"It sets the standard for future Mars mission simulations." The fact that it says "for future Mars mission simulations" instead of just "for Mars missions" shows how far away we really are.
Which doesn't surprise anyone actually familiar with the technology and the process. Contrary to the beliefs of many in the space fanboy community we are far from ready - but the problem isn't the technology, but because while much of the research has been done, almost none of the development has. Or, as I've pointed out before - if we, back in November 1998, could have waved a magic wand and created a completed ISS - and put it on a trajectory for Mars... Odds are the crew would be dead from system [equipment] failure.
If I think of it as a psychology experiment, I'd get even more testy. Long duration isolation experiments are old hat. Then there is real world experience like crews wintering over in the Antarctic. (Or head over to the US Sub Vets national convention - you'll find guys who have done 100 days submerged by the gross lot.) You have the 'closed loop enviroment/isolation' studies done a decade back by NASA, and you have Biosphere II as an example of how not to do it.
Then there are stunts like 'living on Mars time' - which has already been done (by the Spirit and Opportunity control teams). Why would you do that? Why would you want to force your mission clock 'out of sync' with the local solar clock, except as a stunt?
The simple fact is, the Devon Island station is nothing more than a PR stunt. Driven by Robert Zubrin's ego it has been a multiyear exercise in re-inventing the wheel. TFA is correct when it says 'Their pioneering simulation of crew operations on Mars time is by far the best work on this topic ever done. It sets the standard for future Mars mission simulations.', but what it doesn't tell you is how abysmally *low* that standard is.
American kids aren't avoiding math and science for lack of funds. They avoid math and science because its HARD and not cool. They are more interested in sports and MTV and shopping and spending their parent's money than they are in learning how to do anything that takes effort. If they can't charge it to daddy's credit card, it's not happening. Of course this is an over-generalization, but you know its true.
It's not true - because it presupposed a mythical golden era where American kids didn't prefer other [era and socioeconomic level appropriate] activities and fields of study to math, science, and engineering.
The overall effect was to to take 1 m2 down to 10 sqcm of chips.. and yet have the power output be about the same.
Which matters how if it still takes up 1 m2 of roof space?
Concentrator systems leave me cold because of this. They concentrate (pardon the pun) on increasing the output per cm2 of solar cell - when the real need is to increase the output per m2 of roof space occupied. (The difference is subtle, but important.)
I'd add a few prewritten flashcards for 'no', 'yes', and 'thanks for dropping by'. Other than that, you've nailed it right on the head.
High tech stuff can break, crash, have its batteries die, etc... etc... Why keep forcing its use rather than questioning whether or not it is appropriate in the first place?
On ancient technology, more than one archaeological site has been utterly destroyed - partially or totally unmapped and unstudied - because some country or other wanted to build a dam. Water is important, sure, but you can collect water in any number of ways, and even if the dam is imperative, it'll take years to decades to build. Allowing scientists a few months to collect irreplaceable data isn't going to kill anyone or anything. Denying them does kill our chances of understanding the past.
If the dam takes years-to-decades to build... Why in hell aren't the scientists and archeologists out there doing their digging and collecting from friggin' day one of earth moving? They keep getting denied because they wait till the last damn minute - and then complain loudly they don't have time to do in a few months what they've put off for years-to-decades.
I just love it when online nobodies try to twist and distort things to feel cool.
I didn't distort anything - I identified you for the asshole you are. Something you further prove by your choice of words and perjoratives in your reply.
Also, Einstein, it doesn't take much research or thought to realize that a repair or break in a pipe is going to be a huge problem.
Well Mister 'Expert' then you are also aware that a repair or a break in a line hung from poles is going to be a huge problem. And you are also undoubtedly aware that a repair or a break in a line in a dedicated conduit is going to be a huge problem as well. Etc... Etc...
Or, in short, you are making shit up to make yourself look good. (Me, I don't have to make myself look good or 'cool'.)
