Re:This sounds like a good time for you
on
Gimp Hits 2.0
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I'll agree with that.
Every time that there is a post about a gimp upgrade on slashdot, the posts degenerate into photoshop vs. gimp debates.
Seriously, who cares? Some of us don't run windows, and every version of Photoshop after 8 or so doesn't run worth a crap in Wine; so we use what works best in Linux, which is Gimp. Windows users can use Photoshop. Sure, it's better in a lot of ways - I won't argue that - but you use the best tool you have. Personally I will never have another windows installation on my systems, for many reasons. So.... Gimp for me. It works for what I do (texture creation for 3d models).
I'd like to see a post on/. where it didn't degenerate into the "this or that is better" arguements but where Gimp users shared their tips and tricks more.
Think about it - even the Vatican finally (some centuries later) finally acknowledged that Galileo was right.
Look at the branching and diversity within any religion. Anyone who thinks religion is "eternal" doesn't understand that it also evolves; and anything that evolves can also die off.
(why yes, I'm an athiest; raised a Christian, chose my own path)
They haven't progressed on - what do you think cockroaches are?. Ever wonder why those bastards were so tough? They started out nearly indestructible! D:
A huge asteroid could hit the Earth next Tuesday, but it won't.
You're right. The chances of it happening are very low. It could just as well happen right now as it could twenty million years from now, but it won't.
Good point. What you're talking about is the theory of Panspermia - that life originated elsewhere earlier in the universe and has traveled from system to system deeply buried and inert in cometary or asteroidal material.
Actually the only way I can think of that we can prove/falsify the theory of Panspermia is to get out into the deep solar system (or better yet into interstellar space) and start sampling, see if there are microfossils or spores of whatever kind in the materials we find. If we find viable spores (not just organic compounds, they are present all over, we've observed them in pre-stellar nebula and star creches all over the place) that would be pretty damning evidence that panspermia has/is happening.
If we didn't find anything at all, that'd be a pretty huge blow against the theory. The major problem with local planetary observations finding similar life forms is that given similar conditions, the possibility of independent parallel development, especially of very early life, rises sharply. Not saying you are wrong, just pointing out that it's a lot more complicated than that.
Yup, that's one of the major debates raging right now.
However, given that Mars' wet period seems to have been hundreds of millions (or billions) of years in the past, it's very possible the olivine was formed since, or migrated thru wind erosion or meteor impacts from water-free sites to the site where it was observed. We haven't seen enough of Mars to know.
It's a very interesting question - but I don't think it rules out large bodies of water on Mars at one time. It does definitely mean that we have to get a sample return mission there - do some dating on the apparent water formations and on the olivine (or figure out a way to do it remotely - that's difficult but not impossible.) I think it likely we'll find out that Martian geology is just as complex as Earth's is, but sometimes in different ways.
Swimmin' pools, movie stars...
Heh. Now if we found *oil* there....:)... but it's certain that any manned mission will find riches beyond our wildest dreams...even if they are scientific riches. After all, look what the unmanned missions have accomplished.
Let's just not destroy the other good science we're doing for some vaguely shaped plan of a manned Mars mission. After all, it's entirely possible that if NASA had decided to follow the late 80s plans for a Mars mission, these unmanned missions would never have happened.
On that note manned exploration of the solar system should not be *solely* a NASA venue, or (especially) even a governmental venue...though I'd almost be willing to put some money on the Chinese getting there before we do:)
Actually WRT to planet/moon I find the gravitational center of orbit to be a pretty good delineator.
Eventually it'll end up like geology, with 20k definitions dividing rock types down to the towns they were discovered in... oh, wait.... comets. At least the asteroid naming scheme can be made sense of - year and date.
There are times when one has to draw the line at trying to define every little delta-diversity of the universe and leave the details to the long descriptions rather than the type definition. Well, IMO, anyway.
:( Mine, too. Despite forecasts of a clear sky, we had high altitude cirrus & haze and fog and all I could see was a fuzzy moon and very fuzzy Venus. Calls out of town revealed it was the same all over. Sigh.
Well, at least the moon will still be a fairly slim crescent over the next few days. Some more chances to photograph, anyway.
I'm getting ready for work so time limited, but try googling the web for tutorials on the Meade. IIRC there are some out there.
Having read the article, I like his criterion: massive anough for gravity to form it into a spherical object. This doesn't change over time; it's based on physics; and it's very similar to the criterion for whether or not an object is a star (massive enough for fusion to provide the majority of its energy).
