I guess it depends on whether or not the popup is simply connected, and, if so, if it is homoemorphic to the 3-sphere (this may depend on whether or not it is open or closed but I'm not sure on that bit).
Not so - if it is decided the shuttle won't make landing then you can go for bail-out instead. This was discussed in one of the released NASA emails in the context of landing-gear door burn-through leading to gear failure, and needing to decide on belly-landing vs. bail-out.
The re-entry trajectories are calculated with the target of the glide path to landing. If you know (or think you know) that those trajectories will result in loss of a wing, then you aren't landing.
In that case, the glide path target is invalid, and instead you need to hit flight regime suitable for bail-out, preferably with the vehicle impacting somewhere uninhabited. This changes the assumptions under which the re-entry trajectories were calculated, so now you need to go back and do them again - with the less strict end-point hopefully meaning far more options higher up.
I admit it is all pretty theoretical - to get to this point they would have to have known, in orbit, that the damage was serious enough that the shuttle was lost and they were just trying to save crew. Given the damage models they were using for the foam impact, I don't think it is likely they have good models for consequences of leading-edge damage in re-entry (we're assuming they knew the damage was there), so I guess they would have tried for a landing trajectory anyway.
If they lose a chunk of leading-edge on a future flight, then I expect they'll be looking hard at options like this.
We already know your 1-4 were not options, so did NASA, which is why they weren't discussing them. Also, the shuttle didn't have enough deltaV to reach the ISS so that wasn't an option anyway.
The point is that while the media and other commentators were saying "there was nothing they could have done", the NASA guys had discussed things they could have done, had the damage been thought serious enough.
The mindset that got Apollo 13 back doesn't seem to have disappeared, as some have suggested, it was just not thought necessary to apply it.
By the way, you missed out the common 5), which is "they couldn't have changed the reentry angle because then the shuttle would have been going too fast to land". So how come they were considering changing re-entry trajectory then ? - think about it.
A large number of your country's "children under 21" are currently alternately blowing people to bits and scraping bits of their mates off the desert landscape into body bags.
Yet you seem to be saying they should be protected from reading "trash" (by whose definition ?) books ?
Only if they think they are being targeted for being Arab media, which doesn't seem likely given the recent targeting of Spanish journalists, Russian and Palestian diplomats, Kurdish leaders etc. etc.
Libraries have always been about public access to information, if reading some of that information gets you arrested then people will be afraid to read it and the library is not doing its job.
It's basically censorship at the reader end - if you can't stop it being written you can harrass everyone who reads it instead.
You think you have a free press right ? Do you still think you have a free press if reading a certain newspaper means you get questioned as part of a terrorist investigation ?
Re:We can have a PC not based on twenty year old t
on
Legacy-Free PCs
·
· Score: 4, Funny
yes...i also hate how my car still uses rubber tires to drive over "roads"...so primitive.
Primitive is right - it's the 21st century, wheres my f***ing flying car ?
So, they've locked up this guy indefinetly without charge, because he's got suspected links to terrorism, and that is because he donateded some money to an organisation supporting people with suspected links to terrorism.
So what does someone(?) do - set up a support site where sympathetic people can donate (paper check mind you - sign here please...) to an organisation to support the guy. Remember this is the guy with suspected links to terrorism, so you'd be donating to an organisation supporting people with suspected links to terrorism.
I bet it took McCarthy a lot more effort to get his list together - ain't the internet wonderful.
eg. if the receiving fax machine is a computer, or has electronic store capability, then
- print cost is at the receiver's discretion - connect charge is (almost always) totally paid by the sender - there is a denial of service on the receiver's line
In the spam case:
- print cost is at the receiver's discretion - typically no per-message (or at least, per-recipient) connect charge is paid by the sender - connect charge is typically paid by the receiver, and may be expensive per-minute or per-byte - there is a denial of service on the receiver's connection
So that actually looks like spam costs the receiver more (and the sender less) than fax.
It could be argued that fixed-cost connections are increasing so connection costs shouldn't be considered, but equally mobile internet usage is increasing and connection costs then are not fixed and typically not cheap either.