Oh, and YES, I am an expert in networks... I don't just claim to be.
Yeah, your MCSE probably looks really shiny on your wall. When you get out in the real world and deal with a real network, get back to me. (And when you do the research you claim to have not done, you'll know the facts. Like so much else in both of your replies, it's telling that you can't be bothered.)
OK, I'll admit I haven't researched this "technology" but I do run one of the top 50 largest university networks in the U.S. [...]
This is just plain stupid.
I just love it when someone admits he doesn't know anything about the situation... Then claims to be de facto an expert... And then claims that a widely deployed method of installing fiber and cables is 'stupid'.
However, the problem they can't solve is that in the US, the town water authority would be in direct competition with a private company, a big no-no. The existing players would raise hell if it were tried in a community on more than a point to point basis (and even that would get a lot of attention).
That's the meme that runs around the Hivemind... But like many such memes, I often how much of it is truth, and how much crap that's been made up/assumed with disregard for the fact?
Right in the county where I live, the Public Utility District is not only allowed to lay such fibre by law, but also the route isn't point-to-point... In fact it's a complete backbone for the bulk of the county. (Those areas of the county where it isn't are either a) extremely low population density or b) where the municipalities are actively resisting granting right-of-way.) Also the existing players (the cable and telephone companies) have been quite cooperative in granting right-of-way, assisting with construction, and coordinating maintenance acess. (One of my best friends is the head of the project.)
In fact - the organization that came up with the idea, and pushed it through to fruition, is a public utility in direct competition with multiple private ones.
fish spawning, methane and changes to the micro climate don't effect the dam's ability to generate electricity, so it is still renewable energy. Renewable != earth loving hippy compatible.
Fish spawning certainly does effect the dam's ability to generate electricity. Water diverted to fish ladders is water that doesn't go through the turbines for example. Depending on the fish species and river conditions sometimes dam operators have to sometimes either withold or increase water going downstream to control conditions downstream.
I work at a nuclear power plant. We have a limit for the temperature of the river downstream of our returned cooling water for environmental reasons, not reasons related to the power generation process. I suspect the TVA has a similar requirement.
I too have worked on nuclear power plants, and yes the inlet temperature to the condensers effects power generation - because it directly effects the efficiency of the condensers and hence the efficiency of the turbines. You can't change the temperatures anywhere in the system without affecting the operation of the remainder of the system.
Or they are people who, Oh don't know - run a useful and popular free-to-use Web resource and need to raise some income to maintain the service.
Which means, of course, that they're legally guaranteed to make an income and anyone who doesn't pay them is breaking the law.
First off I'll not that claims of 'breaking the law' is FUD of your own creation.
To claim that a user is stealing from you by choosing to not view your ads is delusional.
Really, this is no different than a brick-and-mortar location running off the teens hanging out in the parking lot, or folks that have been sitting in a booth for two hours and have only bought one cup of coffee. It's their business, and their decision to make. (And I'll point out - there are plenty of brick and mortar places that do so, and don't go out of business. Thus, any claims that doing so 'virtually' to Firefox users is a death knell stands on very shakey grounds.)
I notice, by the way that you are posting on a free ad-funded Web site.
Funny example, that - Slashdot probably has one of the highest ratios of users capable of ad-blocking of any site on the entire web, yet manages to pay the bills. Curious...
Slashdot has a parent company with other revenue streams - I don't find it unlikely that they would treat Slashdot as a loss leader.
This is only going to be fixed one way. NASA has to start giving out copious quantities of interesting video from shuttle flights to the media, and completely seal away from the media any talk of damage or problems. The damage has been of no real significance every time, but it is the only thing we're talking about.
I wouldn't take NASA to task for not keeping the media up-to-date when you don't do so for yourself.
NASA does give copious quantities of information to the media. (Video, still, and text, plus press conferences daily.) By and large the media chooses to do nothing with the information, and NASA can't force them to.
