alright - i'll take the nuke & you take the pen. we'll see who wins. I suspect that you'll see the flaw in your plan by the time I'm banging your head against the wall to see if I can get that pen any further up your nose..
None of this was made up the two people blocked from Canada are guilty of various crimes. There were treated no differently then anyone else entering Canada. What various crimes? I couldn't find the specifics, but obviously you know more.
Yeah, it looks like landing is definitely a tough one.. My guess is that the upward thrust, combined with the sudden outward forces induced when getting closer to the ground, causes some problems with the vertical landing. Seems that as they approach, the vehicle starts tilting a bit.. Hmm.. I thought that, as the vehicle touches the ground, you get a pivotal point and the rocket just tends to top over.
He sounded pretty disappointed... Went as far as saying that they felt worse than last year.. I think it was just a bad day.. Sure, improvement will definitely help, but there are always those days that nothing goes right.. That said, they did have some decent flights earlier.. And, the AST qualification flight went off without a hitch.. There's video here : http://media.armadilloaerospace.com/2007_10_21/modFreeFlight.mpg That's understandable. They were ready. They had done dress rehearsals of the flights, and it went flawlessly. Everybody is certain it will work. Then they go on stage, and everything goes wrong. Suddenly all that confidence is gone. There's nothing as frustrating as that... I just hope they get over it quickly, and will be back next year - with a vengeance:).
I've been following their news flashes also, and indeed they are very open about what they're doing (and how). The amount of testing they've done is staggering, but the landing has always been the weakest link of the vehicle IMHO. I think landing is at least as difficult as building the rest of the rocket, but most testing went toward engine testing.
Lately, they have been flying reliably, but then they had to change the graphite chambers suddenly because the company they bought them from had received a big order and could not supply them to Armadillo. Is that what caused the problems? In any case, making changes just before the big show is always an omen for troubles (not that they had a choice).
It's really too bad, I thought they had a fair chance. I just hope John will take some time to really focus on the landing, the engine troubles will have to be examined but I don't think it will turn out to be a major issue (again, they've been flying for a while now, the engine is quite stable).
The good thing is that, as a sofware engineer, he surely knows how to handle crashes emotionally.
I started reading the comments hoping to find a discussion and maybe some interesting posts about DRM, but it's just page after page of comments about what the man's wearing! Has the army secretly started testing that gay weapon"? Come on, people, get a grip!
I cannot imagine a reason why I would want this feature. Sure it's cool, but.. what's the use?
Now, something that I did find myself wishing a couple of times is a laptop with a video in connector. But then again, I'm one of those freaks who has a server without any monitor attached.
Drugs are bad, because they cause physiological (chemical) dependence — not because they cause you to sense something, that's not there (like movies).
So, suppose they are not addictive, then it would be ok to take them? Well, I've got some great news for you: muchrooms and psychedelics like LSD are not addictive! Let the party begin!
Religion — as well as hamburgers (a potential targets for the now unemployed anti-tobacco lawyers) — has no such effects.
Indeed, the best description of religion I found is "a linguistic virus" (Snowcrash). People who are infected will pass on the virus to their offspring at a very early age, using indocrination and social pressure as their primary tools. The view of religion as a drug (opium for the people) results from the period where the aristocracy realized they could use religion for keeping their underlings docile.
I don't understand how a bunch of mirrors fail to compete against coal. Once you have the steam, a coal plant or a solar plant work the same, so, somehow, digging out massive amounts of coal and transporting them to the plant is cheaper than keeping mirrors locked on the sun? My gut feeling also tells me that transporting electricity through wires should be cheaper than transporting coal by train.
Disclaimer: my gut feeling has been known to be wrong before (occasionally).
Luckily, it doesn't work that way:
Who "owns" the results? What will happen to them?
Unlike other distributed computing projects, Folding@home is run by an academic institution (specifically the Pande Group, at Stanford University's Chemistry Department), which is a nonprofit institution dedicated to science research and education. We will not sell the data or make any money off of it.
Moreover, we will make the data available for others to use. In particular, the results from Folding@home will be made available on several levels. Most importantly, analysis of the simulations will be submitted to scientific journals for publication, and these journal articles will be posted on the web page after publication. Next, after publication of these scientific articles which analyze the data, the raw data of the folding runs will be available for everyone, including other researchers, here on this web site.
http://folding.stanford.edu/faq.html#project.own Making drug companies use your computer to do research on their future patents is something nobody should want to do. Especially when you know the disgusting practices of companies like Johnson&Johnson. Their aids research springs into mind: they first find some people who are willing to participate in an experiment, give them medication, and when they find out it works, they stop the experiment and let those poor guys perish. Of course they don't do it in the developed countries, they go to Africa where there is little chance of lawsuits.
They deal with life and death, and yet "ethics" is a word totally unknown to them. Despicable.
Don't forget the 's', it stands for second edition. I don't think it's sold anymore, nowadays it's D40 and D80. However if you can buy it second hand I don't think you will be disapointed, it's a decent product. New these Nikons are quite pricey.
