Why shouldn't we ask for hard evidence before accepting their conclusions at face value?
Go ahead and do so, if you want - no-one's stopping you. You could even go to college, get that degree, spend 10 years out in the field and do everything else the first guy did to check that it's all true. Personally I'm happy to accept the existence of electrons and quarks on trust at this point.
If they are just as fallible as anyone else then why should we believe what they say rather than [confirming] whether what they are saying [survives further scientific scrutiny]
That's what all the other scientists in the world are for.
You could always - yes, yes, I know, this is Slashdot - read the article. It's sparse on details, but it will at least tell you that
Oxford Performance Materials adapted EOS P800 printing technology to use a special polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) material that has proved suitable for human implants.
Teleportation, or any form of FTL travel messes this up.
I think that's your unwarranted assumption. Teleportation is not a form of FTL, and nor is entanglement or uncertainty or (to the best of my understanding) any other quantum effect.
B actually happened before D for one traveler and viceversa for the other.
Why? I'm not really sure. I'm not a physisist.
Try this: if you're mapping events in 2D space, the intuitive thing is to divide the space up into an XY grid. But two people could place the grid different - I could place mine at 45 degrees to yours. My coordinates won't match yours, but we're both describing the same events. The same goes for spacetime - although it's not arbitrary, different observers place their spacetime coordinates differently - just as, in the 2D case, you'd be partially swapping X and Y when compared to my grid, in the spacetime case you'd be partially swapping space for time. Thinking about things in those terms could also give you a feeling for length contraction and time dilation (although the "grid" analogy breaks down eventually, because time acts like inverse space...)
Would it have killed you to mention that it's an RPG? The summary doesn't even explicitly state that it's a game. Yes, it's pretty clear from context, but it's poor journalistic style not to slip these things in.
I remember using an Acorn R540 workstation in 1991 that was running Acorn's UNIX implementation and this machine was capable of emulating an x86 in software and running Windows 3 just fine
Emulating an entirely different architecture at a reasonable speed in 1991 sounds pretty incredible. It definitely wasn't using one of those accessory 486 cards (though I think those were RISC PC onwards)?
Wow, now all those long-forgotten ARM3 instructions are bubbling out of my memory... MOV PC,R14 *sniff*
I objected to it being *that* bright. It was a day shot. And obviously so.
What else would you expect a night shot from a highly sensitive camera to look like? What differences would you expect to see which you are not seeing?
There's just that much area in a pixel. So there can only be that amount of photons coming in, no matter how sensitive your sensor is.
Here's the clue: these pixels are BIGGER than before.
Quite aside from that, I don't think we're anywhere near the point where we can detect every single incoming photon, so there's still room for improvement regardless. You may as well argue that there's nothing interesting about better solar panels, because there are only so many photons htiting them.
On the basis of it being a joke (which I, and others, had also assumed your post to be), in that I was disagreeing with you in such a way as to imply that your brain had selectively ignored and forgotten something. And now I've had to ruin it by explaining it/collapsing its wave function:(
Not entirely sure what caloric needs have got to do with anything of this, either...
I liked the fact that it was made out of some of the CO2 he had exhaled over the years.
I hope it won't ruin your nostalgia to point out that it's probably using some exhaled CO2 from anyone who's ever lived (up to, say, X months ago so there's enough time for the atmosphere to mix).
Slashdot Mirror
So that begs the question.
*twitch*
Why shouldn't we ask for hard evidence before accepting their conclusions at face value?
Go ahead and do so, if you want - no-one's stopping you. You could even go to college, get that degree, spend 10 years out in the field and do everything else the first guy did to check that it's all true. Personally I'm happy to accept the existence of electrons and quarks on trust at this point.
If they are just as fallible as anyone else then why should we believe what they say rather than [confirming] whether what they are saying [survives further scientific scrutiny]
That's what all the other scientists in the world are for.
