These black holes were not "missing" because nobody thought they existed. This/. article calls the report "surprising", but their existence would not be surprising if they were known to exist but had not been located.
And with its many uses, the first use of this single room will be to untangle the scheduling needs of all the staff who need to use the room, one person at a time.
Except when the entire staff uses it at once, to monitor for problems on the field of play of major sporting events.
That's why I didn't waste much time, and just pointed out the glue that can help with umpteen data sources and several manipulators. Including that glue in the searches helps reduce the options to examine ahd assorted people can find if something meets their needs.
First, look at PostGIS. It is a geographic extension to PostgreSQL. That gives you a single place to store your data.
Then look for "TIGER PostGIS" to find tools which support both formats, and find something to read TIGER into PostGIS. Then look at editing and display tools to find one which supports PostGIS.
Latest stealth technologies. Reverse doppler so viewers don't know if it's coming or going. Apparent tiny size so it is dismissed as not a bomber. Details made visible worldwide through Slashdot so everyone thinks the weapon system does not really exist. The smallest miniature cowboys to fly the thing.
Seriously, the sound might be different due to listening to the inside of the engine or the side of it. Or listening to the intake is low pitched, but the exhaust may be high pitched due to the smaller turbines being in the rear..so as it approaches you hear more of the high pitch which is coming from behind. Or the microphones are just overloaded and we have no idea what it sounds like. Or these tiny engines don't produce the same sound as those that can eat a car, and you're expecting a similarity.
Cool, but considering how realistic this thing looks, and sounds, I wonder if anyone's going to mistake it for a low flying real aircraft. Without any frame of reference in the sky, it would look like a very low flying full sized aircraft. Someone might flip out, and scramble fighters thinking it was another attack.
"Why are the missiles knocking planes out of the sky by just rotating toward them before launch?"
"Flight leader, you just flew behind it, fly lower!"
"No, he looks smaller than your little fighter, fly higher!"
"That wasn't a missile, one cannon round made it vanish! Maybe it's a smoke screen, see if he's hugging the ground now...although at 50 feet, he was already doing well at that."
"Shoot that refueling plane, that will eventually stop the B-52!"
"Flight leader, did you drop a lawn dart with a cowboy riding it?"
"... I would also hope the default sa/password will no longer be there."
You'll simply use your Microsoft Passport to access the database. All SQL Server will have to do is ask you if you are the SA or not.
For added security, it will also ask you if you really are the SA.
Uh. I would not, in fact, stop the local (Finnish) police from searching my apartment if they gave me a good reason for doing it and I had nothing to hide.
Can we search that computer for kiddie porn? You have nothing to hide, right? Call us in a month to see if our technicians are done searching, and where you can pick up your computer.
Have you ever been drunk? Can we take your liver so we can check?
They know what they are looking for. Such as an incoming IP connection from Diebold or a mail message which was large enough for the material?
With so many technically skilled people interested in the site, how many forged IP connections might have been created? But if Diebold's computers have weak security, someone outside Diebold might have initiated IP traffic from Diebold's own machines. And one of the issues here is "Diebold security".
The pointy stick is a temporary risk. The hard part is having new nests...and aiming the pointy stick near but not at the nest.
Life is dangerous. But the obvious initial need to to have self-sufficent nests on the Moon and several asteroids, so a disaster local to Earth (such as a big rock) won't wipe us out.
Practical benefits, such as supplying cheap metals and energy to everyone, are a side effect of having distributed locations (in this solar system, distributed locations implies living among asteroids because there aren't many usable planets, thus asteroid technologies and mining are assumed).
Unfortunately being scattered in the Solar System only protects against occasional disasters to individual nests. Earth's magnetic field provides some protection from interstellar radiation bursts (although similar protection is likely to be built elsewhere). But events such as the entire system passing through a cloud of rocks or a sterilizing radiation blast require further protection. But such problems can be solved after getting out of the nest, as staying in the nest does not increase protection against the death of the species (or loss of this civilization).
