If they had anything why wouldn't they publish their results in Nature? "We've tried without success to isolate the chemical signal from the air by dissolving it. Next we'll try gas chromatography."
They havn't even isolated it! Gah. Sending your results to New Scientist is about as professional as posting them on Slashdot.
or if there is a fire. I wonder how many people have died in theatre fires due to everyone remaining bitterly silent due to fear of incarceration at the hands of the speech police.
We've always been on friendly terms Sarah, except when you go spouting fascist crap like this. What does Symantic pay you for anyways? Researching "ethical implications of select technologies" sounds like "making up FUD and scare tactics" to me. How can the author of The Generic Virus Writer accuse anyone of "bad science". Pah-lease. You're a psychologist, your "discipline" invented bad science. When you condem virus writing and try to criminalize it like you constantly do you drive more and more kids to get into it -- call it the "coolness factor". Make it more illegal and it will become more dangerous. What the vx scene needs is compassion and guidance -- leadership if you will. When VLAD was on top we put forward positive responsible leadership. Unlike hacking, writing viruses is about investigating the weaknesses of both insecure and secure systems. What can you do in the bounds of a good security model that is still malicious? Can this help us build better security models? This is research, and maybe if you got out of your closed little commerical lab ("we make scanners!" Big deal) you might be able to see the whole picture.
Why is it that AOL's proprietory terminology dominates the technology that predates it? It's not a "Chat Room". It's a channel. Read the god damn rfc!
Section 1.3:
A channel is a named group of one or more clients which will all
receive messages addressed to that channel. The channel is created
implicitly when the first client joins it, and the channel ceases to
exist when the last client leaves it. While channel exists, any
client can reference the channel using the name of the channel.
In fact, search the rfc for the word "room" and you wont find it! You're in the real world now people, drag yourself away from the smothering bossom of AOL and grow the hell up.
No they didnt. VMWare implements existing chipsets licensed from their respective manufacturers. It has an "accelerated" video driver which provides better performance by delegating it to the host system. Connectix does the same. Both suck in respect to video drivers however, they should virtualize whatever video card you have, that way you could have 3d games stuff in your vm. They both make it excessively difficult to copy stuff from your host system to your vm (virtual network, pfft) because they dont want to implement any filesystem code. What I use it for is totally inappropriate however (operating system development) so I guess I have no right to bitch. Really I should be focusing my efforts on Bochs or something. Make a perfect x86 emulator. MMM.. a cycle accurate simulator of both cpu and hardware would be droolable. Apparently m$ft has such technology down to the level of millisecond accurate ide harddrive simulators.
Virtualizing? Do you know what the word means? How can they have 10 years experience virtualizing x86 when their product has always been an x86 _emulator_ on Macs? Their port to windows was quick cause their technology is slow and boring. Who cares about 20% perf loss? Well, *me*. Not that you're better off going with vmware for desktop use however, they're focusing on server applications.
That's no easy feat. At VMWare they use OS/2 as a part of the internal test suite. If you changed something in the monitor (the core of a virtualizer) you had to boot/halt OS/2 and a bunch of other operating systems before you could check it into cvs. Apart from the business case, the main reason OS/2 isn't supported on VMWare is because it is so damn wacky that it was considered too unstable to publically support. Virtual PC on the other had can support it because they have dual operation modes. They virtualize the processor until something breaks, you get a popup box saying the VM is going to reboot and then it starts up in 100% emulation mode (ie slow). I figure it must have taken a hell of a lot of effort to keep OS/2 running to be able to release it as a product, or maybe it is just especially dodgy/slow.
"Particles, Environments, and Possible Ecologies in the Jovian Atmosphere" by Carl Sagan and Edwin Salpeter, Astrophysical Journal Supplements, vol 32, 737-755, 1976.
The eddy diffusion coefficient is estimated as a function of altitude, separately for the Jovian troposphere and mesosphere. Complex organic molecules produced by the Ly alpha photolysis of methane may possibly be the absorbers in the lower mesosphere which account for the low reflectivity of Jupiter in the near ultraviolet. The optical frequency chromophores are localized at or just below the Jovian tropopause. Candidate chromophore molecules must satisfy the condition that they are produced sufficiently rapidly that convective pyrolysis maintains the observed chromophore optical depth. The condition is satisfied if complex organic chromophores are produced with high quantum yield by NH3 photolysis at less than 2,300 A. Jovian photoautotrophs in the upper troposphere satisfy this condition well, even with fast circulation, assuming only biochemical properties of comparable terrestrial organisms. An organism in the form of a thin, gas filled balloon can grow fast enough to replicate if (1) it can survive at the low mesospheric temperatures, or if (2) photosynthesis occurs in the troposphere.