If we get to the point where most mobiles have email capability, shouldn't email be treated the same as SMS ? [ I'm not sure what controls there are on SMS spam in the US but I am pretty sure there are controls elsewhere ]
A lot of X application writers don't have a good handle on server-side caching of images. The widget libraries need much better documentation about how to do things the "right way".
If a windowing system / api is network transparent, the application writer surely should not have to worry about doing things in a particular ("right") way (possibly implying it's the "wrong" way for the local case) if the app is running remote.
Whether you call it antialiasing or font-hinting, the point is that it does something to make fonts much more readable, without noticeable impact on performance. Windows also does LCD-specific colour font hinting if you ask it to - and it works.
If X is suffering the performance hit because it is doing true antialiasing, then it just shows again that X has got it wrong by solving the wrong problem. The vast majority of users don't need or want fonts to be antialiased as opposed to hinted (or whatever), and they wouldn't know the difference anyway. They just want something that looks better than hard-edged pixelated fonts, and when they change the config setting to ask for it they want it to just happen - without slowing the machine to a crawl.
I believe that newer AR missiles also use positional targeting - so if the source is an intermittent transmitter (or someone just turned it off) it can hit the last-known location.
If HARM is older/dumber then it could be more of a threat to journalists because if the properly-targeted SAM radar switches off it might just go find the next best source, being the satellite phone of the journalist down the road.
They released their code in their version of LINUX with licenses for their proprietary claims.
Therefore it is under the GPL, as a requirement of the GPL, in which case they'll have to argue that IBM signed away their rights under GPL by separate contract (not sure if that itself would breach GPL).
Either that or it wasn't actually in Linux (the kernel) but some library or program on their distribution, in which cases it probably doesn't affect most Linux users / distributors.
However given some of the stuff they are talking about (eg. SMP support) I can't see how it can be other than in the kernel and therefore they have released it under GPL when they shipped their version of the kernel.
True our power is fairly stable, but I've seen problems, and sometimes they aren't obviously bad power damage.
In one case (about ten years ago) working at night, server room UPS trips, shuts down. Nothing else seems wrong, all the other (non-upsed) kit still running. Reset UPS, same thing happens. Consult logs - mains power is running 50v over voltage. Cue lots of running around turning stuff off.
When we reported it, the electricity supplier confirmed fault, and that the supply was over voltage for several hours that night.
None of the kit in my lab was damaged but some other stuff in the same building did blow that night, and I think they got compensation.
Thing is, as I heard it most of it was limited lifetime stuff anyway (eg. light/heat or projector bulbs) and without the power monitoring on the ups, the fact that an unusal amount of stuff blew in one night might well have gone unnoticed.
ccTlds are going to have a problem. How are you going to enforce this rule worldwide, especially when some ccTlds make a lot of their income off adult sites ?
More importantly, why should adult stuff be banned from local domains - especially where offering a local service ? If I have a sex shop in amsterdam why should I not be allowed to have a.nl domain ?
If you want a benign google search, turn it on (safesearch) in your google prefs, and then if you get porn in your search tell google.
If you want to search the entire internet then leave the filter off - but presuming your search is then benign is stupid, the entire internet is blatantly obviously going to contain non-benign stuff (just like the real world).
Dynamically hooking into the windows filesystem (namespace extensions) is about as well documented as any other bit of the windows api, and there are a lot of examples (including code) around from MS.
And yes, that does mean that all windows applications (that use the common controls) get the extensions dynamically linked in when you File->Open.
Linux is perfectly good for old machines - I ran Linux with X11, Emacs, GCC, etc. etc. for many years on 386s and an early 486 (16M ram).
Also, what constitutes "older OS" - IIRC I was running custom linux (floppy +some apps off nfs) disks for turning 386s into X terminals 10 years ago. That's certainly not a young OS.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess it depends on whether or not the popup is simply connected, and, if so, if it is homoemorphic to the 3-sphere (this may depend on whether or not it is open or closed but I'm not sure on that bit).
[...]you still need to be able to land.
Not so - if it is decided the shuttle won't make landing then you can go for bail-out instead. This was discussed in one of the released NASA emails in the context of landing-gear door burn-through leading to gear failure, and needing to decide on belly-landing vs. bail-out.
The re-entry trajectories are calculated with the target of the glide path to landing. If you know (or think you know) that those trajectories will result in loss of a wing, then you aren't landing.