Me, too. It's the only argument that is simple enough to be applied easily, in addition to keeping things consistent.
It's (roughly) a sphere, or it's not. If it orbits around another body that is much more massive than it is (but is not a star) than it's a moon. If it's (roughly) a sphere, and orbits around another (not star) body, but the center of gravity of the orbit is outside both bodies, it's a double planet.
Seriously, how much more of a definition do you need?
Criminy, this whole argument is getting ridiculous.
Yeah, North Dakota is good. Wyoming is even better; the best I've ever seen was the Four Corners area (Utah, AZ, NM, CO); what people? *grin* but it's quite a lot of driving, even from here.
I live in a small town, so the skies aren't super dark, but they're not too bad. Then again it's only 15 miles to the Wyo border and really dark skies. Pretty decent weather (compared to MN) even in January, which is a plus.
Well, relatively small. I plan on doing several exposures staggered at about 30-60 degrees; as Brahmastra below notes, I'll need a seperate one for the moon anyway. Actually with the long twilights where I live, I'll probably go thru 2 different rolls of film trying different settings and overlaps:)
What I hate about fisheye lenses is the loss of definition and the distortion. Really good ones minimize that but they're expensive.
Being a former minnesotan, the only way I know of to find decent dark skies from the TC is to head NE into Wisconsin. Way past Eau Claire.
It's been a while, but I know that even back in the mid 90s the skyglow around the TC and outer suburbs/inner rural was atrocious.
Of course I'm more of a deep-sky type rather than planetary conjunctions:)
Enjoy, friend. Nice to know one can still at least see the planets from "rural" Twin Cities (Fifty million backyard 500w halogen security lights and counting):)
Oh, for really, really dark skies - if you want to travel some - try between Thief River Falls, MN and East Grand Forks. Some of the country road views out there are astounding, and it's 360/180 - very flat country.
I saw a story concerning this (well, the title of the article in the mag anyway) on the front page of a tabloid at a supermarket while I was waiting in line. This was, oh, a few weeks ago; I forget which tabloid it was. Basic doomsday stuff. Thought nothing of it...
You're right tho; it seems like stories of that nature have been declining in recent years. Good! Maybe with Hubble and the internet contributing to more astronomy education, the tabloid publishers are losing their "market share" *grin* Not that there won't still be a huge market (and associated loonies) for these types of stories. *shudder*
I'm going to have to take a look at a few of those mags next time I'm there... in the interest of research (and hilarity of course):)
Agreed. They've certainly been doing a good job - I noted a marked performance increase in 1.6. Firefox is still much faster (particularly loading) but Mozilla has really changed in the last 6 months.
The 35mm camera and the 28mm widefield lens are ready.:) Wish my digital could do longer exposures...
Get outside and take a look at the sky during the next couple weeks. It's worth it. Having this many planets in this small a section of sky doesn't happen very often. Take your kids out there too, and explain to them what they are seeing (it's a good time to demonstrate to them that planets really don't twinkle like stars do, and why - they can see the evidence with their own eyes.)
Oh, and there will almost certainly be a lot of good pix on alt.binaries.pictures.astro after the 22nd.
XP Embedded might make sense (although it's vulnerable to most of the same security problems; there were a couple comments to this article pointing out those problems), if, like you said, it easier to get without million-volume licensing, etc....
Years ago during and after college I worked on a lot of DOS POS terms. They were painfully slow, but at least they worked:) I remember once ('88?) spending an hour with tech support while both of us tried to figure out to restart the sales GUI and get it to talk properly to the backend (turned out the problem was a hosed serial cable). That was quite fun;) At that time I thought it a good thing that you got dumped to a usable shell, albeit one with no capability of locking out unauthorized users.
The thing that really bothered me about the machine in the article is that from the icons on the screen, it looked like a pretty generic install of XP with the POS app installed on it. That's just asking for trouble IMO with a public terminal - not so much with a POS, but still can be misused...
I'll tell you one thing; OpenServer based POS systems are no picnic. Try printing a report or doing updates and watch every terminal in the store slow to a crawl...
Slashdot Mirror
Nice and well written. Thanks, particularly for the tutorial on removing things...
Cheers
SB
Inaccurate or no, it would be better that way.
SB
I'll agree with that.
Every time that there is a post about a gimp upgrade on slashdot, the posts degenerate into photoshop vs. gimp debates.
