For example, they only have two satalites up there. Sirius has three, which offers them some redundancy if one craps out on them.
Actually, the way the networks are designed, this isn't true. XM satellites are in geosynchrynous orbit - one serves the eastern US and the other the western US. If one 'bird' goes out, then half the country loses the signal. The Sirius satellites are in a highly elliptical orbit; as one completes its sweep over the coverage area, another is beginning its sweep. The signal graph looks like a three-phase power graph - three superimposed sine waves that average out to a more or less DC signal. So if a Sirius bird goes off-line, you lose signal coverage for 1/3 of the orbit period.
Both companies probably have backup birds on the ground, ready to launch should a failure occur.
A good summary of the technical details can be found here (Sirius) and here (XM)
According to Neal Boortz in his news section this morning, WSB in Atlanta is solving the problem by filtering out the commercials from the webcasts. Makes sense to me... could end up being another source of revenue for the stations also, as they could sell streamed commercials separately.
Plus, if you get in an accident... there's plenty of rubbing alcohol around to clean your cuts with! Now if they could figure out how to run a car on Bactine...
Both parties already pay taxes - that's not what this is about. The manufacturer pays taxes on the materials that are shipped and on the resources that they consume wherever they're located. Likewise, I pay property tax and income tax to cover that on my end. To say that the sale and subsequent shipment uses public resources any more than usual is ridiculous. Do I pay tax when I ship a birthday present to my dad? The government is already taxing us to death; to add a tax on a transaction that doesn't consume any additional resources is irresponsible.
What government resources do internet merchants consume? Bricks-and-mortar merchants utilize an infrastructure that's built up by the government (roads, sewer, traffic lights, etc.) and thus should pay taxes. Internet merchants use no such infrastructure - so why tax them? If there is some value-added from the government, then it could be justified, but levying taxes on internet merchants - especially by local governments is particularly absurd. My government in Atlanta isn't providing any service for a merchant based in Seattle or California or wherever. Taxation "just because bricks-and-mortar merchants are taxed" makes no sense at all.
This can be a tricky situation, particularly for the employer. A co-op is as valuable as the mentoring he/she is given, in my experience. The typical sequence of co-opdom is this:
Co-op is hired because engineers are overworked
Co-op does menial tasks or (more often) sits around because the engineers are too over-worked to think up stuff for the co-op to do
A 'good' co-op project comes around; co-op does a good job and is given more responsibility
Co-op gets more and more stuff to do
Co-op becomes equivalent over-worked engineer; newbie co-op is hired...
I guess the moral here is to stick it out, do a good job and keep asking for more responsibility. Nothing pissed me off more than seeing a co-op playing solitare instead of pounding the bushes for stuff to do. Having been on both sides of the coin, I can say that 'industry experience' is worth it, whatever you're doing - especially in high school!
Don't underestimate the importance of face-to-face meetings, though. Videoconferences are OK, but in my experience it's a technology that's 'not quite there'. Particularly for a start-up, there's a huge advantage to locating where the greatest amount of assets (i.e., people) are. As an employee of a (non.com) startup, I can say that even flying in out-of-town prospects (not to mention paying for moving costs, etc) can put a strain on the budget.
The net is a great resource, but putting someone on salary that you don't see on a daily or even weekly basis is a dicey proposition - especially for a start up. As a company scales, this kind of outsourcing begins to make more sense.
It seems like this would be a pretty hard sell in the court system. Regardless of the scientist's impartiality, lawyers would always want 'their guy' on the stand. Where I think this group could be really useful is in the patent system. With the explosion of net technology and associated (controversial) patents, a consultation with an impartial scientist that actually KNOWS something about the relevant technology would be a huge asset. Just a thought...
So because programmers have more direct impact on society, they are the 'real' artists? I don't understand how you equate the effect of a work on society with whether or not something is art. I'm sure your perl scripts are great and everything, but to call an eCommerece app 'art' while dismissing 'a few splashes of paint on a canvas' is outlandish. Pride in your work is one thing, but calling it art is another thing.
Programming more like engineering - identifying a need and filling it using availiable assets. Sure, there's creativity involved, but no one's ever going to go to the 'Code Museum' and look at your code/app for its own sake.
You propose that art is a reflection of the world we live in. Is programming a reflection of the world we live in, or is it a part of that world? I'd argue the latter - no one is going to reflect on his/her cultural beliefs or the absurdity of life while buying a pair of sneakers over the internet. Well, they might, but only because buying a pair of sneakers over the internet is kind of absurd in and of itself. I certainly won't reflect on how many lines of code it took to implement the app.