You mentioned effects that would cause negative feedback, but unfortunately the greeat majority of scientists agree that the positive feedback seems to be more significant.
A number of studies which show increasing temperatures are based on strong positive feedbacks. Just because you hear about those studies a lot does not mean that a majority of scientists agree with them, nor does it mean that the real world is like that.
Also when reading a study which involves feedbacks, you should examine what is being studied. If behavior of known processes is being studied, feedback loops will have factors which are measurable in a laboratory.
Such studies can not be compared to the real world because there are many unknown factors, so often some magic processes are added which produce realistic results. These magic processes do not explain what is unknown, but their values help estimate the significance of the unknown factors: if the magic values must be 10 times your known factors you can suspect something major is missing. The magic values do have problems, such as not knowing and dealing with several unknown factors which vary a lot but happen to have a stable average. A study designed to find magic numbers which produce realistic results is useful in designing such simulations, but might not be useful for forecasting. A study which is intended for forecasting should be labeled as such.
Another problem is if a study is examining how significant changes in factors might be, then things such as feedbacks are altered simply to see the effects. Such a study has uses such as in examining the mathematics, but may not be reliable for forecasting. A weather man can examine what might happen to today's thunderstorm if it hits the jet stream, but that might not be useful as a forecast (for example, if it is known that the jet stream happens to be far away today).
Yet another variation is when a suspected effect is the starting point: "What might have caused drying of the Sahara?" or "What might cause rainfall over the Sahara to increase ten times and happen at least three times a month?" The factors might then get drastic adjustments in order to get the desired result. But this is not a forecast, as what is being studied are the adjustments.
Yes, I know this study is examining many factors. My comment was directed at the ancestor article with its simplistic concepts. He mentioned albedo without mentioning water or clouds, so I used an example related to that -- particularly because most people know that usually higher temperatures increase water evaporation.
My parent article had rhetorical questions related to the grandparent article. Some real science should be used as a source rather than echoing an activism industry pamphlet.
Personally, I have read quite a few scientific climate studies as well as quite a few unscientific ones. I am quite aware of CO2 measurements (off the top of my head I know there are several referenced in the TAR - IPCC.ch, and Mauna Loa is a major site), and my rhetorical question was about the major greenhouse gas, which is not CO2. Reliable temperature records are considered to have begun around 1850, which is not long enough in climate timescales, thus the numerous efforts to use temperature proxies.
Slashdot Mirror
Oops. Forgot the link: "I Am My Own Grandpa"
One has to be careful whenever one is one's own grandparent.
These black holes were not "missing" because nobody thought they existed. This /. article calls the report "surprising", but their existence would not be surprising if they were known to exist but had not been located.
I would prefer a proof of where the new theory was pulled from. Makes evaluation much simpler.
Except when the entire staff uses it at once, to monitor for problems on the field of play of major sporting events.
All the more reason to include an editor in your toolset...
"the girder is complete. what is this "spiral" word in your query?"
In a related discussion someone pointed out thus /. knows the password of 6,510 people.
That's why I didn't waste much time, and just pointed out the glue that can help with umpteen data sources and several manipulators. Including that glue in the searches helps reduce the options to examine ahd assorted people can find if something meets their needs.
Then look for "TIGER PostGIS" to find tools which support both formats, and find something to read TIGER into PostGIS. Then look at editing and display tools to find one which supports PostGIS.
Seriously, the sound might be different due to listening to the inside of the engine or the side of it. Or listening to the intake is low pitched, but the exhaust may be high pitched due to the smaller turbines being in the rear..so as it approaches you hear more of the high pitch which is coming from behind. Or the microphones are just overloaded and we have no idea what it sounds like. Or these tiny engines don't produce the same sound as those that can eat a car, and you're expecting a similarity.
You'll simply use your Microsoft Passport to access the database. All SQL Server will have to do is ask you if you are the SA or not.
For added security, it will also ask you if you really are the SA.