Frankly, when I bought it I totally went over my budget, but I don't regret it any more:). A digital reflex camera is a wonderful thing to have.
The big advantage with digital is that you don't have to develop the film. You can try as much as you want, and you don't have to wait days to get the result and then realise that it's underexposed (while still having to pay for the film. With digital, you can take a trial-and-error approach, without having to spend money on film.
It doesn't have to be a fancy camera, a webcam mounted on your telescope will get you quite far already. I've made a complete mosaic of the moon that way, 2000x2000 pixels with a simple toucam.
I hate digital cameras period, I always want to take another exposure and the digital is always "recording image". I don't understand what you're saying. Did you mean to say that saving an image takes too long? From what I understand, you are talking about a cheap digital camera. Indeed they sometimes are quite slow, but that's no problem for some people and if it is, then you should just buy a better camera. E.g. I'm totally fond of my Nikon D70s, it can take 3 photo's per second, you can control everything, and it's relatively easy to use.
I think you're either just too impatient to learn how it works, or else your camera is worthless. But saying that all digital camera's suck is just.. how to put it.. moronic.
I think you're making the same mistake that the numerous anti-Flash zealots make, and that is assuming that bad use of a tool equals a bad tool. Has flash been opened up yet? If not, that alone should be a good enough reason to dump it. Remember, the web is a standard. I could in theory design my own processor, make my own programming language, and use that to write my own browser to access the web. But if I need a supported platform to use flash, than it is useless.
OpenSSH is not GPL but BSD licensed so there is no problem IMO. I haven't checked for VNC (sorry, I'm just too lazy). And besides, GPL is all about distribution, not about modification; if I modify a GPL program and keep it to myself, there is no problem. There is no way you can force me to give up the changes. But if I distribute it, I have to supply the source code with my modifications.
So did the guy receive binaries of GPL-based software? If that's the case, he can demand the source. If not, he just wasted our precious time.
After reading further in the wikipedia articles, I found this paragraph:
On March 31, 2006, the amateur radio operators from AMSAT Germany tracked and received data from Voyager 1 using the 20 m dish at Bochum with a long integration technique. Its data was checked and verified against data from the Deep Space Network station at Madrid, Spain. AMSAT-DL article in German; ARRL article in English. This is believed to be the first such tracking of Voyager. There you have it. That old equipment isn't the only thing that can communicate wit V'ger. Probably just a reporting eager to romantisize a story.
You don't need low serial baudrates. I was thinking, why not use software defined radio like the USRP. And the sentence from the article "modern computers can't work that slow" is nonsense, think of PSK31.
I'm pretty sure modern digital signal processing techniques can kick the old analog technology's ass any day.
Don't worry, I have the Armadillo homepage bookmarked, it's very interesting just to follow what you're doing.
PS: I don't know if you know, but if you take a look at this image, I bet you'll see something that draws your attention:-). Did you get inspired by that lander, or is it coincidence? At least it suggests that your design too could land something on the moon... Too bad there is so little information to be found about the Lunokhod missions.
That's what I didn't get: if you want to use something like that for war games, why patent it? Then you have to disclose how you did it, no? Betting that your enemy will not use this because of patent laws, is quite optimistic thinking.
USA: Please stop using our wargame simulation technology, you're only making it worse. Enemy: Making it worse? How can it possibly get any worse? Coca-Cola! Coca-Cola! USA: And don't abuse our trademarks!
Slashdot Mirror
I've been following their news flashes also, and indeed they are very open about what they're doing (and how). The amount of testing they've done is staggering, but the landing has always been the weakest link of the vehicle IMHO. I think landing is at least as difficult as building the rest of the rocket, but most testing went toward engine testing.
Lately, they have been flying reliably, but then they had to change the graphite chambers suddenly because the company they bought them from had received a big order and could not supply them to Armadillo. Is that what caused the problems? In any case, making changes just before the big show is always an omen for troubles (not that they had a choice).
It's really too bad, I thought they had a fair chance. I just hope John will take some time to really focus on the landing, the engine troubles will have to be examined but I don't think it will turn out to be a major issue (again, they've been flying for a while now, the engine is quite stable).
The good thing is that, as a sofware engineer, he surely knows how to handle crashes emotionally.
I started reading the comments hoping to find a discussion and maybe some interesting posts about DRM, but it's just page after page of comments about what the man's wearing! Has the army secretly started testing that gay weapon"? Come on, people, get a grip!
Huh? Does emacs export to .doc?
Temperature reversal and a loose teeth feeling? This news will have no obvious effect on society whatsoever. That is, until april 1st arrives...
I cannot imagine a reason why I would want this feature. Sure it's cool, but.. what's the use?
Now, something that I did find myself wishing a couple of times is a laptop with a video in connector. But then again, I'm one of those freaks who has a server without any monitor attached.
Drugs are bad, because they cause physiological (chemical) dependence — not because they cause you to sense something, that's not there (like movies).