Seriously, who cares? Some of us don't run windows, and every version of Photoshop after 8 or so doesn't run worth a crap in Wine; so we use what works best in Linux, which is Gimp. Windows users can use Photoshop. Sure, it's better in a lot of ways - I won't argue that - but you use the best tool you have. Personally I will never have another windows installation on my systems, for many reasons. So.... Gimp for me. It works for what I do (texture creation for 3d models).
I'd like to see a post on
So much to ask?
SB
Mars also started off with much lower mass than Earth did, therefore the escape velocity is lower, so heavier molecules can escape easier.
SB
Mod parent up.
Think about it - even the Vatican finally (some centuries later) finally acknowledged that Galileo was right.
Look at the branching and diversity within any religion. Anyone who thinks religion is "eternal" doesn't understand that it also evolves; and anything that evolves can also die off.
(why yes, I'm an athiest; raised a Christian, chose my own path)
SB
Posts like these are not just funny... they're art.
:) Not only that, it was ontopic. Kudos to the grandparent poster!
Damned straight. That's the best triple pun I've seen in a long time
SB
They haven't progressed on - what do you think cockroaches are?. Ever wonder why those bastards were so tough? They started out nearly indestructible! D:
SB
A huge asteroid could hit the Earth next Tuesday, but it won't.
You're right. The chances of it happening are very low. It could just as well happen right now as it could twenty million years from now, but it won't.
However, I
what's that bright ligh AAAAHHHHH MY EYES AHHH
(*$ R)UIGT&E )^(*FR&^R WHAM ffffhhhhhhhhhhhh
*NO CARRIER*
Good point. What you're talking about is the theory of Panspermia - that life originated elsewhere earlier in the universe and has traveled from system to system deeply buried and inert in cometary or asteroidal material.
Actually the only way I can think of that we can prove/falsify the theory of Panspermia is to get out into the deep solar system (or better yet into interstellar space) and start sampling, see if there are microfossils or spores of whatever kind in the materials we find. If we find viable spores (not just organic compounds, they are present all over, we've observed them in pre-stellar nebula and star creches all over the place) that would be pretty damning evidence that panspermia has/is happening.
If we didn't find anything at all, that'd be a pretty huge blow against the theory. The major problem with local planetary observations finding similar life forms is that given similar conditions, the possibility of independent parallel development, especially of very early life, rises sharply. Not saying you are wrong, just pointing out that it's a lot more complicated than that.
SB
Yup, that's one of the major debates raging right now.
:) ... but it's certain that any manned mission will find riches beyond our wildest dreams...even if they are scientific riches. After all, look what the unmanned missions have accomplished.
:)
However, given that Mars' wet period seems to have been hundreds of millions (or billions) of years in the past, it's very possible the olivine was formed since, or migrated thru wind erosion or meteor impacts from water-free sites to the site where it was observed. We haven't seen enough of Mars to know.
It's a very interesting question - but I don't think it rules out large bodies of water on Mars at one time. It does definitely mean that we have to get a sample return mission there - do some dating on the apparent water formations and on the olivine (or figure out a way to do it remotely - that's difficult but not impossible.) I think it likely we'll find out that Martian geology is just as complex as Earth's is, but sometimes in different ways.
Swimmin' pools, movie stars...
Heh. Now if we found *oil* there....
Let's just not destroy the other good science we're doing for some vaguely shaped plan of a manned Mars mission. After all, it's entirely possible that if NASA had decided to follow the late 80s plans for a Mars mission, these unmanned missions would never have happened.
On that note manned exploration of the solar system should not be *solely* a NASA venue, or (especially) even a governmental venue...though I'd almost be willing to put some money on the Chinese getting there before we do
SB
Supernova. Type I and II.
Oh, wait, there's Ia, Ib, Ic.
I give it another five years, there'll be more
Actually WRT to planet/moon I find the gravitational center of orbit to be a pretty good delineator.
Eventually it'll end up like geology, with 20k definitions dividing rock types down to the towns they were discovered in... oh, wait.... comets. At least the asteroid naming scheme can be made sense of - year and date.
There are times when one has to draw the line at trying to define every little delta-diversity of the universe and leave the details to the long descriptions rather than the type definition. Well, IMO, anyway.
Sigh, time for work.
SB
:( Mine, too. Despite forecasts of a clear sky, we had high altitude cirrus & haze and fog and all I could see was a fuzzy moon and very fuzzy Venus. Calls out of town revealed it was the same all over. Sigh.
Well, at least the moon will still be a fairly slim crescent over the next few days. Some more chances to photograph, anyway.
I'm getting ready for work so time limited, but try googling the web for tutorials on the Meade. IIRC there are some out there.