Insofar as 'interesting' video goes, NASA can't do much about that - they do what they do, even if it doesn't look sexy. I mean have you ever watched, really watched, the live feed of a spacewalk? It's boring as hell - it's like watching a video of a mechanic working on your car, slowed down 4:1. (It's fascinating to me personally, but it's not going to be to Joe Sixpack.) There's really no way to make it 'interesting'.
Though, parenthetically speaking, I imagine NASA could use creative editing to create the same kind of false drama found on 'reality documentaries' like Deadliest Catch or Ice Road Truckers... But is it a good use of our tax dollars not only to lie to the public, but create a false impression thereby?
And I'm sure thats the only thing the astronauts were worried about as well... the precious shuttle.
From a certain point of view - that's all that really does matter.
Astronauts are a dime-a-dozen. NASA currently has nearly 150 on the payroll - even if we fired the crew after each flight, we could fly 20 missions before we needed more. For every astronaut NASA currently has, there are 10 or more equally well qualified candidates available to be hired and trained.
But the Shuttle itself is a nearly unique piece of irreplaceable hardware. If we lose another, the program ends. Not from politics and public outcry (though that will play a factor certainly), but because NASA won't be able to meet any kind of a schedule. (Since each mission requires two shuttles, one for the mission and one standing by a rescue mission.)
Maybe CD's were/are fragile to someone who just 'throws stuff into a pile', but I was raised to take care of my things. (Didn't have a lot of money, so stuff that got broke might not get replaced.) I never find putting vinyl/tapes/CDs back into their cases to be much of a burden.
No, the current system rewards those who perform services that the economy at large values. It's really just as simple as that. "Contact with the financial system" (whatever that means) has nothing to do with it at all. (Examine the recompense of professional athletes or entertainment figures for example.)
As to the claim that scientists a priori add more value, I've never found that an easy claim to swallow as it invariably requires special pleadings to make the case.
Actually, I got my info from a co-worker who saw a photo printed from one of the high-resolution military satellites. I've never known him to be a liar, so I trust that when he says he saw a photo that resolved printing on a one centimeter object, that indeed it is for real.
He might not be a liar - but he is (at a minimum) exaggerating somewhat, or misunderstood what he saw.
In TFA they mentioned that in the past, the DOD would sometimes provide info to the Feds. I recall that after the Oklahoma City Bombing, it was mentioned on the radio that one of the perps was caught because he traveled 200 miles away from the bombing the fastest of anyone else. How, in 1995, would you measure who drove 70 miles an hour, for over 200 miles, specifically away from Oklahoma City directly after the bombing?
All manner of things get misreported in the press, and misremembered years later. (I've done it myself.) Doing a little research on the web finds no mention of such an incident - and the details of McVeigh's and Nichols' capture match what I remember. It's possible, nay probable, that they misreported details of McVeigh's arrest (he was headed away from OKC and picked up for not having the proper license plate).
If such a thing was a minor detail - it's possible that they noted the speed (after their capture) they same way my dad once knew I'd sped from Charleston to home, he knew what time I left and what time I arrived... and did the math. (This was in 1984.)
We are not only behind in science. We are also illiterate. Most people never read any classic texts.
And you want to know the hard and unpleasant truth? This has been true for decades - if not for centuries, right back to the founding of the Republic. If you want answers - you'll have to look elsewhere than comparing a mythologized golden age of yesterday with the reality of today.
And they (the movies) have been just as bad about science and engineering (and history, and just about everything else) for decades - Speed isn't anything new, merely the latest in a long line.
That is part of the problem, but it is not the root of it. The real problem is that science and engineering are no longer as valued in society as they were during the space race and among the generation who grew up watching those early successes and failures as the cold war and the space race between the United States and the Soviet Union unfolded upon their television screens and in their imaginations. If you ask the more ambitious youngsters today what they want to be when they grow up then you will hear lawyer, CEO, real estate investor, professional athlete, and the next American Idol long before you will hear scientist or engineer.
