It may well be that it does make a difference, but it shouldn't. What if Card sided with the other side, would people still be valuing his opinion then?
Famous peoples' opinions on subjects for which they did not game their fame are just as relevant as the everyman in the street. And that is to say, not bloody much.
No, diphthongs (not dipthongs) are phoneme sequences where two vowel phonemes, one right after each other, make a new sound. An example in English would be "o" and "y" make "oy."
Diphthongs are actually about the phonemes, not the spellings, so several single letter vowel sounds in English are already diphthongs, like the "a" in "favorite."
I have to agree. That is the height of unprofessionalism. If someone had such ridiculous screening criteria in their hiring practices, I wouldn't want to work for them, regardless of whether they'd want me or not.
The OSP is for docking with rendezvousing with the ISS, and for use as a sort of life raft in case we have further Shuttle program downtimes in the future. It doesn't have anything to do with renewed trips to the Moon or Mars.
It was pseudoscience, the claims were nonsense, and the scientific community investigated the claims thoroughly to try to reproduce the claimed results and no one, including the original "researchers," could manage. It was bullshit, and was demonstrated to be bullshit. The rest of the world moved on.
Just because you want something bad enough doesn't make it real.
I'm impressed with how much press this object is getting, since it's extremely unlikely that it will hit the Earth. So unlikely, in fact, that the probability of it impacting is calculated at at about one in a million over the next century (not for the 2014 encounter, which would consequently much lower probability). Furthermore, one in a million is about the background probability of any object hitting us over the next century, so in fact the probability of 2003 QQ47 hitting us is no greater than any object, including ones we don't know about, hitting us in the same time period.
Phil Plait has a site called Bad Astronomy which features all the bad astronomy, and various other forms of science, that are inappropriately represented in contemporary films, news, and television. The site is excellent, and journeys into other areas, such as debunking common myths and misunderstandings about astronomy and science in general. I'm surprised it wasn't one of the ones mentioned in the title.
There is remarkably little contention in the actual scientific community about nomenclature. A few astronomers argue strongly for organized nomenclature revamps, however the vast majority of astronomers are not in this camp. The objects themselves don't fundamentally change based on the name we attach to this; most of the clamoring for nomenclature changes come from the lay press and the amateur astronomy community.
That being said, it's important to realize that the proposed classification system only affects outer Solar System comets and asteroids.
Well, since hams only have conversations about the weather, their computers which they can barely operate, and their ham radio equipment, I guess the hams were really yapping it up about their ham equipment during the blackout.
It's worth pointing out that up until just recently, pretty much everyone was sure that the universe would be closed (although it appears pretty flat). The recent supernova measurements indicate a universe that's expanding faster and faster, so we now have very strong reason to believe the universe is in fact open, but when people like Dyson were speculating about the possible future of an open universe, it was considered highly speculative and rather academic (since everyone was sure that we didn't live in one).
Given the number of clones and workalikes that are popping up left and right, I doubt this is a big concern. Perhaps you might be worried about losing the bad games, but the good ones will certainly live on in some fashion, copyright infringing or not.
This is marked Funny, but it's actually a good point. If entities receive a series of complaints that are all almost of precisely the same format and content, and ultimately find out that the complaints all originated from an advocacy group or site, they're far more likely to weigh those complaints much less than if they were independently received. Encouraging all your friends to copy your complaint along is unlikely to have all that much effect.
Remember, the total number of people involved in watching the skies for potential Earth impactors is fewer than the staff of one shift of a modest McDonald's restaurant.
Radiation dangers are usually grossly overrated by the general public. Everything around you is slightly radioactive naturally, after all. Natural uranium is certainly radioactive, but hardly qualifies as a really serious radiation source. You typically need a sample with > ~1 TBq of activity before you really have the makings of a serious radiological weapon; uranium ore is only about 1 MBq/kg.
The damage caused when a bullet hits a victim is caused by both the momentum and kinetic energy of the bullet, as well as how bullet deforms when it strikes tissue. The dynamics involved here won't really be any different for normal bullets. The only difference here is how the bullet gets up to speed.
Don't forget that coilguns (or Gauss rifles, what's being discussed here) and railguns are not the same thing. Coilguns use changing magnetic fields to accelerate the slug via electromagnetic induction.
Railguns use a projectile that makes physical contact with two rails so that they form a current, and an enormous current is pumped through the rails (and thus the projectile) which results in the projectile being accelerated down the rails. So far it's been difficult to build railguns that don't melt the rails to slag after each firing.
They're both electromagnetic, but they're quite different approaches.
Slashdot Mirror
It may well be that it does make a difference, but it shouldn't. What if Card sided with the other side, would people still be valuing his opinion then?
Famous peoples' opinions on subjects for which they did not game their fame are just as relevant as the everyman in the street. And that is to say, not bloody much.
No, diphthongs (not dipthongs) are phoneme sequences where two vowel phonemes, one right after each other, make a new sound. An example in English would be "o" and "y" make "oy."