If anyone has access to the full paper I would love a copy.
is very very limited. It is debatable whether we know of even two examples of life. All life on earth appears to have a common ancestor and is largely identical. We might know something about artifical life, but it is very limited and highly questionable. Man, Carl Sagan should be prerequisit reading. 1977, that's when Carl Sagan and Edwin E. Salpeter wrote their famous paper of "floaters", "hunters" and "sinkers". If you havnt read it, you are not a part of the conversation. Go buy a copy of Cosmos and get some humility. We're a speck of sand on a beach of stars and some among us thing we know something about life in the universe?
recently determined that amino acids are formed in a vacuum
Now that is impressive! Guess we can throw away that whole conservation of matter thing. Maybe you meant that amino acids can be formed in a methane environment, but seeing that news is over 40 years old, you must be talking about some other "recent" discovery.
it's so funny that you mention this. My company sells a compiler for the playstation II vector unit. At present everyone who writes code for the ps2vu does so in asm. Can you imagine how stupid it seems trying to talk to people who say that they dont need a compiler cause they can do it in asm? What is most annoying is that some people in my company actually entertain the notion that they may have a point!
The D compiler will take html and compile what is between the code tags. So you can put both documentation and code in the same file. You can literally use a WYSIWYG html editor to code with.
Sales People make money, not developers. A good sales person can sell anything. If you cant sell the software when it is open then you wont be able to sell it when it is closed.
Sustained rotation in a given plane (as when in a rotating craft) causes the inner-ear fluid to flow with the same angular velocity. If the head is moved out of the plane of rotation (as by turning your head), the continuing fluid movement in the old plane gives a sense of rotation in the new plane, even though no such movement is occurring. This disorienting and nauseating sensation, called Coriolis cross-coupling, is made worse by high rotation rates and short radial arms. Any movement not parallel to the axis of rotation will provoke Coriolis forces. An astronaut climbing towards the axis of rotation decelerates as he/she moves into an area of lower velocity, and experiences a force in the direction of rotation. An astronaut climbing down the same ladder feels a force pushing him/her against the direction of rotation. An astronaut running in the direction of rotation gains angular velocity and thus feels heavier, and one running against rotation feels lighter. Research at NASA Langley Rotating Space Station Simulator indicates that ambulation in the direction of rotation at rotation rates corresponding to greater than 0.3 g produces a disturbing heaviness in the legs, while ambulation against the direction of rotation is not possible below 0.05g. Finally, Coriolis forces act on any moving object; even fluid poured in a rotating field deviates in its course.
Then there's the problem of gravity gradients. Centripetal acceleration (the 'gravity') is a linear function of radius; thus, there is a 100% gravity gradient running from the axis of rotation to the outer rim. An object weighing 10 kg on the 'floor' (rim) would weigh 5 kg if moved half-way up towards the 'ceiling' (axis). The percentage weight change an object moving from a point Ra to a point Rb experienced is given by:
W1/W2 = (Ra - Rb)/Rb
Thus, an object raised to a 1 meter shelf in a 4-meter rotating station (from Ra = 4 m to Rb = 3 m) would lose 25% of its weight. It is unknown how this sudden weight loss would affect materials handling; e.g., would a suddenly lightened box tend to fly out of one's hands?
In addition, a 2-meter tall astronaut standing in a 4-meter rotating station would feel literally 'light-headed'; the head (nearer the axis of rotation) weighs 50% less than the feet!
Despite these concerns, the gravity gradient appears to be the problem of least concern in designing a rotating habitat, and was considered a 'non-problem' in NASA's recent Artificial Gravity Working Group.
There's plenty of reasons why this is bad. Not the least of which is that the platform is visible to the occupant and causes disorientation. Some people have worked with VR setups to get rid of this. I dont think we'll see a centripetal unit on the mars mission (or a mars mission for that matter -- after all, the moon is a shitload closer and we cant convince anyone to fork over funding to go back there).
Antigravity is a lot older than 1992 kids. That's just when it became fashionable to be an antigravity crackpot again. Here's an idea, rather than wasting your time trying to make antigravity devices to power some future space ship, why dont you spend your time trying to make a gravity device that we can put on our existing space ships and space stations? A decent gravity simulator is desperately needed for the human mission to mars (which may never happen in this economic climate) and other long term space projects, and frankly, if you cant make a gravity device, what chance do you have of making an antigravity device?
that Blizzard would have supplied Slashdot with a better review. Guess they figured it wouldn't be believable once Timmah! threw his name on it. Sell out fucks.
Slashdot Mirror
make the SUV run on leaves.
If they had anything why wouldn't they publish their results in Nature?
"We've tried without success to isolate the chemical signal from the air by dissolving it. Next we'll try gas chromatography."