And if you'd asked kids back during the space race - you'd have gotten pretty much the same answers (slightly modified to account for differences in era). There has never been a "golden age" where some large and significant demographic wanted to be scientists or engineers.Never.
This pernicious meme has absolutely no basis in truth.
Post WWII, and especially in the 60's, there was a massive shortage of trained and qualified engineers. (To the degree that it's arguable whether we would have gotten to the moon if the Avro Arrow hadn't been cancelled - because virtually every engineer from there came to work in the US for NASA or a contractor.) As always, shortages mean rising salaries. Rising salaries (along with the field being, briefly, glamorous) means kids going into college are more likely to chose that track, regardless of their earlier intentions. But booms and fads never last do they? When the boom in engineering came to an abrupt halt in the early 70's - kids stopped picking engineering as a career track. Salaries fell as the field became overcrowded - and the field, through no fault of its own, fell back into being the workaday field it had been before.
Does this sound familiar? It should - because it's the exact same arc that CS/IT has followed over the last decade or so.
We just need to ensure that we teach our children critical thinking skills.
That's going to be a hard job - when so damm few adults have any idea what critical thinking means. (And that includes many slashgeeks who toss the term around without the faintest idea what it actually entails.)
Why bother working hard in school, when you can make 6 figures as a real estate broker without ever worrying about anything but a nice smile and the ability to sell an absolute lemon to even the most simple and innocent buyer.
I suspect you've never tried to sell real estate then - because somebody that is 'nothing but a salesman' will fail. Selling real estate not only involves the sales- but managing the interaction between seller & buyer, working with mortgage brokers, dealing with city/county/state authorities on a variety of matters (inspections, codes, taxes), working with building inspectors (and understanding their reports)... It's a fairly complex job.
Slashdot Mirror
Which doesn't surprise anyone actually familiar with the technology and the process. Contrary to the beliefs of many in the space fanboy community we are far from ready - but the problem isn't the technology, but because while much of the research has been done, almost none of the development has. Or, as I've pointed out before - if we, back in November 1998, could have waved a magic wand and created a completed ISS - and put it on a trajectory for Mars... Odds are the crew would be dead from system [equipment] failure.
If I think of it as a psychology experiment, I'd get even more testy. Long duration isolation experiments are old hat. Then there is real world experience like crews wintering over in the Antarctic. (Or head over to the US Sub Vets national convention - you'll find guys who have done 100 days submerged by the gross lot.) You have the 'closed loop enviroment/isolation' studies done a decade back by NASA, and you have Biosphere II as an example of how not to do it.
Then there are stunts like 'living on Mars time' - which has already been done (by the Spirit and Opportunity control teams). Why would you do that? Why would you want to force your mission clock 'out of sync' with the local solar clock, except as a stunt?
The simple fact is, the Devon Island station is nothing more than a PR stunt. Driven by Robert Zubrin's ego it has been a multiyear exercise in re-inventing the wheel. TFA is correct when it says 'Their pioneering simulation of crew operations on Mars time is by far the best work on this topic ever done. It sets the standard for future Mars mission simulations.', but what it doesn't tell you is how abysmally *low* that standard is.
It's not true - because it presupposed a mythical golden era where American kids didn't prefer other [era and socioeconomic level appropriate] activities and fields of study to math, science, and engineering.
There never was such a golden age.
The likely end state is still the same - 'flooding the profession/field with irreverent or apathetic just-want-to-graduate students'.
Which matters how if it still takes up 1 m2 of roof space?
Concentrator systems leave me cold because of this. They concentrate (pardon the pun) on increasing the output per cm2 of solar cell - when the real need is to increase the output per m2 of roof space occupied. (The difference is subtle, but important.)
I'd add a few prewritten flashcards for 'no', 'yes', and 'thanks for dropping by'. Other than that, you've nailed it right on the head.
