Why fly like an airplane when your mission is only to get to the ground in a soft landing? It makes the spacecraft more complicated. And it's no bargain if you have an airplane-like craft with no go-around capability like the Space Shuttle.
No building have room for elevators if they needed runways.
Please come down from whatever overheated state you're running. He did address what you wrote.
Yes, there can be unknowns. Fixing that sort of stuff is how we got from the Wright Flier to the 747.
What I don't think is likely is that the first stage will come down and they will find out sorry, there's space-rot we didn't know about before and reusability just isn't a possibility. Especially after lots of experience with the Space Shuttle.
If they do that, they've been holding back more work than I think they can. Only the first stage can be landed at present. The second stage would need a heat shield to come back.
If ULA has the slightest bit of sense they will announce on Monday that they are pursuing re-usability. But the last I heard was that they would pursue cheaper disposable elements.
If SpaceX actually lands on the barge and flies the first stage to orbit again it's a really big deal, because it radically changes the economics of getting to space. No matter what the payload is for this demonstration. I don't know if they would get that far with this first stage, but no doubt with a later one.
DSL sends radio frequencies over twisted pair. Lots of carriers on lots of different frequencies. Radio stations actually interfere with it, for this reason some DSL systems are known to perform better in the daytime! DSL also puts out broadband radio noise.
Coaxial cable leaks too. When I lived on Long Island, I used to be able to receive it with an antenna! But it generally leaks less.
Fiber to the home is a much better option, but many locales are not being built out for it and will never be. Where I live we have ATT fiber to the neighborhood, and the last 1000 feet are copper. And it's slower than coaxial cable.
I think that beep encoded temperature into audio frequency, and you could get its rough ephemerides from receiving horizon crosses at multiple locations, etc.
Yes. And there is a photo of a 25-year-old guy holding a light aluminum frame that you can use to make a "satellite". Why is he not photographed watching a launch? Because he hasn't gotten any launched yet.
Why is his radio using the AX.25 protocol with G3RUH modem, which tends to fail as a satellite link, rather than Karn's more recent satellite modem which can stand long fades as your satellite tumbles and its antenna points away from Earth? He and "RadioBro" don't seem to know better.
Why don't they tell you that you'll need your ham license, when the frequencies the radio is sold for obviously would require that?
So, a lot of stuff not real yet. But perfect fodder for a fluffy "innovator" story.
Like I said. When AMSAT actually gets something launched for that cost, I will believe it. Until then, it's just advertising. AMSAT has lots of FOX cubesats that it could put up for that price.
Note that most small satellites are launched into low Earth orbit and that the orbit decays quickly. There is not a continuing issue of space junk for such payloads, nor do they cross the Van Allen radiation belts so rad-hardness is not as much of an issue.
It'll be very nice when we can launch one for $30K, but that day is not here. When I see AMSAT getting launches at that price, I will believe it.
Explicit language might modify what would otherwise be there only by an implicit doctrine.
In general, a licensor can modify their own terms. So, if you are using the GPL on software to which you hold the copyright, and you add some sort of exception, it applies. You can't do it to other people's software.
I am still having a little trouble with "we don't need our spies to spy". Maybe we do.
I am also having trouble believing that the kind of encryption we use on the Internet actually stops the U.S. Government from finding out whatever it wishes although IETF and sysadmins might be kidding themselves that it can. Government can get to the end systems. They can subborn your staff. Etc.
Yes. The last stuff I wrote that I couldn't compile today was in "Promal" or "Paradox". My C and C++ code from 1980 still builds and runs.
All of my web development is on Ruby on Rails. That environment has had a lot of development and I've had to port to new versions. So old code for RoR would not quite run out of the box, but it's close.
Development with a proprietary language is ultimately harmful to your own interests, whether you make proprietary software for a profit or Free software.
The one thing every business needs is control. When you make it possible for another company to block your business, you lose control. Your options become limited. Solving business problems potentially becomes very costly, involving a complete rewrite.
