Just because it was invented by somebody (or somebodies) who once invented something great a long time ago in a land far away doesn't meant that it automatically the most coolest, correctest thing ever. The once greats do fade, or get bats in the belfry, etc... etc...
Or, more likely, they just did the fun part of designing the language, and are leaving the hard part of creating libraries to somebody else.
They pretty much explicitly state that in TFA - the 'simple' and 'fun' stuff is done, now it's up to the [currently theoretical] community to dig in and do the hard stuff.
Of course, being Google branded and Open Source (two of the top 'auto orgasm' buttons among a huge swath of geeks) there will be, at least in the beginning, a fairly large community. I'll be very surprised if there isn't a Wiki by morning, and I'll be there's half a dozen or more Waves about it by now.
There is too much competition from other fresh and well regarded "new" languages for yet another new entrant to gain much headway without something really novel to attract attention.
Open Source. Google branded.
It doesn't need anything novel when it hits two of the top orgasm buttons among many geeks, techies, and wanna bees. All that's missing for a grand slam is a connection to Apple.
I was about to say - missing a 7 meter asteroid passing at that distance is roughly akin to missing a pea in the middle of the highway you're currently doing 60MPH down. In rush hour traffic.
You have to collect all the water as it comes off the dome, lest you end up eroding your foundations. Even in a light rain, a dome a mile across is going to accumulate a lot of water. Worse yet, it's going to be moving quite fast by the time it reaches the edge of dome.
So lets do a little math... 1/4 cu in/hour (a fairly light rain) gives 36 cubic inches per square foot of roof surface. 36 inches/sq ft times the area of a dome a mile in diameter (21,237,166 sq ft) gives 764,537,976 cubic inches of water. Divide that by the number of cubic inches in a gallon (231) and you get 3,300,000 gallons of water per hour for a light spring rain. A little Googling reveals the 100 yr storm level (your worst case design scenario) to be 2 inches/hour - or over 25 million gallons/hr to be dealt with.
Moreover, simply having ships listen in wouldn't have cost that much money.
Wouldn't have cost much money - and would have accomplished diddley squat (shipboard amplifiers wouldn't up to the task). Doesn't matter anyways, as the telegram directed shore stations to do the listening.
There is a similar idea which actually carries some currency, though; put a greenhouse below a house and vent it into the house, then vent the exhaust from the house through a chimney. [...]
Pot growers have been already been testing this for decades. You use HPS for overheads and fluorescents on the side. Solar panels on the roof. See, this certain crop isn't exactly "legal" in most states yet.
However, that doesn't fit the usual usage of the word 'greenhouse', nor does it strike me as particularly energy efficient.
Remember, it is still raining, just above the dome. It should be trivial to put collectors at teh base of the dome.
For certain large values of trivial, yes. You're trying to collect all the rain that falls on the dome at the edge of the dome - which, for even a light rain, is going to be a considerable quantity of water. New England also occasionally get smacked by hurricanes, which mean you have to be able to handle torrential rainfalls as well.
You don't get in a car accident and THEN buy insurance expecting them to cover it. You're supposed to have insurance BEFORE something happens.
All this (requiring insurers to cover pre-existing conditions) does is encourage people to wait.
Which, as they GP correctly points out, breaks the model.
Part of the problem is that many people have come to view insurance as kind of a slot machine - one where you put in your nickel, pull the handle, and get a jackpot every single time. Rather than being a recourse for emergencies, insurance is not treated (more or less) a source of income that happens to match whatever debt needs to be covered. (I.E. we've become a nation of insurance trolls.)
And then they wonder why the insurance companies tighten up what they will and won't cover.
The other half of the problem is de-mutualization... Rather than insurance companies being mutual companies, where the profits (if any) are plowed back into reducing premiums, they have become corporations where the profits are funneled to stockholders.
Back then they were able to link landing on the moon with beating the Russians, which at the time virtually guaranteed as much money as you could possibly want to accomplish the goal.
Of course, after that goal was reached, NASA's funding was slashed
That's what the urban legend would have you believe, but as usual, the reality is much different.
In reality, NASA's peak funding (during the Moon race) was in 1965 - and was slashed dramatically in '66/'67. (Before the Saturn V even flew, it's production was already capped!) By the time Apollo 11 landed, four missions of the planned sequence had already been cut and the program was starting to run on fumes.
Where a high voltage appliance will be placed, a high voltage outlet is provided and plainly different from the lower voltage outlets. No significant thinking needed.
That's more than 'no thinking'. Actually my experience while in countries with a dual standard is usually more frustrating when wanting to plug in a low voltage appliance. "I'll just plug my laptop in here to charge... oh bollocks, it's the wrong shape socket."