In that case, the glide path target is invalid, and instead you need to hit flight regime suitable for bail-out, preferably with the vehicle impacting somewhere uninhabited. This changes the assumptions under which the re-entry trajectories were calculated, so now you need to go back and do them again - with the less strict end-point hopefully meaning far more options higher up.
I admit it is all pretty theoretical - to get to this point they would have to have known, in orbit, that the damage was serious enough that the shuttle was lost and they were just trying to save crew. Given the damage models they were using for the foam impact, I don't think it is likely they have good models for consequences of leading-edge damage in re-entry (we're assuming they knew the damage was there), so I guess they would have tried for a landing trajectory anyway.
If they lose a chunk of leading-edge on a future flight, then I expect they'll be looking hard at options like this.
We already know your 1-4 were not options, so did NASA, which is why they weren't discussing them. Also, the shuttle didn't have enough deltaV to reach the ISS so that wasn't an option anyway.
The point is that while the media and other commentators were saying "there was nothing they could have done", the NASA guys had discussed things they could have done, had the damage been thought serious enough.
The mindset that got Apollo 13 back doesn't seem to have disappeared, as some have suggested, it was just not thought necessary to apply it.
By the way, you missed out the common 5), which is "they couldn't have changed the reentry angle because then the shuttle would have been going too fast to land". So how come they were considering changing re-entry trajectory then ? - think about it.
Not to mention that even if they HAD said "it's dead" there would have been NO POSSIBLE WAY to save the crew
Reports on released emails say that NASA engineers would seem to disagree. Maybe you're better at spaceflight than they are...
A large number of your country's "children under 21" are currently alternately blowing people to bits and scraping bits of their mates off the desert landscape into body bags.
Yet you seem to be saying they should be protected from reading "trash" (by whose definition ?) books ?
Hmm... "this title is unavailable" in the land of the free [amazon.com].
Delivery in 24hrs here in the uk... just a coincidence I guess...
Only if they think they are being targeted for being Arab media, which doesn't seem likely given the recent targeting of Spanish journalists, Russian and Palestian diplomats, Kurdish leaders etc. etc.
Libraries have always been about public access to information, if reading some of that information gets you arrested then people will be afraid to read it and the library is not doing its job.
It's basically censorship at the reader end - if you can't stop it being written you can harrass everyone who reads it instead.
You think you have a free press right ? Do you still think you have a free press if reading a certain newspaper means you get questioned as part of a terrorist investigation ?
yes...i also hate how my car still uses rubber tires to drive over "roads"...so primitive.
Primitive is right - it's the 21st century, wheres my f***ing flying car ?
So, they've locked up this guy indefinetly without charge, because he's got suspected links to terrorism, and that is because he donateded some money to an organisation supporting people with suspected links to terrorism.
So what does someone(?) do - set up a support site where sympathetic people can donate (paper check mind you - sign here please...) to an organisation to support the guy. Remember this is the guy with suspected links to terrorism, so you'd be donating to an organisation supporting people with suspected links to terrorism.
I bet it took McCarthy a lot more effort to get his list together - ain't the internet wonderful.
Ok so with the first dupe everyone proposed the slashdot dupe bit, which would clearly have been 1 for that dupe.
But for the second dupe does it wrap to 0 again or take on some other value to be defined only by IETF^H^H^H^HSlashdot consensus ?
I don't think it is as clear cut as that.
eg. if the receiving fax machine is a computer, or has electronic store capability, then
- print cost is at the receiver's discretion
- connect charge is (almost always) totally paid by the sender
- there is a denial of service on the receiver's line
In the spam case:
- print cost is at the receiver's discretion
- typically no per-message (or at least, per-recipient) connect charge is paid by the sender
- connect charge is typically paid by the receiver, and may be expensive per-minute or per-byte
- there is a denial of service on the receiver's connection
So that actually looks like spam costs the receiver more (and the sender less) than fax.
It could be argued that fixed-cost connections are increasing so connection costs shouldn't be considered, but equally mobile internet usage is increasing and connection costs then are not fixed and typically not cheap either.
If we get to the point where most mobiles have email capability, shouldn't email be treated the same as SMS ?