Two probes head toward Earth, dragging asteroids and muttering sterilize...sterilize...
Let Go! Let Go! No, don't return home!
No.
That is a problem at the application level.
The problems begin in tying the barrel to the pigeon's leg.
THIS DOCUMENT OFFICIALLY
-------DOES NOT EXIST-------
Thank you, now we know what to ask for.
On which calendar? Can't be Chinese, as an abacus is not usually used for text processing.
Can we search that computer for kiddie porn? You have nothing to hide, right? Call us in a month to see if our technicians are done searching, and where you can pick up your computer.
Have you ever been drunk? Can we take your liver so we can check?
With so many technically skilled people interested in the site, how many forged IP connections might have been created? But if Diebold's computers have weak security, someone outside Diebold might have initiated IP traffic from Diebold's own machines. And one of the issues here is "Diebold security".
How do you go mach -1? Backwards?
You have to use something that sucks faster than the speed of sound.
The pointy stick is a temporary risk. The hard part is having new nests...and aiming the pointy stick near but not at the nest.
Life is dangerous. But the obvious initial need to to have self-sufficent nests on the Moon and several asteroids, so a disaster local to Earth (such as a big rock) won't wipe us out.
Practical benefits, such as supplying cheap metals and energy to everyone, are a side effect of having distributed locations (in this solar system, distributed locations implies living among asteroids because there aren't many usable planets, thus asteroid technologies and mining are assumed).
Unfortunately being scattered in the Solar System only protects against occasional disasters to individual nests. Earth's magnetic field provides some protection from interstellar radiation bursts (although similar protection is likely to be built elsewhere). But events such as the entire system passing through a cloud of rocks or a sterilizing radiation blast require further protection. But such problems can be solved after getting out of the nest, as staying in the nest does not increase protection against the death of the species (or loss of this civilization).
A number of studies which show increasing temperatures are based on strong positive feedbacks. Just because you hear about those studies a lot does not mean that a majority of scientists agree with them, nor does it mean that the real world is like that.
Also when reading a study which involves feedbacks, you should examine what is being studied. If behavior of known processes is being studied, feedback loops will have factors which are measurable in a laboratory.
Such studies can not be compared to the real world because there are many unknown factors, so often some magic processes are added which produce realistic results. These magic processes do not explain what is unknown, but their values help estimate the significance of the unknown factors: if the magic values must be 10 times your known factors you can suspect something major is missing. The magic values do have problems, such as not knowing and dealing with several unknown factors which vary a lot but happen to have a stable average. A study designed to find magic numbers which produce realistic results is useful in designing such simulations, but might not be useful for forecasting. A study which is intended for forecasting should be labeled as such.
Another problem is if a study is examining how significant changes in factors might be, then things such as feedbacks are altered simply to see the effects. Such a study has uses such as in examining the mathematics, but may not be reliable for forecasting. A weather man can examine what might happen to today's thunderstorm if it hits the jet stream, but that might not be useful as a forecast (for example, if it is known that the jet stream happens to be far away today).
Yet another variation is when a suspected effect is the starting point: "What might have caused drying of the Sahara?" or "What might cause rainfall over the Sahara to increase ten times and happen at least three times a month?" The factors might then get drastic adjustments in order to get the desired result. But this is not a forecast, as what is being studied are the adjustments.
Yes, I know this study is examining many factors. My comment was directed at the ancestor article with its simplistic concepts. He mentioned albedo without mentioning water or clouds, so I used an example related to that -- particularly because most people know that usually higher temperatures increase water evaporation.
Personally, I have read quite a few scientific climate studies as well as quite a few unscientific ones. I am quite aware of CO2 measurements (off the top of my head I know there are several referenced in the TAR - IPCC.ch, and Mauna Loa is a major site), and my rhetorical question was about the major greenhouse gas, which is not CO2. Reliable temperature records are considered to have begun around 1850, which is not long enough in climate timescales, thus the numerous efforts to use temperature proxies.