In other words, having to think for about 2 seconds amounts to a major deficiency to the standard in your estimation... Or, to put it less kindly - having been shown to be in error, you are now reduced to nitpicking.
You're also reduced to arguing from ignorance. The example you cite is unlikely in the extreme to occur in the US because the number of high voltage outlets provided is low, and they are in places where you aren't likely to plug in a laptop anyhow. (Not to mention that despite that, there is almost invariably there is a low voltage plug handy anyhow.)
What's wrong with a system where you don't have to *think* about whether a given socket works with a given appliance?
I don't have to really think about whether a given socket works with a given appliance even under our 'two standard' system. Where a high voltage appliance will be placed, a high voltage outlet is provided and plainly different from the lower voltage outlets. No significant thinking needed, put the appliance in the provided place and plug into the appropriate outlet.
The only place I need to apply significant thinking is my wood shop - but in having one in the first place, I'm an outlier. And I really only have to think because the garage wasn't wired for being a workshop in the first place. That'll be fixed next spring when I remodel it and fix other deficiencies caused by me using it for a purpose it wasn't built for.
As far as heaters go, you've created a circular definition... "We have high voltage outlets, therefore we have high capacity heaters. And since we have high capacity heaters, we have to have high voltage outlets". You can heat a house perfectly adequately using 110v, and I have done so.
I think the point is that you don't have dual standards for high wattage appliances and "everything else". So a standard UK socket will always have enough oomph to power a tumble drier, an electric oven, heaters etc.
Well, I'll give you that. If I ever need to power a dryer or oven in my bedroom, I'll curse the fates that I'm not British. (And then go use the proper plugs provided in the locations for those appliances. IOW, your answer makes no sense.) As far as a heater goes, again - 110V works just fine. (And I live in a climate virtually identical to the UK's.)
I'd love to have 220V coming out of the wall sockets as half the world does; it's unlikely to be more dangerous than the 120 we have now, and would allow for products with twice the power of currently available one (think vacuums, table saws, etc).
But really, what the hell for? My Delta (hybrid) tablesaw does just for normal use on 110v*, as does my vacuum cleaner. I mean, like any red-blooded American, I'd love for my electrical penis to be bigger - but rationally I cannot come up with any other reason.
*My experience is that people having problems with their saws are usually using a misaligned cheap ass saw with a dull piece-of-shit blade. If they had 220V available, they'd still have the same problem.
You might say, well, the US plug can't carry as much current for heavy loads. It's true that you can't get as much power through a single US plug as you can through a UK 13A plug, but that's because the voltage is higher. The US plug can carry 15A at 125V all day long. My wire feed welder works just fine plugged into a normal US 15A outlet - the plug doesn't even get warm.
I was about to say much the same thing - what they hell are the Brits plugging in that they need so much current? My woodshop has nothing but 110V [pro am level] equipment, and I have no problem whatsoever.
In my mind, modifying the internals of a consumer off the shelf product makes it, by definition, non-identical.
That may be true in your mind, but so what? That doesn't make it standard usage. Nor does it change the fact that the guys who actually do the stuff regard them as off the shelf.
Also, stop being a drama queen with statements like "You've been exposed as a fraud." You're turning a rational and logical argument into a petty one.
It hasn't been a rational argument since your first post - when you falsely claimed to be an authority and to have special knowledge.
Of course, that's just me. Since I'm not suffering from the "self-induced panic of the year", I don't tend to see things the way other people who do suffer the problem do....
No, you're not suffering from the "self-induced panic of the year". You're suffering from the "self important asshole of the year".
But, no, I really don't see a need to "solve" a problem that doesn't seem to result in extra fatalities, extra accidents, extra costs, extra anything.
Ah. Having been shown to have made an idiotic assumption, you now move the goalposts from "hasn't killed anyone 'extra'" (which you have failed to prove) to something entirely different in a futile attempt to make yourself look like less of an idiot and to puff up your own self image. (IOW, you've failed to demonstrate that the problem doesn't seem to result in extra fatalities, accidents, etc...)
For that matter, it doesn't have to result in statistically 'extra' fatalities, accidents, etc., to be a problem - you haven't shown that the accidents attributed to distracted drivers are a minor cause. Or a major cause. Or anything. All you've done is state your opinion ("well, we aren't killing so many people so it obviously isn't a problem") as though it represented a fact.
When the electronics, displays, interfaces, etc... are all identical (I.E. all of the primary functionality) are unchanged, and the only changes are to peripheral functions, then to all intents and purposed they are identical to off the shelf consumer grade equipment. "Based on" implies significant functional and operational modifications to primary systems and functionality.