[ I'm not sure what controls there are on SMS spam in the US but I am pretty sure there are controls elsewhere ]
A lot of X application writers don't have a good handle on server-side caching of images. The widget libraries need much better documentation about how to do things the "right way".
If a windowing system / api is network transparent, the application writer surely should not have to worry about doing things in a particular ("right") way (possibly implying it's the "wrong" way for the local case) if the app is running remote.
Whether you call it antialiasing or font-hinting, the point is that it does something to make fonts much more readable, without noticeable impact on performance. Windows also does LCD-specific colour font hinting if you ask it to - and it works.
If X is suffering the performance hit because it is doing true antialiasing, then it just shows again that X has got it wrong by solving the wrong problem. The vast majority of users don't need or want fonts to be antialiased as opposed to hinted (or whatever), and they wouldn't know the difference anyway. They just want something that looks better than hard-edged pixelated fonts, and when they change the config setting to ask for it they want it to just happen - without slowing the machine to a crawl.
I believe that newer AR missiles also use positional targeting - so if the source is an intermittent transmitter (or someone just turned it off) it can hit the last-known location.
If HARM is older/dumber then it could be more of a threat to journalists because if the properly-targeted SAM radar switches off it might just go find the next best source, being the satellite phone of the journalist down the road.
They released their code in their version of LINUX with licenses for their proprietary claims.
Therefore it is under the GPL, as a requirement of the GPL, in which case they'll have to argue that IBM signed away their rights under GPL by separate contract (not sure if that itself would breach GPL).
Either that or it wasn't actually in Linux (the kernel) but some library or program on their distribution, in which cases it probably doesn't affect most Linux users / distributors.
However given some of the stuff they are talking about (eg. SMP support) I can't see how it can be other than in the kernel and therefore they have released it under GPL when they shipped their version of the kernel.
True our power is fairly stable, but I've seen problems, and sometimes they aren't obviously bad power damage.
In one case (about ten years ago) working at night, server room UPS trips, shuts down. Nothing else seems wrong, all the other (non-upsed) kit still running. Reset UPS, same thing happens. Consult logs - mains power is running 50v over voltage. Cue lots of running around turning stuff off.
When we reported it, the electricity supplier confirmed fault, and that the supply was over voltage for several hours that night.
None of the kit in my lab was damaged but some other stuff in the same building did blow that night, and I think they got compensation.
Thing is, as I heard it most of it was limited lifetime stuff anyway (eg. light/heat or projector bulbs) and without the power monitoring on the ups, the fact that an unusal amount of stuff blew in one night might well have gone unnoticed.
I get neither Flash nor popups in Mozilla, to me that's innovation.
Only the USPTO would call that innovation - lynx clearly has years of prior art on Mozilla.
ccTlds are going to have a problem. How are you going to enforce this rule worldwide, especially when some ccTlds make a lot of their income off adult sites ?
.nl domain ?
More importantly, why should adult stuff be banned from local domains - especially where offering a local service ? If I have a sex shop in amsterdam why should I not be allowed to have a
If you want a benign google search, turn it on (safesearch) in your google prefs, and then if you get porn in your search tell google.
If you want to search the entire internet then leave the filter off - but presuming your search is then benign is stupid, the entire internet is blatantly obviously going to contain non-benign stuff (just like the real world).
Before you go trying to get w3c to create another standard you might want to lok at the one they already have created...
http://www.w3.org/PICS/
"Global Failure" means total failure (ie. failure of whole network)
"Spanish Network" means spanish national network.
So the whole spanish national network went down.
seems to compute ok.
Er, but there might be a pesky ecosystem to worry about - that's the whole point of the article isn't it ?
Dynamically hooking into the windows filesystem (namespace extensions) is about as well documented as any other bit of the windows api, and there are a lot of examples (including code) around from MS.
And yes, that does mean that all windows applications (that use the common controls) get the extensions dynamically linked in when you File->Open.
Linux is perfectly good for old machines - I ran Linux with X11, Emacs, GCC, etc. etc. for many years on 386s and an early 486 (16M ram).
Also, what constitutes "older OS" - IIRC I was running custom linux (floppy +some apps off nfs) disks for turning 386s into X terminals 10 years ago. That's certainly not a young OS.