They havn't even isolated it! Gah. Sending your results to New Scientist is about as professional as posting them on Slashdot.
When was the last time you heard a european or a japanese person bitching that a game "ruined" their life. Get a fucking grip.
or if there is a fire. I wonder how many people have died in theatre fires due to everyone remaining bitterly silent due to fear of incarceration at the hands of the speech police.
We've always been on friendly terms Sarah, except when you go spouting fascist crap like this. What does Symantic pay you for anyways? Researching "ethical implications of select technologies" sounds like "making up FUD and scare tactics" to me. How can the author of The Generic Virus Writer accuse anyone of "bad science". Pah-lease. You're a psychologist, your "discipline" invented bad science. When you condem virus writing and try to criminalize it like you constantly do you drive more and more kids to get into it -- call it the "coolness factor". Make it more illegal and it will become more dangerous. What the vx scene needs is compassion and guidance -- leadership if you will. When VLAD was on top we put forward positive responsible leadership. Unlike hacking, writing viruses is about investigating the weaknesses of both insecure and secure systems. What can you do in the bounds of a good security model that is still malicious? Can this help us build better security models? This is research, and maybe if you got out of your closed little commerical lab ("we make scanners!" Big deal) you might be able to see the whole picture.
Why is it that AOL's proprietory terminology dominates the technology that predates it? It's not a "Chat Room". It's a channel. Read the god damn rfc!
Section 1.3:
A channel is a named group of one or more clients which will all
receive messages addressed to that channel. The channel is created
implicitly when the first client joins it, and the channel ceases to
exist when the last client leaves it. While channel exists, any
client can reference the channel using the name of the channel.
In fact, search the rfc for the word "room" and you wont find it! You're in the real world now people, drag yourself away from the smothering bossom of AOL and grow the hell up.
No they didnt. VMWare implements existing chipsets licensed from their respective manufacturers. It has an "accelerated" video driver which provides better performance by delegating it to the host system. Connectix does the same. Both suck in respect to video drivers however, they should virtualize whatever video card you have, that way you could have 3d games stuff in your vm. They both make it excessively difficult to copy stuff from your host system to your vm (virtual network, pfft) because they dont want to implement any filesystem code. What I use it for is totally inappropriate however (operating system development) so I guess I have no right to bitch. Really I should be focusing my efforts on Bochs or something. Make a perfect x86 emulator. MMM.. a cycle accurate simulator of both cpu and hardware would be droolable. Apparently m$ft has such technology down to the level of millisecond accurate ide harddrive simulators.
Virtualizing? Do you know what the word means? How can they have 10 years experience virtualizing x86 when their product has always been an x86 _emulator_ on Macs? Their port to windows was quick cause their technology is slow and boring. Who cares about 20% perf loss? Well, *me*. Not that you're better off going with vmware for desktop use however, they're focusing on server applications.
That's no easy feat. At VMWare they use OS/2 as a part of the internal test suite. If you changed something in the monitor (the core of a virtualizer) you had to boot/halt OS/2 and a bunch of other operating systems before you could check it into cvs. Apart from the business case, the main reason OS/2 isn't supported on VMWare is because it is so damn wacky that it was considered too unstable to publically support. Virtual PC on the other had can support it because they have dual operation modes. They virtualize the processor until something breaks, you get a popup box saying the VM is going to reboot and then it starts up in 100% emulation mode (ie slow). I figure it must have taken a hell of a lot of effort to keep OS/2 running to be able to release it as a product, or maybe it is just especially dodgy/slow.
That's a pretty damn cool party trick.
a healthy skepticism is a requirement of the scientific method.
"Particles, Environments, and Possible Ecologies in the Jovian Atmosphere" by Carl Sagan and Edwin Salpeter, Astrophysical Journal Supplements, vol 32, 737-755, 1976.
The eddy diffusion coefficient is estimated as a function of altitude, separately for the Jovian troposphere and mesosphere. Complex organic molecules produced by the Ly alpha photolysis of methane may possibly be the absorbers in the lower mesosphere which account for the low reflectivity of Jupiter in the near ultraviolet. The optical frequency chromophores are localized at or just below the Jovian tropopause. Candidate chromophore molecules must satisfy the condition that they are produced sufficiently rapidly that convective pyrolysis maintains the observed chromophore optical depth. The condition is satisfied if complex organic chromophores are produced with high quantum yield by NH3 photolysis at less than 2,300 A. Jovian photoautotrophs in the upper troposphere satisfy this condition well, even with fast circulation,
assuming only biochemical properties of comparable terrestrial organisms. An organism in the form of a thin, gas filled balloon can grow fast enough to replicate if (1) it can survive at the low mesospheric temperatures, or if (2) photosynthesis occurs in the troposphere.
