Actually, what Coca Cola does is license to local bottlers the right to mix the concentrated syrup, that Coca Cola sells to them, with local water to to 'make' the Coke for local distribution.
Lordy - I'm going to go buy tin foil stock, as that has to be the most convoluted way to justify Slashdot's "blame Microsoft, Google is innocent no matter what" mindset I have ever seen.
So in government-land, the way to fix the problem of data accidentally collected is to order that said data be KEPT, instead of immediately deleted??
It's called preserving evidence.
To answer the parent:
For some reason, the United States is the only country on Earth where accidents don't happen - it's always somebody's fault, and you can sue that somebody for neglect.
If the United States was a place where a deliberate and intentional decision to perform an action could be called an 'accident', you'd have a point. But the United States (indeed the whole world) isn't such a place. Somebody at Google decided to write the function into the code and the database schema to collect and store that data - there is no possible way for it to have occurred accidentally. (Now, it may have been stupidity rather than malice that lead to that decision - but that doesn't change the fact that it was deliberately done.)
If there's no grain in it, it's not beer. Since the primary carbohydrate source in it is honey, it's mean - honey wine.
And speaking as someone who does historical reproduction cookery: The odds this wine tastes like the source are pretty slim. We don't know what their cacao tasted like or how close the extract shipped from Honduras to Delaware is to the product they would have used. (Reading TFA, it appears that it wasn't very close at all.) We don't know the quality of their honey. (And I bet they didn't use honey from the beverage's native region.) We don't know the taste of their chili's or other spices (or in what form they were used).
Not to mention the yeast, cooking, handling, and storage processes... (Note that he had it in a refrigerator - something the Mesoamericans notably lacked.)
In short, from a culinary historic point of view, this is junk science à la Mythbusters. It's kinda cool, but it's pretty much worthless and meaningless from a historical and scientific standpoint.
Moon rocks (regolth) contains a vast amount of He3
Across the entire surface of the moon, sure there's vast amounts of He3. In any given cubic meter - not so much. You've got mine a whole bunch of cubic meters to obtain any appreciable amount of He3.
Not that we a) know how to build and operate the required mining robots, b) build and operate the required processing equipment, or c) build a reactor that will burn the He3...
Yes, the prices drop - though less than you might think since not only are the robots themselves very expensive, so are the support/operations crew back on Earth. There's also considerable loss in the amount of science and work performed, so the difference in your 'bang for your buck' isn't all that great.
Datalinks don't let you examine parts as specified by the OP. If you're using datalinks and not recovering the vehicle, there's no particular reason no to test the vehicle to destruction. (Assuming it has a safe descent path for the vehicle and/or the debris.)
I'll grant the inspection, but not the removal/reinstallation - too high a chance of damage.
Not according to NASA. Saw that fairly recently in an interview by the people who actually do the work. I'll take NASA's word for it.
Never heard of any such thing, and I follow Shuttle issues fairly closely.
So sayeth the Official NASA PR Spin. Some people even believe it.
Care to provide an alternative. I can't think of anything else which even comes close. Just because may be PR-based (not really sure), doesn't mean its not true.
They aren't the most complex moving object ever built, they aren't even close - an SSN or SSBN surpasses them easily. Or consider a CVN. As far as advanced goes, that's more a matter of opinion as anything else, but I will say NASA rarely takes any chances. They're actually pretty conservative when it comes to engineering.
Likewise you want to stop the test before failure so you can look for signs of component wear and material stress so that you know what to improve for next time. Stopping at 200 seconds and finding this out is very useful. Stopping at 201 seconds after it has exploded and you have to work out from the pieces what went wrong is not as informative.
Since the vehicle was deliberately crashed into the ocean and not recovered - there's nothing to examine for wear and stress, whole or in pieces.
The reason price fluctuates throughout the day is not internal to the company, but external.
That's pretty much his point - which seems to have gone whooshing right over your head. The value of a stock is (theoretically) tied directly to the value of a company, yet the price varies even when the value doesn't - and he doesn't see why that should be. I tend to agree with him, the stock market has increasingly become an abstract game unrelated to the underlying real world it's (theoretically) based on.
One result is that we take the market to be something it isn't - an accurate reflection of the underlying structure, despite the fact that the two increasingly bear no relationship to each other.