High tech stuff can break, crash, have its batteries die, etc... etc... Why keep forcing its use rather than questioning whether or not it is appropriate in the first place?
If the dam takes years-to-decades to build... Why in hell aren't the scientists and archeologists out there doing their digging and collecting from friggin' day one of earth moving? They keep getting denied because they wait till the last damn minute - and then complain loudly they don't have time to do in a few months what they've put off for years-to-decades.
I didn't distort anything - I identified you for the asshole you are. Something you further prove by your choice of words and perjoratives in your reply.
Well Mister 'Expert' then you are also aware that a repair or a break in a line hung from poles is going to be a huge problem. And you are also undoubtedly aware that a repair or a break in a line in a dedicated conduit is going to be a huge problem as well. Etc... Etc...
Or, in short, you are making shit up to make yourself look good. (Me, I don't have to make myself look good or 'cool'.)
Yeah, your MCSE probably looks really shiny on your wall. When you get out in the real world and deal with a real network, get back to me. (And when you do the research you claim to have not done, you'll know the facts. Like so much else in both of your replies, it's telling that you can't be bothered.)
I just love it when someone admits he doesn't know anything about the situation... Then claims to be de facto an expert... And then claims that a widely deployed method of installing fiber and cables is 'stupid'.
That's the meme that runs around the Hivemind... But like many such memes, I often how much of it is truth, and how much crap that's been made up/assumed with disregard for the fact?
Right in the county where I live, the Public Utility District is not only allowed to lay such fibre by law, but also the route isn't point-to-point... In fact it's a complete backbone for the bulk of the county. (Those areas of the county where it isn't are either a) extremely low population density or b) where the municipalities are actively resisting granting right-of-way.) Also the existing players (the cable and telephone companies) have been quite cooperative in granting right-of-way, assisting with construction, and coordinating maintenance acess. (One of my best friends is the head of the project.)
In fact - the organization that came up with the idea, and pushed it through to fruition, is a public utility in direct competition with multiple private ones.
At you hit the nail on the head without even realizing it;
Preparing reasonably accurate, easily digested science popularization isn't easy. Making it easily available [via a youtube clone] won't change that.
Fish spawning certainly does effect the dam's ability to generate electricity. Water diverted to fish ladders is water that doesn't go through the turbines for example. Depending on the fish species and river conditions sometimes dam operators have to sometimes either withold or increase water going downstream to control conditions downstream.
I too have worked on nuclear power plants, and yes the inlet temperature to the condensers effects power generation - because it directly effects the efficiency of the condensers and hence the efficiency of the turbines. You can't change the temperatures anywhere in the system without affecting the operation of the remainder of the system.
First off I'll not that claims of 'breaking the law' is FUD of your own creation.
Really, this is no different than a brick-and-mortar location running off the teens hanging out in the parking lot, or folks that have been sitting in a booth for two hours and have only bought one cup of coffee. It's their business, and their decision to make. (And I'll point out - there are plenty of brick and mortar places that do so, and don't go out of business. Thus, any claims that doing so 'virtually' to Firefox users is a death knell stands on very shakey grounds.)
Slashdot has a parent company with other revenue streams - I don't find it unlikely that they would treat Slashdot as a loss leader.
I wouldn't take NASA to task for not keeping the media up-to-date when you don't do so for yourself.
NASA does give copious quantities of information to the media. (Video, still, and text, plus press conferences daily.) By and large the media chooses to do nothing with the information, and NASA can't force them to.
Insofar as 'interesting' video goes, NASA can't do much about that - they do what they do, even if it doesn't look sexy. I mean have you ever watched, really watched, the live feed of a spacewalk? It's boring as hell - it's like watching a video of a mechanic working on your car, slowed down 4:1. (It's fascinating to me personally, but it's not going to be to Joe Sixpack.) There's really no way to make it 'interesting'.
