If you are covering more than one language in a "basic programming course" then you are already off mark. Now if your goal is to do more like a survey of programming languages, or an introduction to programming languages, then it is appropriate to explain why there are different languages, the types of languages, why languages are used in specific roles, etc.
If you are truly teaching programming, as in at the end of the course the students will be creating programs that do things, then you need to stick with one single language and development environment. Otherwise, every time the students begin to grasp the language and how it is invoked you are switching to something entirely different.
This is amazing. Maybe they can put this technology in a small box that I can point at my TV so I don't have to get off the couch to change channels. Maybe they can use IR LEDs to reduce interference from ambient light which is mostly in the visible spectrum.
A simple directional antenna operating at a few watts from the ground could expose the avionics to many times more RF energy than these low-power devices inside the aircraft.
In other words, if this was really due to RF, then terrorists would be dropping planes out of the sky on a daily basis with $50 worth of equipment and a Pringles can.
1. Text messages work when voice calls are dropped for the same reason Morse can get through when SSB voice can't.
That's a bad analogy, and infers that the fundamental radio carrier / modulation is different for SMS than voice. Both are exactly the same thing fundamentally - data that are sent using the exact same mechanism. The difference is SMS is small, discreet and not real-time, whereas voice requires long-duration, continuous connectivity. Morse code has greater range because it is just a carrier wave that is not modulated with data. It is the modulation of the carrier wave that is so difficult to decode on a receiver unless you have a strong, clean signal.
Pictures 1 and 2 in this series of photos clearly show burnt wood around the crash site. So either a forest fire burnt the area recently, or more likely, the plane's fuel burnt after the crash. However, his money and ID cards were clearly not burnt, and no mention was made of his sweatshirt being burnt, so either he was ejected clear of the crash and escaped the fire (whether or not he lived), or he got away from the fire under his own power.
They've already found wreckage, so this is basically a sure thing. The real question is did Fossett survive the crash, and if so where did he go on-foot. If he died were his remains consumed by wild animals (wild cats and bears), possibly making it impossible to ever recover them.
Just out of curiosity, why doesn't the Slashdot software simply check to see if a submitted story contains the same url as an existing story? Wouldn't that stop a lot of dupes?
Just because people know of them doesn't mean they really contributed to software development. One on the list that comes to mind is John Romero. My understanding is that he was primarily a level designer with Doom and Quake, and that he did some rudimentary coding, like menus and the like, whereas the real cutting edge stuff was of course all attributed to Carmack.
I bet everyone at Slashdot knows who John Romero is, but I bet few at Slashdot know of him because of anything he has coded.
I am supporting this by not utilizing any patented items today. Well, except for this computer, its software, all the hardware and protocols between my computer and the Slashdot server, software running on the Slashdot server, the action of clicking a virtual button with a mouse to preview a information to be submitted to a server.
Addendum: the clicking of a "Continue Editing" button to correct information that is to be submitted to a server after first previewing said information.
Addendum: the clicking of a "Preview" button to preview newly edited information.
Addendum: the clicking of a "Submit" button to send information to a server.
It seems absurdly simple, but it is quite foreign to meteorology on our planet to have an impact crater affecting the global climate and weather patterns. That will be just another of those little things that will give future astronauts the "this isn't Kansas anymore" feeling as they live on another planet.
I have found memories of Usenet from the days before http. Back then there were around 2000 groups, and most of the participants were from academia. It (and IRC) was the first real place I can remember interacting with a global community, and it was quite enjoyable. Of course the self-control and self-regulation that kept the original Usenet usable went out the window as the public at large came online. The original intent of Usenet has been replaced by the online forum. So instead of a central repository of information, all properly categorized and viewable within a consistent client application, we now have the web-based forum. The information is spread far and wide across the internet. The interfaces vary vastly depending on the software and its configuration and theme. The information is spread out across redundant and competing sites. Information can suddenly be lost as a site goes down. Information can be deleted at a whim depending on who is running the site.
"Cosmonaut makes more sense anyway, at least until we have a manned flight to the stars"
I feel the exact opposite. "Cosmos" is a somewhat archaic term. I can't think of a time I've heard its use in the general vernacular. In fact, the only person I can even remember using the word anywhere was Carl Sagan. Astronauts work in the field of Astronautics, hence the name.
I know, I complained about this the last time Slashdot ran a story on Chinese space program, but it simply annoys the fire out of me.
If they are going to translate (well, it isn't even a translation, but a phonetic English spelling of a Chinese word) the Chinese word for "taikonaut", then they really ought to "translate" the word "Director" too, since they are both occupations held by a Chinese person. If you're going to make us have to deal with foreign pronunciations when we have perfectly adequate words in our own language, then you might as well be consistent.
You had me up until the "biological signature" part. If you spray a bullseye on the target, why do you need a biological signature? This is just another form of laser guidance. Instead of having to actively illuminate your target with a laser so the weapon can guide itself, you would spray your target with the marker, irradiate it with microwave RF (heck, maybe the cellular network is already doing this part for them), and the bomb just homes in on whatever signal the marker emits.