Diphthongs are actually about the phonemes, not the spellings, so several single letter vowel sounds in English are already diphthongs, like the "a" in "favorite."
I have to agree. That is the height of unprofessionalism. If someone had such ridiculous screening criteria in their hiring practices, I wouldn't want to work for them, regardless of whether they'd want me or not.
The OSP is for docking with rendezvousing with the ISS, and for use as a sort of life raft in case we have further Shuttle program downtimes in the future. It doesn't have anything to do with renewed trips to the Moon or Mars.
It was pseudoscience, the claims were nonsense, and the scientific community investigated the claims thoroughly to try to reproduce the claimed results and no one, including the original "researchers," could manage. It was bullshit, and was demonstrated to be bullshit. The rest of the world moved on.
Just because you want something bad enough doesn't make it real.
Revised data rule out the possibility of a collision in 2014: Read about it here.
I'm impressed with how much press this object is getting, since it's extremely unlikely that it will hit the Earth. So unlikely, in fact, that the probability of it impacting is calculated at at about one in a million over the next century (not for the 2014 encounter, which would consequently much lower probability). Furthermore, one in a million is about the background probability of any object hitting us over the next century, so in fact the probability of 2003 QQ47 hitting us is no greater than any object, including ones we don't know about, hitting us in the same time period.
Are people really naive enough to think that DOS attacks don't almost always harm innocent bystanders?
The article makes it clear it's about taxing business LANs, not private, personal LANs.
Phil Plait has a site called Bad Astronomy which features all the bad astronomy, and various other forms of science, that are inappropriately represented in contemporary films, news, and television. The site is excellent, and journeys into other areas, such as debunking common myths and misunderstandings about astronomy and science in general. I'm surprised it wasn't one of the ones mentioned in the title.
Tranisititititition?
Don't point it at the Sun!
There is remarkably little contention in the actual scientific community about nomenclature. A few astronomers argue strongly for organized nomenclature revamps, however the vast majority of astronomers are not in this camp. The objects themselves don't fundamentally change based on the name we attach to this; most of the clamoring for nomenclature changes come from the lay press and the amateur astronomy community.
That being said, it's important to realize that the proposed classification system only affects outer Solar System comets and asteroids.
Well, since hams only have conversations about the weather, their computers which they can barely operate, and their ham radio equipment, I guess the hams were really yapping it up about their ham equipment during the blackout.
The phrase "cart before the horse" has special meaning here. In small moves, guys, in small moves.
For a good foray into the future history of an open universe, see Freeman Dyson's classic, "Time Without End: Physics and Biology In an Open Universe".
It's worth pointing out that up until just recently, pretty much everyone was sure that the universe would be closed (although it appears pretty flat). The recent supernova measurements indicate a universe that's expanding faster and faster, so we now have very strong reason to believe the universe is in fact open, but when people like Dyson were speculating about the possible future of an open universe, it was considered highly speculative and rather academic (since everyone was sure that we didn't live in one).
Wasn't that the name of the big truck in Are You My Mother?
Perhaps you're not familiar with how book reviews work. The reviewer gets to say whether they liked the book or not, not the author.
Given the number of clones and workalikes that are popping up left and right, I doubt this is a big concern. Perhaps you might be worried about losing the bad games, but the good ones will certainly live on in some fashion, copyright infringing or not.
This is marked Funny, but it's actually a good point. If entities receive a series of complaints that are all almost of precisely the same format and content, and ultimately find out that the complaints all originated from an advocacy group or site, they're far more likely to weigh those complaints much less than if they were independently received. Encouraging all your friends to copy your complaint along is unlikely to have all that much effect.
Remember, the total number of people involved in watching the skies for potential Earth impactors is fewer than the staff of one shift of a modest McDonald's restaurant.
Sheesh, guys, fractional people arguments were old in 1985 ("2.3 children per couple").
I can't see original site; it got suspended.
Radiation dangers are usually grossly overrated by the general public. Everything around you is slightly radioactive naturally, after all. Natural uranium is certainly radioactive, but hardly qualifies as a really serious radiation source. You typically need a sample with > ~1 TBq of activity before you really have the makings of a serious radiological weapon; uranium ore is only about 1 MBq/kg.
The damage caused when a bullet hits a victim is caused by both the momentum and kinetic energy of the bullet, as well as how bullet deforms when it strikes tissue. The dynamics involved here won't really be any different for normal bullets. The only difference here is how the bullet gets up to speed.
Don't forget that coilguns (or Gauss rifles, what's being discussed here) and railguns are not the same thing. Coilguns use changing magnetic fields to accelerate the slug via electromagnetic induction.
Railguns use a projectile that makes physical contact with two rails so that they form a current, and an enormous current is pumped through the rails (and thus the projectile) which results in the projectile being accelerated down the rails. So far it's been difficult to build railguns that don't melt the rails to slag after each firing.
They're both electromagnetic, but they're quite different approaches.