Luck
SB
It's not like Jupiter might get ambitious one day and decide to get lit.
I'm not going to touch that comment with a ten foot monolith.
SB
Having read the article, I like his criterion: massive anough for gravity to form it into a spherical object. This doesn't change over time; it's based on physics; and it's very similar to the criterion for whether or not an object is a star (massive enough for fusion to provide the majority of its energy).
Me, too. It's the only argument that is simple enough to be applied easily, in addition to keeping things consistent.
It's (roughly) a sphere, or it's not. If it orbits around another body that is much more massive than it is (but is not a star) than it's a moon. If it's (roughly) a sphere, and orbits around another (not star) body, but the center of gravity of the orbit is outside both bodies, it's a double planet.
Seriously, how much more of a definition do you need?
Criminy, this whole argument is getting ridiculous.
SB
You forgot "corporate schill"
SB
Yeah, North Dakota is good. Wyoming is even better; the best I've ever seen was the Four Corners area (Utah, AZ, NM, CO); what people? *grin* but it's quite a lot of driving, even from here.
I live in a small town, so the skies aren't super dark, but they're not too bad. Then again it's only 15 miles to the Wyo border and really dark skies. Pretty decent weather (compared to MN) even in January, which is a plus.
Cheers
SB
Well, relatively small. I plan on doing several exposures staggered at about 30-60 degrees; as Brahmastra below notes, I'll need a seperate one for the moon anyway. Actually with the long twilights where I live, I'll probably go thru 2 different rolls of film trying different settings and overlaps :)
:)
What I hate about fisheye lenses is the loss of definition and the distortion. Really good ones minimize that but they're expensive.
Anyway, looks like clear skies tonite...
SB
Being a former minnesotan, the only way I know of to find decent dark skies from the TC is to head NE into Wisconsin. Way past Eau Claire.
It's been a while, but I know that even back in the mid 90s the skyglow around the TC and outer suburbs/inner rural was atrocious.
Of course I'm more of a deep-sky type rather than planetary conjunctions
Enjoy, friend. Nice to know one can still at least see the planets from "rural" Twin Cities (Fifty million backyard 500w halogen security lights and counting)
Oh, for really, really dark skies - if you want to travel some - try between Thief River Falls, MN and East Grand Forks. Some of the country road views out there are astounding, and it's 360/180 - very flat country.
Cheers
SB
You're welcome :)
SB
Google is your friend
Being rather busy at the moment...
SB
I saw a story concerning this (well, the title of the article in the mag anyway) on the front page of a tabloid at a supermarket while I was waiting in line. This was, oh, a few weeks ago; I forget which tabloid it was. Basic doomsday stuff. Thought nothing of it...
:)
You're right tho; it seems like stories of that nature have been declining in recent years. Good! Maybe with Hubble and the internet contributing to more astronomy education, the tabloid publishers are losing their "market share" *grin* Not that there won't still be a huge market (and associated loonies) for these types of stories. *shudder*
I'm going to have to take a look at a few of those mags next time I'm there... in the interest of research (and hilarity of course)
SB
Agreed. They've certainly been doing a good job - I noted a marked performance increase in 1.6. Firefox is still much faster (particularly loading) but Mozilla has really changed in the last 6 months.
Kudos Mozilla team!!
SB
The 35mm camera and the 28mm widefield lens are ready. :) Wish my digital could do longer exposures...
Get outside and take a look at the sky during the next couple weeks. It's worth it. Having this many planets in this small a section of sky doesn't happen very often. Take your kids out there too, and explain to them what they are seeing (it's a good time to demonstrate to them that planets really don't twinkle like stars do, and why - they can see the evidence with their own eyes.)
Oh, and there will almost certainly be a lot of good pix on alt.binaries.pictures.astro after the 22nd.
Clear skies everyone.
SB
XP Embedded might make sense (although it's vulnerable to most of the same security problems; there were a couple comments to this article pointing out those problems), if, like you said, it easier to get without million-volume licensing, etc....
Years ago during and after college I worked on a lot of DOS POS terms. They were painfully slow, but at least they worked
The thing that really bothered me about the machine in the article is that from the icons on the screen, it looked like a pretty generic install of XP with the POS app installed on it. That's just asking for trouble IMO with a public terminal - not so much with a POS, but still can be misused...
I'll tell you one thing; OpenServer based POS systems are no picnic. Try printing a report or doing updates and watch every terminal in the store slow to a crawl...
SB
Not if it gets spraypainted.
SB