The other (and more dire) result is that we increasingly hold CEO's responsible for matters they have no control over - which leads to them indulging in all manner of what are regarded as reprehensible activities in a vain attempt to raise the value to meet the price. (The whole 'nothing but next quarters bottom line' mentality so often derided.) This also happens at the other extreme, if for some reason everyone decided GE was worth (priced on the market) 30% less at the close of trading today than at the start - the CEO of GE would be held responsible even if absolutely nothing had changed regarding the value of the company.
That is true. Just the same, all wiring does get visually inspected and miles of wiring is removed and reinstalled/replaced after each flight.
I'll grant the inspection, but not the removal/reinstallation - too high a chance of damage.
Likewise, large chunks of the shuttle's engines are also disassembled, inspected, repaired, and reassembled.
Wrong. They stopped removing them after every flight well over a decade ago and stopped disassembling them every time they were removed not too long after.
The shuttles are literally considered one of the most advanced engineering feats by mankind - if not the most advanced - even to this day. IIRC, the shuttles are also considered the most complex moving machines ever designed and built.
So sayeth the Official NASA PR Spin. Some people even believe it.
I've actually been inside the Atlantis. I was lucky enough to receive the VIP tour. I'm gonna glow your mind. The technicians there say *every inch* of wire is removed and closely examined after every launch.
They're exaggerating. Removing and replacing every inch of wire is a job that would take over a year.
Unless this traffic was separated out from the rest of the packet, and stored separately in their database, it could easily have been part of a large binary blob that was the entirety of what was collected from that network.
The only way to harvest and store such data is by deliberately writing and executing the code to do so. There is no way to 'accidentally' do so. Period. End of story.
True, but 'so what?'. The key problem with GPS location often isn't CPU power, but antenna design.
If antenna design were the limitation, phone GPS wouldn't work at all.
Wrong. As in 'you couldn't be more wrong if you claimed the earth was flat'.
All the GPS bits have to come in through the phone's antenna, after all.
True. But irrelevant - as not all antennas are created equal, their specifc design matters. Hint: There's a reason one of many differences between high and low end GPSr's is that low end units use patch antenna and high end units use a quad helix antenna. (And surveyor/geodesy grade units use yet a different design.)
The real reason "assisted GPS" is overcentralized is so that "Enhanced 911" and other police/surveillance functions (CALEA) will work.
Wrong. (The whole 'Earth is flat' thing again.) Even with centralization, those services don't know where you are to any useful level of precision in many areas - they require the phone to tell the system where they are for that.
Google didn't just "waltz right in." They collected it by accident
Yeah, kinda like the shoplifter who claims the items "just happened" to fall into his pockets.
Seriously, you don't "accidentally" write a function into code and a spot to store the data collected by the that code into a database specification, run that code, collected the data in a local database, upload the local database into a master database... etc... etc...
There may or may not have been malice, but it wasn't an accident.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, what Coca Cola does is license to local bottlers the right to mix the concentrated syrup, that Coca Cola sells to them, with local water to to 'make' the Coke for local distribution.
Lordy - I'm going to go buy tin foil stock, as that has to be the most convoluted way to justify Slashdot's "blame Microsoft, Google is innocent no matter what" mindset I have ever seen.
To answer the grandparent:
It's called preserving evidence.
To answer the parent:
If the United States was a place where a deliberate and intentional decision to perform an action could be called an 'accident', you'd have a point. But the United States (indeed the whole world) isn't such a place. Somebody at Google decided to write the function into the code and the database schema to collect and store that data - there is no possible way for it to have occurred accidentally. (Now, it may have been stupidity rather than malice that lead to that decision - but that doesn't change the fact that it was deliberately done.)
If there's no grain in it, it's not beer. Since the primary carbohydrate source in it is honey, it's mean - honey wine.
And speaking as someone who does historical reproduction cookery: The odds this wine tastes like the source are pretty slim. We don't know what their cacao tasted like or how close the extract shipped from Honduras to Delaware is to the product they would have used. (Reading TFA, it appears that it wasn't very close at all.) We don't know the quality of their honey. (And I bet they didn't use honey from the beverage's native region.) We don't know the taste of their chili's or other spices (or in what form they were used).
Not to mention the yeast, cooking, handling, and storage processes... (Note that he had it in a refrigerator - something the Mesoamericans notably lacked.)
In short, from a culinary historic point of view, this is junk science à la Mythbusters. It's kinda cool, but it's pretty much worthless and meaningless from a historical and scientific standpoint.