Really, all this is is standard RFID but miniaturized even further. If each target had a unique RFID number then you would even know which individuals were in a building or group.
The problem with this is that someone still has to make some sort of close-range, in-person identification of the target. So intelligence and infiltration is a must. However, it would be extremely difficult to detect the spy. My thought for transferring the marker onto the target would be to use some sort of lotion embedded with the markers. The spy would apply it liberally to their hands, and being careful not to touch other people, shake hands or give the target a pat on the back.
Of course the spy would not want to be anywhere around when the bomb is in the air seeking the marker.
The ISS has an acre of solar panels, and they can be designed incredibly light-weight because they are in microgravity. Panels on the moon would require vastly more infrastructure to support them, which would increase the weight and bulk considerably.
Why does the media use foreign names for astronauts from other countries? We've got cosmonaut and now "yuhangyuan"? That's ridiculous. Is "astronaut" somehow reserved for only US spacefarers? I think this whole thing is a leftover from the cold war, where it was somehow insulting to use the same terminology for Soviet and US astronauts, probably because of the fierce competition.
On another note, if the astronauts don't leave the confines of their ship, and merely evacuate all the air, is that really a "space walk"?
The ad was a complete success. Can you believe that, after reading about it on Google News, I actually sought out and watched the commercial? Can you believe that right this very moment you are reading some unimportant commentary by someone whose opinion doesn't matter whatsoever about a TV commercial?
Your question doesn't make it clear. Are you needing an existing service to actually host your content, or are you just looking for the best method of delivery for your own site? Just because YouTube quality is low doesn't mean you can't use the exact same technology (Flash FLV video) but at a higher bitrate and resolution. You can set up your own "YouTube" on your site in a matter of minutes. You just need a flash video player (there are tons of them out there for free) to point at the FLV files sitting on your site.
As others have pointed out, you also do not specify if you want something streaming, that someone can begin watching within seconds of clicking a link, or something that is downloaded and played offline. The latter offers the best possible quality, because the bitrate can greatly exceed the viewer's bandwidth.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are covering more than one language in a "basic programming course" then you are already off mark. Now if your goal is to do more like a survey of programming languages, or an introduction to programming languages, then it is appropriate to explain why there are different languages, the types of languages, why languages are used in specific roles, etc.
If you are truly teaching programming, as in at the end of the course the students will be creating programs that do things, then you need to stick with one single language and development environment. Otherwise, every time the students begin to grasp the language and how it is invoked you are switching to something entirely different.
This is amazing. Maybe they can put this technology in a small box that I can point at my TV so I don't have to get off the couch to change channels. Maybe they can use IR LEDs to reduce interference from ambient light which is mostly in the visible spectrum.
A simple directional antenna operating at a few watts from the ground could expose the avionics to many times more RF energy than these low-power devices inside the aircraft.
In other words, if this was really due to RF, then terrorists would be dropping planes out of the sky on a daily basis with $50 worth of equipment and a Pringles can.
1. Text messages work when voice calls are dropped for the same reason Morse can get through when SSB voice can't.
That's a bad analogy, and infers that the fundamental radio carrier / modulation is different for SMS than voice. Both are exactly the same thing fundamentally - data that are sent using the exact same mechanism. The difference is SMS is small, discreet and not real-time, whereas voice requires long-duration, continuous connectivity. Morse code has greater range because it is just a carrier wave that is not modulated with data. It is the modulation of the carrier wave that is so difficult to decode on a receiver unless you have a strong, clean signal.
Pictures 1 and 2 in this series of photos clearly show burnt wood around the crash site. So either a forest fire burnt the area recently, or more likely, the plane's fuel burnt after the crash. However, his money and ID cards were clearly not burnt, and no mention was made of his sweatshirt being burnt, so either he was ejected clear of the crash and escaped the fire (whether or not he lived), or he got away from the fire under his own power.
They've already found wreckage, so this is basically a sure thing. The real question is did Fossett survive the crash, and if so where did he go on-foot. If he died were his remains consumed by wild animals (wild cats and bears), possibly making it impossible to ever recover them.
This was from back in April, and was already discussed on Slashdot (the "tuning / exploitation" link).
Just out of curiosity, why doesn't the Slashdot software simply check to see if a submitted story contains the same url as an existing story? Wouldn't that stop a lot of dupes?
Didn't you RTFA? They're going to burn trees to generate electricity to run the device.
Just because people know of them doesn't mean they really contributed to software development. One on the list that comes to mind is John Romero. My understanding is that he was primarily a level designer with Doom and Quake, and that he did some rudimentary coding, like menus and the like, whereas the real cutting edge stuff was of course all attributed to Carmack.
I bet everyone at Slashdot knows who John Romero is, but I bet few at Slashdot know of him because of anything he has coded.
"I have gmail and slashdot up almost 100% of my day"
You took an excessive 20 minutes to comment after this story was posted. You are slacking off.
Move along, nothing to see here.
