That's not really the ITU's fault. Their only income is selling their standards. In the past, that worked out really well for them, since the only people who were interested in the standards were big telcos, who just considered it the cost of doing business.
Re:Remember the Sonic Cruiser?
on
Son of Concorde
·
· Score: 2
Even if they'd had good reception from the carriers, that wouldn't have guanteed success. Concorde had good reception from the carriers, with 18 different airlines actually placing orders or options. Unfortunatly between the start of the project and the aircraft being available for delivery, the world changed, in particular the success of wide-bodies and with PanAm and TWA cancelling their orders, the fate was sealed - without the two biggest american carriers at the time, they couldn't get any other carrier to commit. Ever since then, aircraft manufacturers have required substantial interests from carriers before committing the money involved in creating a new modern jetliner.
But even person to person messaging (which SMTP is an example of) isn't a single protocol. SMTP, the various IM protocols, and even the crufty old talkd protocol are all different solutions for the same problem - send a message from one person to another. Each of them has different optimizations, with SMTP being best for reliability, IM being best for speed and not caring about where a user is connect, and talkd being best for speed but without having to have a server, but with knowledge of where a user is currently connected. Similar with P2P file transfers we've got different goals. SMTP can be used, for file originator based transfer, freenet is best for privacy and secrecy, the original napster protocol was best for quality of searching, and the current P2P protocols are good for decentralized searching. As I said above, when you have different goals, you're going to get different instances meeting those goals.
The RBOS is only one of the banks which issue Scottish notes, the others being the Clydesdale and the Bank of Scotland. However, none of the Scottish notes are actually legal tender. They're promisary notes, basically IOU's. For each note issued, they have to have a Bank of England note in their vaults, which they have to be prepared to hand over on demand.
That works fine, if there are only one set of goals. But if you have more than one set of goals, you'll find that if you optimize for one set, you'll make it worse for the other set.
If you click on a link on a site, then the site which is linked TO can log the referer. Therefore by putting up a link on slashdot, and analyzing who follows that link, you can get an estimate of the slashdot population.
The simple answer is that the paper trail is the definative vote. Optical scan of visible cards is the best way, as it's easily and quickly verifiable, countable, and re-verifiable.
Please bear in mind that in the UK computer personnel get appointed on the following scale:-
And this is different to anywhere else?
Re:The customer's needs can be accomplished many w
on
Does IT Matter?
·
· Score: 1
Increasing productivity is a need. However nothing you list above sounds like it's cutting edge - 10 years ago was right in the middle of the change to CAD drafting. Cutting edge would be deciding that the systems they have aren't any good, and deciding that a.NET or J2EE based system for managing the drawings is required.
I've seen successful businesses operating on 15 and 20 year old IT.
I've seen a successful business operating on 30 year old IT*, a new manager come in, decide that it was totally out of date, try to replace it, and end up driving the business into the ground.
*=IBM 360 based system, which was first installed in the late 60's. The hardware had been replaced about 3 years earlier, so it wasn't terribly out of date. All the green screen terminals had been replaced with PC's, and a terminal emulator with
some macro functionality had been used to replace them. The macros made some of the clunkier apps easier to use. The system to replace it was supposed to be Oracle based with fancy GUI screens replacing the old green screen apps.
Tele-operated machinery is slowly getting more popular in mining work on Earth. It's expensive, but it can operate for nearly 24 hours a day, with only short breaks at shift change instead of the long treks to get to the face that human miners have to do. Also in many cases, one human operator can operate multiple machines, and the reduced risk means lower insurance payments. However there still has to be someone down the mine, because machines will break down.
Linus can ASK the world to do something,... Gates on the other hand can ORDER everyone
This isn't neccessarily an advantage for Gates. People at the heads of organisations have a problem with getting surrounded with 'Yes' men. This can cause problems if the guy at the top makes a stupid decision. With Linus, he's going to get feedback on every stupid decision.
I don't speak ASL, but I thought that most ASL speakers choose a 'nickname' for themselves, and used that to refer to themselves, and for others to refer to them. This is obviously going to be quicker than fingerspelling every name in a conversation. Well known people get assigned nicknames, for the same reason. Does anyone who speaks ASL know if this is the case?
It's very much disputed what role Von Braun had. There is no dispute that he was aware that slave labour was being used at Peenemunde and Mittelwerk. There is little dispute that he was aware that the slaves were being mistreated. What is disputed most is if Von Braun had direct control over the treatment of the slaves. Those who survived mainly claimined that he did, and one of Von Braun's colleges, Arthur Rudolph, had to renounce his US citizenship and return to Germany after relevations that he was present at the hanging of several slaves.
My postgres system does it on it's own, without my help. Ok, I had to help it by scheduling vacuumdb to run each night, but once I did that, I can forget about it.