If anyone has access to the full paper I would love a copy.
is very very limited. It is debatable whether we know of even two examples of life. All life on earth appears to have a common ancestor and is largely identical. We might know something about artifical life, but it is very limited and highly questionable. Man, Carl Sagan should be prerequisit reading. 1977, that's when Carl Sagan and Edwin E. Salpeter wrote their famous paper of "floaters", "hunters" and "sinkers". If you havnt read it, you are not a part of the conversation. Go buy a copy of Cosmos and get some humility. We're a speck of sand on a beach of stars and some among us thing we know something about life in the universe?
recently determined that amino acids are formed in a vacuum
Now that is impressive! Guess we can throw away that whole conservation of matter thing. Maybe you meant that amino acids can be formed in a methane environment, but seeing that news is over 40 years old, you must be talking about some other "recent" discovery.
it's so funny that you mention this. My company sells a compiler for the playstation II vector unit. At present everyone who writes code for the ps2vu does so in asm. Can you imagine how stupid it seems trying to talk to people who say that they dont need a compiler cause they can do it in asm? What is most annoying is that some people in my company actually entertain the notion that they may have a point!
The D compiler will take html and compile what is between the code tags. So you can put both documentation and code in the same file. You can literally use a WYSIWYG html editor to code with.
Sales People make money, not developers. A good sales person can sell anything. If you cant sell the software when it is open then you wont be able to sell it when it is closed.
Sustained rotation in a given plane (as when in a rotating craft) causes the inner-ear fluid to flow with the same angular velocity. If the head is moved out of the plane of rotation (as by turning your head), the continuing fluid movement in the old plane gives a sense of rotation in the new plane, even though no such movement is occurring. This disorienting and nauseating sensation, called Coriolis cross-coupling, is made worse by high rotation rates and short radial arms. Any movement not parallel to the axis of rotation will provoke Coriolis forces. An astronaut climbing towards the axis of rotation decelerates as he/she moves into an area of lower velocity, and experiences a force in the direction of rotation. An astronaut climbing down the same ladder feels a force pushing him/her against the direction of rotation. An astronaut running in the direction of rotation gains angular velocity and thus feels heavier, and one running against rotation feels lighter. Research at NASA Langley Rotating Space Station Simulator indicates that ambulation in the direction of rotation at rotation rates corresponding to greater than 0.3 g produces a disturbing heaviness in the legs, while ambulation against the direction of rotation is not possible below 0.05g. Finally, Coriolis forces act on any moving object; even fluid poured in a rotating field deviates in its course.
Then there's the problem of gravity gradients. Centripetal acceleration (the 'gravity') is a linear function of radius; thus, there is a 100% gravity gradient running from the axis of rotation to the outer rim. An object weighing 10 kg on the 'floor' (rim) would weigh 5 kg if moved half-way up towards the 'ceiling' (axis). The percentage weight change an object moving from a point Ra to a point Rb experienced is given by:
W1/W2 = (Ra - Rb)/Rb
Thus, an object raised to a 1 meter shelf in a 4-meter rotating station (from Ra = 4 m to Rb = 3 m) would lose 25% of its weight. It is unknown how this sudden weight loss would affect materials handling; e.g., would a suddenly lightened box tend to fly out of one's hands?
In addition, a 2-meter tall astronaut standing in a 4-meter rotating station would feel literally 'light-headed'; the head (nearer the axis of rotation) weighs 50% less than the feet!
Despite these concerns, the gravity gradient appears to be the problem of least concern in designing a rotating habitat, and was considered a 'non-problem' in NASA's recent Artificial Gravity Working Group.
NASA spends $2.6M on a hammer.
Maybe if you actually read the thread...
and yet we cant make a gravity device..... see the point now?
There's plenty of reasons why this is bad. Not the least of which is that the platform is visible to the occupant and causes disorientation. Some people have worked with VR setups to get rid of this. I dont think we'll see a centripetal unit on the mars mission (or a mars mission for that matter -- after all, the moon is a shitload closer and we cant convince anyone to fork over funding to go back there).
Fewer than 15% of the populace can comprehend basic causal relationships
Sounds like someone just got dumped.
Antigravity is a lot older than 1992 kids. That's just when it became fashionable to be an antigravity crackpot again. Here's an idea, rather than wasting your time trying to make antigravity devices to power some future space ship, why dont you spend your time trying to make a gravity device that we can put on our existing space ships and space stations? A decent gravity simulator is desperately needed for the human mission to mars (which may never happen in this economic climate) and other long term space projects, and frankly, if you cant make a gravity device, what chance do you have of making an antigravity device?
that Blizzard would have supplied Slashdot with a better review. Guess they figured it wouldn't be believable once Timmah! threw his name on it. Sell out fucks.