I get tired of seeing terms that used to have meaning bastardized for the use of the technology industry. Maybe the only thing 'artistic' about most programs is the ego of their creators.
According to Fox News the NEAR was built under the 'faster, better, cheaper' philosophy. IMO, that philosophy doesn't mean that the craft are any less robust (generally, if a satellite payload survives launch, it's structurally sound enough to handle anything during spaceflight)... it just means that there are less 'bells and whistles' built in.
Slashdot Mirror
See, when a mommy uranium and a daddy uranium love each other very much...
Actually, the way the networks are designed, this isn't true. XM satellites are in geosynchrynous orbit - one serves the eastern US and the other the western US. If one 'bird' goes out, then half the country loses the signal. The Sirius satellites are in a highly elliptical orbit; as one completes its sweep over the coverage area, another is beginning its sweep. The signal graph looks like a three-phase power graph - three superimposed sine waves that average out to a more or less DC signal. So if a Sirius bird goes off-line, you lose signal coverage for 1/3 of the orbit period.
Both companies probably have backup birds on the ground, ready to launch should a failure occur.
A good summary of the technical details can be found here (Sirius) and here (XM)
According to Neal Boortz in his news section this morning, WSB in Atlanta is solving the problem by filtering out the commercials from the webcasts. Makes sense to me... could end up being another source of revenue for the stations also, as they could sell streamed commercials separately.
Plus, if you get in an accident... there's plenty of rubbing alcohol around to clean your cuts with! Now if they could figure out how to run a car on Bactine...
Stay tuned for the next study, "The effect of thinking about thinking about work". I'm stressed already.
Both parties already pay taxes - that's not what this is about. The manufacturer pays taxes on the materials that are shipped and on the resources that they consume wherever they're located. Likewise, I pay property tax and income tax to cover that on my end. To say that the sale and subsequent shipment uses public resources any more than usual is ridiculous. Do I pay tax when I ship a birthday present to my dad? The government is already taxing us to death; to add a tax on a transaction that doesn't consume any additional resources is irresponsible.
What government resources do internet merchants consume? Bricks-and-mortar merchants utilize an infrastructure that's built up by the government (roads, sewer, traffic lights, etc.) and thus should pay taxes. Internet merchants use no such infrastructure - so why tax them? If there is some value-added from the government, then it could be justified, but levying taxes on internet merchants - especially by local governments is particularly absurd. My government in Atlanta isn't providing any service for a merchant based in Seattle or California or wherever. Taxation "just because bricks-and-mortar merchants are taxed" makes no sense at all.
Bummer... and I was looking forward to watching the Iridium meteor shower. Guess I'll have to settle for MIR...
Here's the link (or http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology /space_gear_13.html) - the previous link didn't work for some reason...
I guess the moral here is to stick it out, do a good job and keep asking for more responsibility. Nothing pissed me off more than seeing a co-op playing solitare instead of pounding the bushes for stuff to do. Having been on both sides of the coin, I can say that 'industry experience' is worth it, whatever you're doing - especially in high school!
The net is a great resource, but putting someone on salary that you don't see on a daily or even weekly basis is a dicey proposition - especially for a start up. As a company scales, this kind of outsourcing begins to make more sense.
It seems like this would be a pretty hard sell in the court system. Regardless of the scientist's impartiality, lawyers would always want 'their guy' on the stand. Where I think this group could be really useful is in the patent system. With the explosion of net technology and associated (controversial) patents, a consultation with an impartial scientist that actually KNOWS something about the relevant technology would be a huge asset. Just a thought...
Programming more like engineering - identifying a need and filling it using availiable assets. Sure, there's creativity involved, but no one's ever going to go to the 'Code Museum' and look at your code/app for its own sake.
You propose that art is a reflection of the world we live in. Is programming a reflection of the world we live in, or is it a part of that world? I'd argue the latter - no one is going to reflect on his/her cultural beliefs or the absurdity of life while buying a pair of sneakers over the internet. Well, they might, but only because buying a pair of sneakers over the internet is kind of absurd in and of itself. I certainly won't reflect on how many lines of code it took to implement the app.
I get tired of seeing terms that used to have meaning bastardized for the use of the technology industry. Maybe the only thing 'artistic' about most programs is the ego of their creators.
According to Fox News the NEAR was built under the 'faster, better, cheaper' philosophy. IMO, that philosophy doesn't mean that the craft are any less robust (generally, if a satellite payload survives launch, it's structurally sound enough to handle anything during spaceflight)... it just means that there are less 'bells and whistles' built in.