The one thing that should be abundantly clear to everyone by now is that making your business dependent on Microsoft anything is ultimately a losing proposition. They have a long history of deprecating their own products after customers have built products upon them.
I suspect that we could persuade those caches to flush to RAM, simply by exhausting the number of possible lines for that address - if the cache is set-associative. Of course modern processors have multiple levels of cache, so that makes it harder.
This is sort of self-contradictory, so I don't really need to respond to it directly. I just want to point one thing out. I can't afford to work for any company as less than a C-level employee. It would be a salary cut from my current business.
Right. I didn't even bother responding to the taunts.
Coward really means coward. I am sorry for the folks who are afraid that their employer will take a dislike of what they post, but for them we have handles.
I can't say I'm happy about what's happened to Debian. Having Ubuntu as a commercial derivative really has been the kiss of death for it, not that there were not other problems. It strikes me that the kernel team has done better for its lack of a constitution and elections, and Linus' ability to tell someone to screw off. I even got to tell him to screw off when he was dumping on 'Tridge over Bitkeeper. Somehow, that stuff works.
IMO, don't create a happy inclusive project team full of respect for each other. Hand-pick the geniuses and let them fight. You get better code in the end.
This actually has something to do with why so many people hate Systemd. It turns out that Systemd is professional-quality work done by competent salaried engineers. Our problem with it is that we're used to beautiful code made by geniuses. Going all of the way back to DMR.
It really does look like Jomo did post this article, and it refers to another article of his.
What isn't to like about Ubuntu is that it's a commercial project with a significant unpaid staff. Once in a while I make a point of telling the unpaid staff that there really are better ways that they could be helping Free Software.
Slashdot Mirror
A Falcon 9 launch will fail. This is a given in rocket science. Remember the history of Falcon 1. They have planned to survive such a situation.
Why fly like an airplane when your mission is only to get to the ground in a soft landing? It makes the spacecraft more complicated. And it's no bargain if you have an airplane-like craft with no go-around capability like the Space Shuttle.
No building have room for elevators if they needed runways.
Please come down from whatever overheated state you're running. He did address what you wrote.
Yes, there can be unknowns. Fixing that sort of stuff is how we got from the Wright Flier to the 747.
What I don't think is likely is that the first stage will come down and they will find out sorry, there's space-rot we didn't know about before and reusability just isn't a possibility. Especially after lots of experience with the Space Shuttle.
If they do that, they've been holding back more work than I think they can. Only the first stage can be landed at present. The second stage would need a heat shield to come back.
How about calling it Fireball XL5. :-)
If ULA has the slightest bit of sense they will announce on Monday that they are pursuing re-usability. But the last I heard was that they would pursue cheaper disposable elements.
If SpaceX actually lands on the barge and flies the first stage to orbit again it's a really big deal, because it radically changes the economics of getting to space. No matter what the payload is for this demonstration. I don't know if they would get that far with this first stage, but no doubt with a later one.
DSL sends radio frequencies over twisted pair. Lots of carriers on lots of different frequencies. Radio stations actually interfere with it, for this reason some DSL systems are known to perform better in the daytime! DSL also puts out broadband radio noise.
Coaxial cable leaks too. When I lived on Long Island, I used to be able to receive it with an antenna! But it generally leaks less.
Fiber to the home is a much better option, but many locales are not being built out for it and will never be. Where I live we have ATT fiber to the neighborhood, and the last 1000 feet are copper. And it's slower than coaxial cable.
Dear Mom,
Please send UnknownSoldier to computer science school.
Explanation: he doesn't understand basic things about digital cryptographic trust systems used on the Internet.
Thank you.
:-)
I think that beep encoded temperature into audio frequency, and you could get its rough ephemerides from receiving horizon crosses at multiple locations, etc.
Yes. And there is a photo of a 25-year-old guy holding a light aluminum frame that you can use to make a "satellite". Why is he not photographed watching a launch? Because he hasn't gotten any launched yet.
Why is his radio using the AX.25 protocol with G3RUH modem, which tends to fail as a satellite link, rather than Karn's more recent satellite modem which can stand long fades as your satellite tumbles and its antenna points away from Earth? He and "RadioBro" don't seem to know better.