Technically they comply -- but trolls will have to sift out all the chaff.
You don't even need to pad.
"It's all the right octets. But not necessarily in the right order."
Oxford Performance Materials adapted EOS P800 printing technology to use a special polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) material that has proved suitable for human implants.
The sun sets too early in the eastern half (near the 'leading edge') of each time zone.
[objective definition of "too early" needed]
I want less social media, not more choices of time wasting.
I hear (though it could be a rumour) that they're thinking of making participation in social networking optional!
Teleportation, or any form of FTL travel messes this up.
I think that's your unwarranted assumption. Teleportation is not a form of FTL, and nor is entanglement or uncertainty or (to the best of my understanding) any other quantum effect.
B actually happened before D for one traveler and viceversa for the other. Why? I'm not really sure. I'm not a physisist.
Try this: if you're mapping events in 2D space, the intuitive thing is to divide the space up into an XY grid. But two people could place the grid different - I could place mine at 45 degrees to yours. My coordinates won't match yours, but we're both describing the same events. The same goes for spacetime - although it's not arbitrary, different observers place their spacetime coordinates differently - just as, in the 2D case, you'd be partially swapping X and Y when compared to my grid, in the spacetime case you'd be partially swapping space for time. Thinking about things in those terms could also give you a feeling for length contraction and time dilation (although the "grid" analogy breaks down eventually, because time acts like inverse space...)
Would it have killed you to mention that it's an RPG? The summary doesn't even explicitly state that it's a game. Yes, it's pretty clear from context, but it's poor journalistic style not to slip these things in.
Ees no rat. Ees hamster!
How about a bill to ban on all online grammar fuck ups?
"giving the neglected and premier solar body for life past Earth another compelling reason for being explored" was rather tortutous to parse as well.
I mean, wasn't this already obvious?
I remember using an Acorn R540 workstation in 1991 that was running Acorn's UNIX implementation and this machine was capable of emulating an x86 in software and running Windows 3 just fine
Emulating an entirely different architecture at a reasonable speed in 1991 sounds pretty incredible. It definitely wasn't using one of those accessory 486 cards (though I think those were RISC PC onwards)?
Wow, now all those long-forgotten ARM3 instructions are bubbling out of my memory... MOV PC,R14 *sniff*
Work is making things like movies, music and games.
So what is it that the other 99% of computer-using workers do for 8 hours a day?
That's the same reason spam went away!
My imaginary mod points to you.
I objected to it being *that* bright. It was a day shot. And obviously so.
What else would you expect a night shot from a highly sensitive camera to look like? What differences would you expect to see which you are not seeing?
How is your mom?
There's just that much area in a pixel. So there can only be that amount of photons coming in, no matter how sensitive your sensor is.
Here's the clue: these pixels are BIGGER than before.
Quite aside from that, I don't think we're anywhere near the point where we can detect every single incoming photon, so there's still room for improvement regardless. You may as well argue that there's nothing interesting about better solar panels, because there are only so many photons htiting them.
Are we there yet?
So help me, I will turn this spaceship around!
On precisely what basis are you saying that?
On the basis of it being a joke (which I, and others, had also assumed your post to be), in that I was disagreeing with you in such a way as to imply that your brain had selectively ignored and forgotten something. And now I've had to ruin it by explaining it/collapsing its wave function :(
Not entirely sure what caloric needs have got to do with anything of this, either...
assuming just momentaneously that this allows for information to travel instantaneously
Why would it?
Which until relatively recently wasn't that big of a deal
Yes it was.
I liked the fact that it was made out of some of the CO2 he had exhaled over the years.
I hope it won't ruin your nostalgia to point out that it's probably using some exhaled CO2 from anyone who's ever lived (up to, say, X months ago so there's enough time for the atmosphere to mix).
it's like throwing away your semi-truck after every shipment.
Yeah... no.
Pfft. Just pray.
They don't just record the original stream? Oy...