IOW, no. I didn't "prove your point", I showed (as others did) just how wrong you are. You've been exposed as a fraud.
Actually I had a friend that worked for NASA. A lot of the important software for experiments was written in Java. A lot of the experiments on the ISS are not high demand and in a lot of labs around the work there are a lot of PCs running a lot of VB code. So yes I think that there is a good chance that a good amount of it is also running on the ISS.
Your conclusion does not follow from your premise. Just because 'a lot of the software written in Java' does not justify the leap to 'therefore there is a lot of VB code'. And don't you find it odd that your friend knows they use Java - but not whether or not they use VB?
It is a real shame that they are using Windows for everything on the ISS. I would love to see some of the stuff they use released as FOSS.
I hate to break this to you - but FOSS is agnostic about which OS the software was written to run under. People can and have released FOSS for Windows.
I'm talking about the code that monitors the experiments too. Years or decades of preparation, millions of dollars spent, operated by someone who didn't design or build it... And you think the experimenter would leave a 'thrown together' VB app in place?
For the most part they are indeed off the shelf with the exception of adding some extra cooling fans to accommodate the lower pressure that the station maintains during EVAs
The station doesn't change pressure during EVAs - you're confusing it with the Shuttle. The station has the two airlock modules (one each Russian and American) specifically so that EVA astronauts can 'camp out' in them and get used to a different pressure and atmosphere mix without having to expose the experiments and other crew to those changed conditions.
Slashdot Mirror
And Slashdot, being largely anti government and anti corporate eats that FUD like candy.
Just because it was invented by somebody (or somebodies) who once invented something great a long time ago in a land far away doesn't meant that it automatically the most coolest, correctest thing ever. The once greats do fade, or get bats in the belfry, etc... etc...
They pretty much explicitly state that in TFA - the 'simple' and 'fun' stuff is done, now it's up to the [currently theoretical] community to dig in and do the hard stuff.
Of course, being Google branded and Open Source (two of the top 'auto orgasm' buttons among a huge swath of geeks) there will be, at least in the beginning, a fairly large community. I'll be very surprised if there isn't a Wiki by morning, and I'll be there's half a dozen or more Waves about it by now.
Open Source.
Google branded.
It doesn't need anything novel when it hits two of the top orgasm buttons among many geeks, techies, and wanna bees. All that's missing for a grand slam is a connection to Apple.
I was about to say - missing a 7 meter asteroid passing at that distance is roughly akin to missing a pea in the middle of the highway you're currently doing 60MPH down. In rush hour traffic.
You have to collect all the water as it comes off the dome, lest you end up eroding your foundations. Even in a light rain, a dome a mile across is going to accumulate a lot of water. Worse yet, it's going to be moving quite fast by the time it reaches the edge of dome.
So lets do a little math... 1/4 cu in/hour (a fairly light rain) gives 36 cubic inches per square foot of roof surface. 36 inches/sq ft times the area of a dome a mile in diameter (21,237,166 sq ft) gives 764,537,976 cubic inches of water. Divide that by the number of cubic inches in a gallon (231) and you get 3,300,000 gallons of water per hour for a light spring rain. A little Googling reveals the 100 yr storm level (your worst case design scenario) to be 2 inches/hour - or over 25 million gallons/hr to be dealt with.
That's a significant engineering problem.
Wouldn't have cost much money - and would have accomplished diddley squat (shipboard amplifiers wouldn't up to the task). Doesn't matter anyways, as the telegram directed shore stations to do the listening.
However, that doesn't fit the usual usage of the word 'greenhouse', nor does it strike me as particularly energy efficient.
For certain large values of trivial, yes. You're trying to collect all the rain that falls on the dome at the edge of the dome - which, for even a light rain, is going to be a considerable quantity of water. New England also occasionally get smacked by hurricanes, which mean you have to be able to handle torrential rainfalls as well.
Which, as they GP correctly points out, breaks the model.
Part of the problem is that many people have come to view insurance as kind of a slot machine - one where you put in your nickel, pull the handle, and get a jackpot every single time. Rather than being a recourse for emergencies, insurance is not treated (more or less) a source of income that happens to match whatever debt needs to be covered. (I.E. we've become a nation of insurance trolls.)
And then they wonder why the insurance companies tighten up what they will and won't cover.
The other half of the problem is de-mutualization... Rather than insurance companies being mutual companies, where the profits (if any) are plowed back into reducing premiums, they have become corporations where the profits are funneled to stockholders.
That's what the urban legend would have you believe, but as usual, the reality is much different.
In reality, NASA's peak funding (during the Moon race) was in 1965 - and was slashed dramatically in '66/'67. (Before the Saturn V even flew, it's production was already capped!) By the time Apollo 11 landed, four missions of the planned sequence had already been cut and the program was starting to run on fumes.