Though, parenthetically speaking, I imagine NASA could use creative editing to create the same kind of false drama found on 'reality documentaries' like Deadliest Catch or Ice Road Truckers... But is it a good use of our tax dollars not only to lie to the public, but create a false impression thereby?
From a certain point of view - that's all that really does matter.
Astronauts are a dime-a-dozen. NASA currently has nearly 150 on the payroll - even if we fired the crew after each flight, we could fly 20 missions before we needed more. For every astronaut NASA currently has, there are 10 or more equally well qualified candidates available to be hired and trained.
But the Shuttle itself is a nearly unique piece of irreplaceable hardware. If we lose another, the program ends. Not from politics and public outcry (though that will play a factor certainly), but because NASA won't be able to meet any kind of a schedule. (Since each mission requires two shuttles, one for the mission and one standing by a rescue mission.)
Maybe CD's were/are fragile to someone who just 'throws stuff into a pile', but I was raised to take care of my things. (Didn't have a lot of money, so stuff that got broke might not get replaced.) I never find putting vinyl/tapes/CDs back into their cases to be much of a burden.
No, the current system rewards those who perform services that the economy at large values. It's really just as simple as that. "Contact with the financial system" (whatever that means) has nothing to do with it at all. (Examine the recompense of professional athletes or entertainment figures for example.)
As to the claim that scientists a priori add more value, I've never found that an easy claim to swallow as it invariably requires special pleadings to make the case.
He might not be a liar - but he is (at a minimum) exaggerating somewhat, or misunderstood what he saw.
All manner of things get misreported in the press, and misremembered years later. (I've done it myself.) Doing a little research on the web finds no mention of such an incident - and the details of McVeigh's and Nichols' capture match what I remember. It's possible, nay probable, that they misreported details of McVeigh's arrest (he was headed away from OKC and picked up for not having the proper license plate).
If such a thing was a minor detail - it's possible that they noted the speed (after their capture) they same way my dad once knew I'd sped from Charleston to home, he knew what time I left and what time I arrived... and did the math. (This was in 1984.)
And you want to know the hard and unpleasant truth? This has been true for decades - if not for centuries, right back to the founding of the Republic. If you want answers - you'll have to look elsewhere than comparing a mythologized golden age of yesterday with the reality of today.
And they (the movies) have been just as bad about science and engineering (and history, and just about everything else) for decades - Speed isn't anything new, merely the latest in a long line.
And if you'd asked kids back during the space race - you'd have gotten pretty much the same answers (slightly modified to account for differences in era). There has never been a "golden age" where some large and significant demographic wanted to be scientists or engineers. Never.
This pernicious meme has absolutely no basis in truth.
Post WWII, and especially in the 60's, there was a massive shortage of trained and qualified engineers. (To the degree that it's arguable whether we would have gotten to the moon if the Avro Arrow hadn't been cancelled - because virtually every engineer from there came to work in the US for NASA or a contractor.) As always, shortages mean rising salaries. Rising salaries (along with the field being, briefly, glamorous) means kids going into college are more likely to chose that track, regardless of their earlier intentions. But booms and fads never last do they? When the boom in engineering came to an abrupt halt in the early 70's - kids stopped picking engineering as a career track. Salaries fell as the field became overcrowded - and the field, through no fault of its own, fell back into being the workaday field it had been before.
Does this sound familiar? It should - because it's the exact same arc that CS/IT has followed over the last decade or so.
That's going to be a hard job - when so damm few adults have any idea what critical thinking means. (And that includes many slashgeeks who toss the term around without the faintest idea what it actually entails.)
I suspect you've never tried to sell real estate then - because somebody that is 'nothing but a salesman' will fail. Selling real estate not only involves the sales- but managing the interaction between seller & buyer, working with mortgage brokers, dealing with city/county/state authorities on a variety of matters (inspections, codes, taxes), working with building inspectors (and understanding their reports)... It's a fairly complex job.