered lit pixels. You'll also get better luminance range.
Smaller sensors with small photosites receive much less light, and thus are susceptible to stray photons (particularly infrared) from the electronics and ambient air. This is why your point and shoots have a max ISO of 400 and look utterly terrible, while a DSLR can go up to ISO 1600 or higher, and have considerably less noise!
This is why a 6 megapixel DSLR has pictures vastly better than one of those new 8mp.
Or check out the nasa rovers.. large sensors, excellent optics, superb electronics, but with only 1 megapixel. Ultra sharp pictures!
This depends on how you define 'quality'
For photographers on the move (like myself), the following make up the initial capital investment of a digital camera:
-instant feedback on exposure. If you know how to read a histogram, you can get vastly better pictures.
-no film/development cost
-the ability to shoot different ISOs on the fly. Some cameras allow you to set a minimum shutter speed and will increase (or decrease) the ISO incrementally if lighting conditions change rapidly. This is invaluable.
Shooting RAW requires more post processing work by the photographer, but at least you dont have to deal with scanning slides/negatives and cleaning up dust and scratches.
It is difficult to compare the resolution of film to digital because film "resolution" varies greatly.
If we consider "resolution" to be the maximum size one can blow up an image before noticable grain (in the case of film) or pixelation (in the case of digital), low-ISO film still "wins". I still don't think this a fair comparison though because pixels are not grains.
Digital cameras, regardless of ISO used, output the same resolution across all speeds. Film on the other hand, changes. At higher ISO's, the grain becomes visible at much smaller print sizes.
There are some specialty films out there that can easily create a many meter sized print without noticible grain.
But, in the end, for general purpose film, even a 6 mp digital SLR camera will give you better performance. Especially at higher ISO's, if you shoot in RAW. The real catch so far has been competing with the likes of velvia...
The more you have, the better. And it is better to have some than none.
The problem here is not google, it is china's government policy. Google has no say in what the government there does. Imagine if google were a food distributor and the chinese government limited people to 2 cups of rice per day - if google offered more, they would not be allowed access to the country. People would have no cups of rice per day.
There is nothing google could possibly do, except perhaps do no business with china. I doubt the chinese government would care if they left.
But that surely would screw the chinese people out of an invaluable service - regardless of the rules placed upon it.
There sure are a whole lot of people on here who think in black and white, its good or its "evil". WIthout even thinking of the practical reality that there is. Google censored by the government is better than no google at all - and that isnt google's fault.
Who are you to say "we dont need this"? You can forsee all applications of a technology before its made? And you automatically assume just because the money is initially military its going to be used to "kill people"? What nonsense.
This would useful for finding people in a burning building full of smoke. Or imagine putting it onto a car as a warning system in heavy fog that you're approaching an obstacle too fast. Same with planes. Surely more creative people than I can dream up a dozen applications for this.
Here's a tip about research: The military has a ton of money, and they spend it on all kinds of things that have nothing to do with "killing people". As pointed out already, the internet was a defense project. So was GPS. So was radar. So was a million other extremely useful things.
"We dont need this" - we don't need you and your cluelessness.
Have you asked the same thing about the gas tank?
the space race is more like a marathon. Just because you're off the starting line first doesnt guarantee a 'win'.
They dont put those things in because it would drive the cost beyond what the average consumer wants to pay for a basic digital camera.
Want really good zoom? Get a DSLR and a nice lens. The nikon D70's 18-70mm kit lens is worth $500 but only costs a bargain $250 in the kit.
More battery power = bigger battery = bigger camera. Size is a purchase factor for many people.
Most DSLR's can shoot well over 1000 shots between charges and theres no need to turn the camera off. Heck, my D70 *never* turns off completely, even with the switch on Off. It always at least displays the shots remaining on the card.
All electronic cameras have fixed noise patterns. They vary from camera to camera usually, but with several frames and now commonly available software, you can detect the pattern, clean it up, and interpolate the data from where it was with a good deal of precision.