Across the entire surface of the moon, sure there's vast amounts of He3. In any given cubic meter - not so much. You've got mine a whole bunch of cubic meters to obtain any appreciable amount of He3.
Not that we a) know how to build and operate the required mining robots, b) build and operate the required processing equipment, or c) build a reactor that will burn the He3...
And since, if you read TFA, the whole purpose of this base is to return samples - your point would be what?
Moral: You get what you pay for. Drop the Wal Mart shopper mentality and buy quality gear.
Yes, the prices drop - though less than you might think since not only are the robots themselves very expensive, so are the support/operations crew back on Earth. There's also considerable loss in the amount of science and work performed, so the difference in your 'bang for your buck' isn't all that great.
"It's a shame that The Tetris Company, LLC uses its power to stop developers from creating good and free games for Android users."
What exactly is good about yet another Tetris clone?
It's called "charging what the traffic will bear", and it's not "getting away" with anything - it's extremely smart pricing.
Of course you forgot another option - that both are true, and utterly unrelated to each other.
But you can't be bothered to Google the acronym? And no, I'm not confusing size with anything.
Datalinks don't let you examine parts as specified by the OP. If you're using datalinks and not recovering the vehicle, there's no particular reason no to test the vehicle to destruction. (Assuming it has a safe descent path for the vehicle and/or the debris.)
Never heard of any such thing, and I follow Shuttle issues fairly closely.
They aren't the most complex moving object ever built, they aren't even close - an SSN or SSBN surpasses them easily. Or consider a CVN. As far as advanced goes, that's more a matter of opinion as anything else, but I will say NASA rarely takes any chances. They're actually pretty conservative when it comes to engineering.
Since the vehicle was deliberately crashed into the ocean and not recovered - there's nothing to examine for wear and stress, whole or in pieces.
That's pretty much his point - which seems to have gone whooshing right over your head. The value of a stock is (theoretically) tied directly to the value of a company, yet the price varies even when the value doesn't - and he doesn't see why that should be. I tend to agree with him, the stock market has increasingly become an abstract game unrelated to the underlying real world it's (theoretically) based on.
One result is that we take the market to be something it isn't - an accurate reflection of the underlying structure, despite the fact that the two increasingly bear no relationship to each other.
The other (and more dire) result is that we increasingly hold CEO's responsible for matters they have no control over - which leads to them indulging in all manner of what are regarded as reprehensible activities in a vain attempt to raise the value to meet the price. (The whole 'nothing but next quarters bottom line' mentality so often derided.) This also happens at the other extreme, if for some reason everyone decided GE was worth (priced on the market) 30% less at the close of trading today than at the start - the CEO of GE would be held responsible even if absolutely nothing had changed regarding the value of the company.
I'll grant the inspection, but not the removal/reinstallation - too high a chance of damage.
Wrong. They stopped removing them after every flight well over a decade ago and stopped disassembling them every time they were removed not too long after.
So sayeth the Official NASA PR Spin. Some people even believe it.
They're exaggerating. Removing and replacing every inch of wire is a job that would take over a year.
A bug captured and stored all that data? You are either on serious drugs or utterly fucking ignorant of how computers work.
The only way to harvest and store such data is by deliberately writing and executing the code to do so. There is no way to 'accidentally' do so. Period. End of story.
You are aware the largest earthquake in the US wasn't in California?
Wrong. As in 'you couldn't be more wrong if you claimed the earth was flat'.
True. But irrelevant - as not all antennas are created equal, their specifc design matters. Hint: There's a reason one of many differences between high and low end GPSr's is that low end units use patch antenna and high end units use a quad helix antenna. (And surveyor/geodesy grade units use yet a different design.)
Wrong. (The whole 'Earth is flat' thing again.) Even with centralization, those services don't know where you are to any useful level of precision in many areas - they require the phone to tell the system where they are for that.
Yeah, kinda like the shoplifter who claims the items "just happened" to fall into his pockets.
Seriously, you don't "accidentally" write a function into code and a spot to store the data collected by the that code into a database specification, run that code, collected the data in a local database, upload the local database into a master database... etc... etc...
There may or may not have been malice, but it wasn't an accident.
Or, in other words, you made it up - but lack the wit to tell the difference between your assumptions and facts.
Not to mention - they haven't figured out how to ship viruses with printer ink, though they have for digital picture frames.