It's only because of politics that we belive it was the hydrogen. The Zeppelin engineers at the time obviously knew it was the doping, which is why the Hindenburg's sister ship, the Graf Zeppelin, was switched to using bronze based doping instead of the alumnium based doping that the Hindenburg used. However the German government at the time wanted to presure the US government to release supplies of helium, and blaming the hydrogen was the way to do that.
Incidentally, I don't think that the accident is the only cause of the demise of airships. I'd blame it on the DC2/DC3, which was rolled out in late 1935, and quickly became first really successful commerical airliner, with over 10000 built in the 10 years of it's production run. The DC3 couldn't really fly transatlantic, the DC4 rolled out in 1939 was the aircraft designed for the transatlantic route, but the DC2/DC3 showed that commerical airplanes were reliable & comfortable enough for real usage.
JWST won't be repairable by the shuttle. It's going to be at the L2 point. One of the major problems with the HST is that it's so close to the earth, it's got a built in 'wobble' due to the gravity tides of the earth moon system. Putting it at L2, the wobble is much smaller, and that means it can take long exposure images much more easily. The shuttle can't get anywhere near L2, so JWST won't be servicable. This has the added benefits of making JWST much easier to design, as they don't have to make all the instrumentation in easy to remove compartments.
HST IS a reconfigured spy satellite design. It's heavily based upon the Keyhole 11 Satellite, but with a better quality mirror, different instruments, changes to make it easier for servicing and extra gyroscopes for stablization (because astronomical images take much longer to be formed than spy pictures).
If that's correct, I sit corrected, but it sounds high to me. Maximum launch capacity is about 65,000 lbs, and I thought that RTE capacity was about 1/3 launch capacity. Remember also that you have to include not only the mass of the satellite, but also the mass of a support structure to hold it safely in the cargo bay.
That would exclude replacement of any instrument where the maintence costs are low. In order to proceed scientifically then you sometimes have to drop an old instrument and replace it, even though this isn't economically justifyable.
Because we don't have the tools or experience to do it. We've done a small amount of 'remove this box and insert that box' repairs. We've done a slightly larger amount of 'couple this box to that box' construction. We've done a tiny amount of 'uncouple this box from that box' reconstruction, and we've done zero 'cut this apart' distruction. To do so would require a huge amount of development of new tools and techniques.
We've been looking at the sky with telescopes for nearly 400 years now, and we're still learning more. While part of this is due to improved instruments, part of it is due to just how much sky there is out there to look at. Even quite old instruments, such as the 1908 Mt Wilson 100 inch reflector where Hubble did his work, are still capable of doing significant observations.
I think the HST is too heavy for the shuttle to bring down. The mass that they can lift is significantly larger than the mass that they can return to Earth.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not really the ITU's fault. Their only income is selling their standards. In the past, that worked out really well for them, since the only people who were interested in the standards were big telcos, who just considered it the cost of doing business.
Even if they'd had good reception from the carriers, that wouldn't have guanteed success. Concorde had good reception from the carriers, with 18 different airlines actually placing orders or options. Unfortunatly between the start of the project and the aircraft being available for delivery, the world changed, in particular the success of wide-bodies and with PanAm and TWA cancelling their orders, the fate was sealed - without the two biggest american carriers at the time, they couldn't get any other carrier to commit. Ever since then, aircraft manufacturers have required substantial interests from carriers before committing the money involved in creating a new modern jetliner.
But even person to person messaging (which SMTP is an example of) isn't a single protocol. SMTP, the various IM protocols, and even the crufty old talkd protocol are all different solutions for the same problem - send a message from one person to another. Each of them has different optimizations, with SMTP being best for reliability, IM being best for speed and not caring about where a user is connect, and talkd being best for speed but without having to have a server, but with knowledge of where a user is currently connected. Similar with P2P file transfers we've got different goals. SMTP can be used, for file originator based transfer, freenet is best for privacy and secrecy, the original napster protocol was best for quality of searching, and the current P2P protocols are good for decentralized searching. As I said above, when you have different goals, you're going to get different instances meeting those goals.
The RBOS is only one of the banks which issue Scottish notes, the others being the Clydesdale and the Bank of Scotland. However, none of the Scottish notes are actually legal tender. They're promisary notes, basically IOU's. For each note issued, they have to have a Bank of England note in their vaults, which they have to be prepared to hand over on demand.
That works fine, if there are only one set of goals. But if you have more than one set of goals, you'll find that if you optimize for one set, you'll make it worse for the other set.
If you click on a link on a site, then the site which is linked TO can log the referer. Therefore by putting up a link on slashdot, and analyzing who follows that link, you can get an estimate of the slashdot population.
The simple answer is that the paper trail is the definative vote. Optical scan of visible cards is the best way, as it's easily and quickly verifiable, countable, and re-verifiable.