So, suppose they are not addictive, then it would be ok to take them? Well, I've got some great news for you: muchrooms and psychedelics like LSD are not addictive! Let the party begin!Religion — as well as hamburgers (a potential targets for the now unemployed anti-tobacco lawyers) — has no such effects.
Indeed, the best description of religion I found is "a linguistic virus" (Snowcrash). People who are infected will pass on the virus to their offspring at a very early age, using indocrination and social pressure as their primary tools. The view of religion as a drug (opium for the people) results from the period where the aristocracy realized they could use religion for keeping their underlings docile.I don't understand how a bunch of mirrors fail to compete against coal. Once you have the steam, a coal plant or a solar plant work the same, so, somehow, digging out massive amounts of coal and transporting them to the plant is cheaper than keeping mirrors locked on the sun? My gut feeling also tells me that transporting electricity through wires should be cheaper than transporting coal by train.
Disclaimer: my gut feeling has been known to be wrong before (occasionally).
Unlike other distributed computing projects, Folding@home is run by an academic institution (specifically the Pande Group, at Stanford University's Chemistry Department), which is a nonprofit institution dedicated to science research and education. We will not sell the data or make any money off of it.
Moreover, we will make the data available for others to use. In particular, the results from Folding@home will be made available on several levels. Most importantly, analysis of the simulations will be submitted to scientific journals for publication, and these journal articles will be posted on the web page after publication. Next, after publication of these scientific articles which analyze the data, the raw data of the folding runs will be available for everyone, including other researchers, here on this web site.
http://folding.stanford.edu/faq.html#project.own Making drug companies use your computer to do research on their future patents is something nobody should want to do. Especially when you know the disgusting practices of companies like Johnson&Johnson. Their aids research springs into mind: they first find some people who are willing to participate in an experiment, give them medication, and when they find out it works, they stop the experiment and let those poor guys perish. Of course they don't do it in the developed countries, they go to Africa where there is little chance of lawsuits.
They deal with life and death, and yet "ethics" is a word totally unknown to them. Despicable.
Don't forget the 's', it stands for second edition. I don't think it's sold anymore, nowadays it's D40 and D80. However if you can buy it second hand I don't think you will be disapointed, it's a decent product. New these Nikons are quite pricey.
:). A digital reflex camera is a wonderful thing to have.
Frankly, when I bought it I totally went over my budget, but I don't regret it any more
(IMO)
While we're listing astronomy software: Kstars is great too.
And if you want to use a (web)cam on your telescope, take a look at registax.
The big advantage with digital is that you don't have to develop the film. You can try as much as you want, and you don't have to wait days to get the result and then realise that it's underexposed (while still having to pay for the film. With digital, you can take a trial-and-error approach, without having to spend money on film.
It doesn't have to be a fancy camera, a webcam mounted on your telescope will get you quite far already. I've made a complete mosaic of the moon that way, 2000x2000 pixels with a simple toucam.
From what I understand, you are talking about a cheap digital camera. Indeed they sometimes are quite slow, but that's no problem for some people and if it is, then you should just buy a better camera. E.g. I'm totally fond of my Nikon D70s, it can take 3 photo's per second, you can control everything, and it's relatively easy to use.
I think you're either just too impatient to learn how it works, or else your camera is worthless. But saying that all digital camera's suck is just.. how to put it.. moronic.
OpenSSH is not GPL but BSD licensed so there is no problem IMO. I haven't checked for VNC (sorry, I'm just too lazy). And besides, GPL is all about distribution, not about modification; if I modify a GPL program and keep it to myself, there is no problem. There is no way you can force me to give up the changes. But if I distribute it, I have to supply the source code with my modifications.
So did the guy receive binaries of GPL-based software? If that's the case, he can demand the source. If not, he just wasted our precious time.
You don't need low serial baudrates. I was thinking, why not use software defined radio like the USRP. And the sentence from the article "modern computers can't work that slow" is nonsense, think of PSK31.
I'm pretty sure modern digital signal processing techniques can kick the old analog technology's ass any day.
But if your system is compromized, do you still trust rkhunter?
Don't worry, I have the Armadillo homepage bookmarked, it's very interesting just to follow what you're doing.
:-). Did you get inspired by that lander, or is it coincidence? At least it suggests that your design too could land something on the moon... Too bad there is so little information to be found about the Lunokhod missions.
PS: I don't know if you know, but if you take a look at this image, I bet you'll see something that draws your attention
That's what I didn't get: if you want to use something like that for war games, why patent it? Then you have to disclose how you did it, no? Betting that your enemy will not use this because of patent laws, is quite optimistic thinking.
USA: Please stop using our wargame simulation technology, you're only making it worse.
Enemy: Making it worse? How can it possibly get any worse? Coca-Cola! Coca-Cola!
USA: And don't abuse our trademarks!
Not if he looked like Elmer Fudd.
So you want to steal the new toy of a group of marines while they're watching? You've got nerves, man.