Why don't they tell you that you'll need your ham license, when the frequencies the radio is sold for obviously would require that?
So, a lot of stuff not real yet. But perfect fodder for a fluffy "innovator" story.
Like I said. When AMSAT actually gets something launched for that cost, I will believe it. Until then, it's just advertising. AMSAT has lots of FOX cubesats that it could put up for that price.
Note that most small satellites are launched into low Earth orbit and that the orbit decays quickly. There is not a continuing issue of space junk for such payloads, nor do they cross the Van Allen radiation belts so rad-hardness is not as much of an issue.
It'll be very nice when we can launch one for $30K, but that day is not here. When I see AMSAT getting launches at that price, I will believe it.
Explicit language might modify what would otherwise be there only by an implicit doctrine.
In general, a licensor can modify their own terms. So, if you are using the GPL on software to which you hold the copyright, and you add some sort of exception, it applies. You can't do it to other people's software.
I am still having a little trouble with "we don't need our spies to spy". Maybe we do.
I am also having trouble believing that the kind of encryption we use on the Internet actually stops the U.S. Government from finding out whatever it wishes although IETF and sysadmins might be kidding themselves that it can. Government can get to the end systems. They can subborn your staff. Etc.
MS language is potentially worse than the default. And there is room for litigation to surprise us.
Yes. The last stuff I wrote that I couldn't compile today was in "Promal" or "Paradox". My C and C++ code from 1980 still builds and runs.
All of my web development is on Ruby on Rails. That environment has had a lot of development and I've had to port to new versions. So old code for RoR would not quite run out of the box, but it's close.
Popular computing languages do not in general have only one Open Source implementation, and do not get abandoned.
Development with a proprietary language is ultimately harmful to your own interests, whether you make proprietary software for a profit or Free software.
The one thing every business needs is control. When you make it possible for another company to block your business, you lose control. Your options become limited. Solving business problems potentially becomes very costly, involving a complete rewrite.
The one thing that should be abundantly clear to everyone by now is that making your business dependent on Microsoft anything is ultimately a losing proposition. They have a long history of deprecating their own products after customers have built products upon them.
All Open Source licenses come with an implicit patent grant, it's an exhaustion doctrine in equitable law.
The problem is not patent holders who contribute to the code, you're protected from them. It's trolls who make no contribution and then sue.
Of course these same trolls sue regarding proprietary code as well.
OK, this isn't the Velicovsky thesis, but it's reminiscent of it.
I suspect that we could persuade those caches to flush to RAM, simply by exhausting the number of possible lines for that address - if the cache is set-associative. Of course modern processors have multiple levels of cache, so that makes it harder.
Hi AC,
This is sort of self-contradictory, so I don't really need to respond to it directly. I just want to point one thing out. I can't afford to work for any company as less than a C-level employee. It would be a salary cut from my current business.
Not to mention that I'd not like it.
Right. I didn't even bother responding to the taunts.
Coward really means coward. I am sorry for the folks who are afraid that their employer will take a dislike of what they post, but for them we have handles.
I can't say I'm happy about what's happened to Debian. Having Ubuntu as a commercial derivative really has been the kiss of death for it, not that there were not other problems. It strikes me that the kernel team has done better for its lack of a constitution and elections, and Linus' ability to tell someone to screw off. I even got to tell him to screw off when he was dumping on 'Tridge over Bitkeeper. Somehow, that stuff works.
IMO, don't create a happy inclusive project team full of respect for each other. Hand-pick the geniuses and let them fight. You get better code in the end.
This actually has something to do with why so many people hate Systemd. It turns out that Systemd is professional-quality work done by competent salaried engineers. Our problem with it is that we're used to beautiful code made by geniuses. Going all of the way back to DMR.
It really does look like Jomo did post this article, and it refers to another article of his.
What isn't to like about Ubuntu is that it's a commercial project with a significant unpaid staff. Once in a while I make a point of telling the unpaid staff that there really are better ways that they could be helping Free Software.