I am supporting this by not utilizing any patented items today. Well, except for this computer, its software, all the hardware and protocols between my computer and the Slashdot server, software running on the Slashdot server, the action of clicking a virtual button with a mouse to preview a information to be submitted to a server.
Addendum: the clicking of a "Continue Editing" button to correct information that is to be submitted to a server after first previewing said information.
Addendum: the clicking of a "Preview" button to preview newly edited information.
Addendum: the clicking of a "Submit" button to send information to a server.
It seems absurdly simple, but it is quite foreign to meteorology on our planet to have an impact crater affecting the global climate and weather patterns. That will be just another of those little things that will give future astronauts the "this isn't Kansas anymore" feeling as they live on another planet.
I have found memories of Usenet from the days before http. Back then there were around 2000 groups, and most of the participants were from academia. It (and IRC) was the first real place I can remember interacting with a global community, and it was quite enjoyable. Of course the self-control and self-regulation that kept the original Usenet usable went out the window as the public at large came online. The original intent of Usenet has been replaced by the online forum. So instead of a central repository of information, all properly categorized and viewable within a consistent client application, we now have the web-based forum. The information is spread far and wide across the internet. The interfaces vary vastly depending on the software and its configuration and theme. The information is spread out across redundant and competing sites. Information can suddenly be lost as a site goes down. Information can be deleted at a whim depending on who is running the site.
I certainly miss what Usenet once was.
Right in the middle of reading your comment I realized they must have changed something in the Matrix again.
"Cosmonaut makes more sense anyway, at least until we have a manned flight to the stars"
I feel the exact opposite. "Cosmos" is a somewhat archaic term. I can't think of a time I've heard its use in the general vernacular. In fact, the only person I can even remember using the word anywhere was Carl Sagan. Astronauts work in the field of Astronautics, hence the name.
I know, I complained about this the last time Slashdot ran a story on Chinese space program, but it simply annoys the fire out of me.
If they are going to translate (well, it isn't even a translation, but a phonetic English spelling of a Chinese word) the Chinese word for "taikonaut", then they really ought to "translate" the word "Director" too, since they are both occupations held by a Chinese person. If you're going to make us have to deal with foreign pronunciations when we have perfectly adequate words in our own language, then you might as well be consistent.
I'll save them millions of dollars and thousands of hours of meetings and development time: Xvid / MP3
You had me up until the "biological signature" part. If you spray a bullseye on the target, why do you need a biological signature? This is just another form of laser guidance. Instead of having to actively illuminate your target with a laser so the weapon can guide itself, you would spray your target with the marker, irradiate it with microwave RF (heck, maybe the cellular network is already doing this part for them), and the bomb just homes in on whatever signal the marker emits.
Really, all this is is standard RFID but miniaturized even further. If each target had a unique RFID number then you would even know which individuals were in a building or group.
The problem with this is that someone still has to make some sort of close-range, in-person identification of the target. So intelligence and infiltration is a must. However, it would be extremely difficult to detect the spy. My thought for transferring the marker onto the target would be to use some sort of lotion embedded with the markers. The spy would apply it liberally to their hands, and being careful not to touch other people, shake hands or give the target a pat on the back.
Of course the spy would not want to be anywhere around when the bomb is in the air seeking the marker.
The ISS has an acre of solar panels, and they can be designed incredibly light-weight because they are in microgravity. Panels on the moon would require vastly more infrastructure to support them, which would increase the weight and bulk considerably.
"IT will be in prime position to alter its relationship with management and reap benefits in the boardroom in the years ahead, analysts contend."
Ahh, more responsibility, additional liability, same pay scale.
Why does the media use foreign names for astronauts from other countries? We've got cosmonaut and now "yuhangyuan"? That's ridiculous. Is "astronaut" somehow reserved for only US spacefarers? I think this whole thing is a leftover from the cold war, where it was somehow insulting to use the same terminology for Soviet and US astronauts, probably because of the fierce competition.
On another note, if the astronauts don't leave the confines of their ship, and merely evacuate all the air, is that really a "space walk"?
The ad was a complete success. Can you believe that, after reading about it on Google News, I actually sought out and watched the commercial? Can you believe that right this very moment you are reading some unimportant commentary by someone whose opinion doesn't matter whatsoever about a TV commercial?
Score one for Microsoft.
Your question doesn't make it clear. Are you needing an existing service to actually host your content, or are you just looking for the best method of delivery for your own site? Just because YouTube quality is low doesn't mean you can't use the exact same technology (Flash FLV video) but at a higher bitrate and resolution. You can set up your own "YouTube" on your site in a matter of minutes. You just need a flash video player (there are tons of them out there for free) to point at the FLV files sitting on your site.
As others have pointed out, you also do not specify if you want something streaming, that someone can begin watching within seconds of clicking a link, or something that is downloaded and played offline. The latter offers the best possible quality, because the bitrate can greatly exceed the viewer's bandwidth.
"I usually keep 25-40 tabs open in FF"
You need an introduction to my little friend, Mr. Bookmark.