Again, is this different to anywhere else?
And this is different to anywhere else?
Increasing productivity is a need. However nothing you list above sounds like it's cutting edge - 10 years ago was right in the middle of the change to CAD drafting. Cutting edge would be deciding that the systems they have aren't any good, and deciding that a .NET or J2EE based system for managing the drawings is required.
I've seen a successful business operating on 30 year old IT*, a new manager come in, decide that it was totally out of date, try to replace it, and end up driving the business into the ground.
*=IBM 360 based system, which was first installed in the late 60's. The hardware had been replaced about 3 years earlier, so it wasn't terribly out of date. All the green screen terminals had been replaced with PC's, and a terminal emulator with some macro functionality had been used to replace them. The macros made some of the clunkier apps easier to use. The system to replace it was supposed to be Oracle based with fancy GUI screens replacing the old green screen apps.
Tele-operated machinery is slowly getting more popular in mining work on Earth. It's expensive, but it can operate for nearly 24 hours a day, with only short breaks at shift change instead of the long treks to get to the face that human miners have to do. Also in many cases, one human operator can operate multiple machines, and the reduced risk means lower insurance payments. However there still has to be someone down the mine, because machines will break down.
This isn't neccessarily an advantage for Gates. People at the heads of organisations have a problem with getting surrounded with 'Yes' men. This can cause problems if the guy at the top makes a stupid decision. With Linus, he's going to get feedback on every stupid decision.
I don't speak ASL, but I thought that most ASL speakers choose a 'nickname' for themselves, and used that to refer to themselves, and for others to refer to them. This is obviously going to be quicker than fingerspelling every name in a conversation. Well known people get assigned nicknames, for the same reason. Does anyone who speaks ASL know if this is the case?
It's very much disputed what role Von Braun had. There is no dispute that he was aware that slave labour was being used at Peenemunde and Mittelwerk. There is little dispute that he was aware that the slaves were being mistreated. What is disputed most is if Von Braun had direct control over the treatment of the slaves. Those who survived mainly claimined that he did, and one of Von Braun's colleges, Arthur Rudolph, had to renounce his US citizenship and return to Germany after relevations that he was present at the hanging of several slaves.
My postgres system does it on it's own, without my help. Ok, I had to help it by scheduling vacuumdb to run each night, but once I did that, I can forget about it.
Incidentally, I don't think that the accident is the only cause of the demise of airships. I'd blame it on the DC2/DC3, which was rolled out in late 1935, and quickly became first really successful commerical airliner, with over 10000 built in the 10 years of it's production run. The DC3 couldn't really fly transatlantic, the DC4 rolled out in 1939 was the aircraft designed for the transatlantic route, but the DC2/DC3 showed that commerical airplanes were reliable & comfortable enough for real usage.
JWST won't be repairable by the shuttle. It's going to be at the L2 point. One of the major problems with the HST is that it's so close to the earth, it's got a built in 'wobble' due to the gravity tides of the earth moon system. Putting it at L2, the wobble is much smaller, and that means it can take long exposure images much more easily. The shuttle can't get anywhere near L2, so JWST won't be servicable. This has the added benefits of making JWST much easier to design, as they don't have to make all the instrumentation in easy to remove compartments.
HST IS a reconfigured spy satellite design. It's heavily based upon the Keyhole 11 Satellite, but with a better quality mirror, different instruments, changes to make it easier for servicing and extra gyroscopes for stablization (because astronomical images take much longer to be formed than spy pictures).
If that's correct, I sit corrected, but it sounds high to me. Maximum launch capacity is about 65,000 lbs, and I thought that RTE capacity was about 1/3 launch capacity. Remember also that you have to include not only the mass of the satellite, but also the mass of a support structure to hold it safely in the cargo bay.
That would exclude replacement of any instrument where the maintence costs are low. In order to proceed scientifically then you sometimes have to drop an old instrument and replace it, even though this isn't economically justifyable.
They'd have to do that anyway for safety. Post Challenger safety rules say nothing explosive or similarly dangerous in the cargo hold for landing.
Because we don't have the tools or experience to do it. We've done a small amount of 'remove this box and insert that box' repairs. We've done a slightly larger amount of 'couple this box to that box' construction. We've done a tiny amount of 'uncouple this box from that box' reconstruction, and we've done zero 'cut this apart' distruction. To do so would require a huge amount of development of new tools and techniques.
We've been looking at the sky with telescopes for nearly 400 years now, and we're still learning more. While part of this is due to improved instruments, part of it is due to just how much sky there is out there to look at. Even quite old instruments, such as the 1908 Mt Wilson 100 inch reflector where Hubble did his work, are still capable of doing significant observations.
I think the HST is too heavy for the shuttle to bring down. The mass that they can lift is significantly larger than the mass that they can return to Earth.