Which means you have a house forty years old, so what? English or American, no forty year old house is wired to modern standards.
In other words, having to think for about 2 seconds amounts to a major deficiency to the standard in your estimation... Or, to put it less kindly - having been shown to be in error, you are now reduced to nitpicking.
You're also reduced to arguing from ignorance. The example you cite is unlikely in the extreme to occur in the US because the number of high voltage outlets provided is low, and they are in places where you aren't likely to plug in a laptop anyhow. (Not to mention that despite that, there is almost invariably there is a low voltage plug handy anyhow.)
I don't have to really think about whether a given socket works with a given appliance even under our 'two standard' system. Where a high voltage appliance will be placed, a high voltage outlet is provided and plainly different from the lower voltage outlets. No significant thinking needed, put the appliance in the provided place and plug into the appropriate outlet.
The only place I need to apply significant thinking is my wood shop - but in having one in the first place, I'm an outlier. And I really only have to think because the garage wasn't wired for being a workshop in the first place. That'll be fixed next spring when I remodel it and fix other deficiencies caused by me using it for a purpose it wasn't built for.
As far as heaters go, you've created a circular definition... "We have high voltage outlets, therefore we have high capacity heaters. And since we have high capacity heaters, we have to have high voltage outlets". You can heat a house perfectly adequately using 110v, and I have done so.
Well, I'll give you that. If I ever need to power a dryer or oven in my bedroom, I'll curse the fates that I'm not British. (And then go use the proper plugs provided in the locations for those appliances. IOW, your answer makes no sense.) As far as a heater goes, again - 110V works just fine. (And I live in a climate virtually identical to the UK's.)
But really, what the hell for? My Delta (hybrid) tablesaw does just for normal use on 110v*, as does my vacuum cleaner. I mean, like any red-blooded American, I'd love for my electrical penis to be bigger - but rationally I cannot come up with any other reason.
*My experience is that people having problems with their saws are usually using a misaligned cheap ass saw with a dull piece-of-shit blade. If they had 220V available, they'd still have the same problem.
I was about to say much the same thing - what they hell are the Brits plugging in that they need so much current? My woodshop has nothing but 110V [pro am level] equipment, and I have no problem whatsoever.
That may be true in your mind, but so what? That doesn't make it standard usage. Nor does it change the fact that the guys who actually do the stuff regard them as off the shelf.
It hasn't been a rational argument since your first post - when you falsely claimed to be an authority and to have special knowledge.
No, you're not suffering from the "self-induced panic of the year". You're suffering from the "self important asshole of the year".
Ah. Having been shown to have made an idiotic assumption, you now move the goalposts from "hasn't killed anyone 'extra'" (which you have failed to prove) to something entirely different in a futile attempt to make yourself look like less of an idiot and to puff up your own self image. (IOW, you've failed to demonstrate that the problem doesn't seem to result in extra fatalities, accidents, etc...)
For that matter, it doesn't have to result in statistically 'extra' fatalities, accidents, etc., to be a problem - you haven't shown that the accidents attributed to distracted drivers are a minor cause. Or a major cause. Or anything. All you've done is state your opinion ("well, we aren't killing so many people so it obviously isn't a problem") as though it represented a fact.
It never occurred to you that just because nobody died in the accident that doesn't mean there weren't other consequences?
When the electronics, displays, interfaces, etc... are all identical (I.E. all of the primary functionality) are unchanged, and the only changes are to peripheral functions, then to all intents and purposed they are identical to off the shelf consumer grade equipment. "Based on" implies significant functional and operational modifications to primary systems and functionality.
IOW, no. I didn't "prove your point", I showed (as others did) just how wrong you are. You've been exposed as a fraud.
Your conclusion does not follow from your premise. Just because 'a lot of the software written in Java' does not justify the leap to 'therefore there is a lot of VB code'. And don't you find it odd that your friend knows they use Java - but not whether or not they use VB?
I hate to break this to you - but FOSS is agnostic about which OS the software was written to run under. People can and have released FOSS for Windows.
I'm talking about the code that monitors the experiments too. Years or decades of preparation, millions of dollars spent, operated by someone who didn't design or build it... And you think the experimenter would leave a 'thrown together' VB app in place?
I suspect precisely none. The ISS is about the last place you want a 'thrown together' control app.
The station doesn't change pressure during EVAs - you're confusing it with the Shuttle. The station has the two airlock modules (one each Russian and American) specifically so that EVA astronauts can 'camp out' in them and get used to a different pressure and atmosphere mix without having to expose the experiments and other crew to those changed conditions.