I mean zooming an image is no rocket science
Yeah, its way harder. At least high quality image interpolation is. Theres been decades of research into it and dozens of different methods have been the topic of phd papers. Lots of high end math and very complex algorithms.
Ever printed a photo on an inkjet printer? You're seeing a pretty strenuous use of interpolation algorithms there. A typical resolution image coming off of a digital camera only prints at maybe 2 or 3 inches across at the resolution a typical printer operates. So if say, you want an 8x10, your printing software does some serious interpolating.
And not all printing software is equal, either. The algorithm makes all the difference. Its why you can get a so-so large image out of photoshop's print facilities (that uses bicubic) and a noticably better one from QImage (at the moment, pyramid)
A sad trend in the US for the last couple of decades has been that of "those who know better, do nothing". Or more recently, "those who know better do nothing but bitch on the internet"
Obviously, voting is something that should be left in the hands of the people and not some corporation with who knows what agenda.
But where are the volunteers to step up and implement and open and robust voting system?
Of all the people here who bitch about "our rights being thrown away" - how many of them have even volunteered to work in a polling place, much less talked with their state's election board members?
The boards know that all these systems SUCK! But nobody has tried to give them a reasonable alternative.
Rather than bitch on the internet, why doesn't anyone here, with the expertise and obsessive desire for openness, do something about it?
Our rights are being thrown away because you're too lazy to get out of your chair and stop it. Join an activist organization. Lobby your congresspeople. Make a nuisance of yourself with them!
Moaning on the internet does nothing.
Yeah because those kinds of robots are common tools of the terrorist trade.
And yeah, if you want to spend several weeks digging with shovels, sure. I would think someone might notice this by then, though.
you'll be deathly irradiated within seconds after opening it makes it fairly 'tamper proof'.
Bury it in the ground and it guarantees it'll take anyone awhile and lots of heavy equipment to get into it.
The toshiba version of this buries the vessel in the ground and puts a 300 ton cap on top of it. To get the material, at the very least you need some extremely heavy industrial equipment and alot of time to lift and cut open the device.
Nevermind the fact that the material within is extremely radioactive and will kill someone right quick who is exposed to it.
A far easier "dirty bomb" can be made with the very radioactive elements contained in medical equipment in hospitals and doctor's offices the world over.
Its a slow fission system that uses a neutron reflecting shield that gradually (over 30 years) descends via gravity over the material. The neutrons bounce back into the fissile material thus creating fission. The shield descends at the rate it takes to consume the fuel (a long time)
The benefit of this is if for some reason the shield stops moving, the worse that would happen is fission would cease entirely at some point, rather than run away.
Or so my understanding goes.
The nuclear "battery" - fully contained, sealed and autonomous. Its designed for remote areas.
The vessel is buried in the ground (thus explosives, car bombs wont touch it), and the nuclear material is sealed under a massive cap that would require very large heavy equipment and alot of time to get at.
nobody here takes their kids to the drafthouse downtown, on friday and saturday night. There are far worse things right outside the door, namely puddles of piss and spilled beer from the homeless drunks asking you for spare change.
Its a essentially a pub that shows movies (or a theater that serves beer, depending on your viewpoint) You cant get in if you're under 18 (unless you're with a parent).
the "transparent aluminum" of recent slashdotism was nothing of the sort. It was alumina - a ceramic material that has little in common from a material standpoint with its metallic cousin.
and it wasnt that new, either. sapphires are natural examples of translucent alumina.
This is all well and good and does make Word immediately available but, on the other hand, there's a whole heap of memory other programs cannot use as a result.
Nonsense. Memory management doesnt work this way. Even if the libraries somehow get loaded (which from other posts point out, they arent), if you don't use them their pages will get quickly swapped out by more demanding active programs.
most of your webcams these days have a little plastic hood that flips down in front of the lens.
broadband "user" is an account. Remember, most of these are household accounts being used by multiple people. You're comparing apples to oranges.