The engineering problem is: How much helium would a reactor produce, with what inputs, capital costs for buildings, footprint in land, etc. Would this output be enough to fulfill our needs, and what would the costs to consumers be?
Those are the questions that need a serious answer if fusion is to be our helium supply.
Personally, as a Christian I'd like to see the line that says the earth isn't ~4.5 billion years old, because I can't find it...
Young Earth Creationism (hence YEC) is a hyper-literalistic reading of the book of Genesis that has been always somewhat rare in Judaism, and not always supported by even those considered mainline Christian fathers.
For YEC to be true, pretty much everything we think we know about physics, astronomy, cosmology, molecular biology and genomics must be wrong.
The good news is that YEC is not the only, or even the best reading of Genesis. See this FAQ for a brief overview, this book for a much more complete overview, and this book if you want a really good, in-depth study of the book of Genesis from a conservative scholar. It's a bit dry, and doesn't give you conclusions as much as really dig into the text, but it's highly recommended if you're serious about approaching the issue rigorously.
I've read many books on the topic, and in my opinion these are the best of the lot. Especially Beyond The Firmament, which is fairly easy read and the best introduction to the issues I've seen.
Perhaps obviously, these books are geared more towards Christians and showing them how to deal with what we believe is an important book, and not towards convincing others that Christianity and the Bible are true. Except perhaps that they might show that not all Christians are (complete) loonies...
As others have said, yes, there are excellent maps for this in the US. The problem is most of the sorts of people mentioned in this article don't want to learn how to use a map and compas, over rely on their GPS and cell phones, and generally do things they're not equipped to do.
In my opinion, going hiking on anything larger then a few mile loop in a park without a map and compass and the skills to use them is almost criminal. (Most) people wouldn't go climbing without being properly trained, but somehow hiking seems overly accessible I guess, and too many people do put themselves in spots they shouldn't. Basic backcountry skills are easy to learn, even a few hours with a book like the Backpacker's Handbook will teach you what you really need to know.
This means very little. Anyone can make a subset of a language faster then a full implementation.
The Ruby world has been through this recently: Someone comes out with a fantastic runtime that supports 1/8 of the ruby language, and it's 10x faster then everything else!
There's lots of hype, but as development continues the other runtimes get 2x faster, and the new magic runtime gets 5x slower by actually supporting the whole language, and the new magic runtime is now the same speed as the rest of the field, with less compatibility and more memory usage.
So color me skeptical, until this runtime supports the whole language, including transparent overlays and all the stuff that the Adobe guys claim makes Flash slow.
Even the author of this article will tell you this. He recently added:
Update: Please do not think that this implementation is 30x faster than the Flash Player developed by Adobe. One(!) microbenchmark is never a number you should count on. I would like to make clear that I never said this.
That being said, If we're stuck with Flash for at least the near term, I'd like to see projects like this, Gordon, and Smokescreen take off and perhaps improve our choices in runtimes. I just don't expect magic.
Unless you want to program for Android, no. Even then, probably not, it's unlikely Google will kill the platform in whatever the outcome is.
OpenJDK is Free as in GPLv2, which has patent protection. They can't screw us over on that if they wanted to, except by stopping to support it. If they did that, others would continue to make bugfixes, but the Java runtime would stagnate or lose market share to other free runtimes. In effect, that's already happening, JDK 7 was supposed to be out years ago.
Basically, Java is too big to kill at theis point, they can grow the market or stagnate the market, but either way Java is the new Cobol. If they push the platform it could be something more also, but it won't be going away anytime soon.
Randi and the JREF are awesome. I didn't know they put up money for audiophiles as well as psychics. It seems the power of their skepticism is broader then I thought.
Average of $40-65 dollars per ticket profit on Acela, depending on whether or not you factor in other non-operational costs, which aren't as easily available and broken down by line.
There are other lines that are profitable from an operating cost standpoint, but not very many.
And yes, I'm not saying the success of Acela means we need a nationwide rail network, just was pointing out to the poster that his example already existed and was profitable. That doesn't mean others would be. You can fly to or between airports by helicopter taxi in NY also for pretty darn cheap. That doesn't mean it would scale to other locations...
You do know that NY-Washington already has high speed rail, right? It could be better, but it's the only one in the country at the moment, and it makes Amtrack money hand over fist.
Her current router is probably running Linux, with a similar rule for IPv4. Her new (router|firmware) will support IPv6 in the way that makes sense for IPv6. She has no idea how her current one does it, and she won't with her next one. She doesn't need to.
It's not a religious taboo, it's just you not knowing what the hell you're talking about (and this happens every damn time an IPv6 story on slashdot shows up).
evil use of NAT (N-to-1 mapping) being taken into consideration
Yes, a stateful firewall can have rules set up to do that. A restricted cone NAT is one of a few firewall policies that accomplish that goal.
but takes away too much for me to consider using it for myself or my customers at the moment.
You should not be doing any job involving networking with your current level of knowledge. If you don't even understand how current technology works how can you determine what is or isn't better for your customers.
Finally, someone who cites sources in their articles!
I hate having to hunt down articles in Google Scholar, PubMed, or other places just to check out if the reporter is completely saying the wrong thing about the study. The especially irks me with online media, where there's no real space limits and hyperlinks are a feature of the platform.
So, bravo Science Daily, and thanks for the links!
Minor version updates are simple, just update the software. Major version updates require a dump/restore, which is slightly annoying but easy for what is a major update. Major versions as old as 2003 are still supported.
If you can't stomach a backup and restore as part of a major software change, postgresql might not be for you.
This. I think I learned more skills relevant to my career through side projects with friends then I did through coursework, but I learned through both.
The people around you is part of the point, and that's why I'm not sure I'd do the online option myself.
The HP 50G is definitely a top flight calculator in terms of key action, processor, and programming. I definitely prefer it over any TI I've used, which is pretty much their whole line except the Nspire. Most people I've heard that have used both prefer the 50G, but I tend to hang around engineering nerds.
To me the keyboard is the biggest win, though I do prefer RPN. The main advantage of a hardware calculator is the dedicated keyboard, which is why using TIs crappy keyboards is such a drag. Though to be fair, the HP 49 series also had crappy keyboards. The 48 and 50 series are golden though.
The downside is the place where stand alone evaluators make the most sense, education, your teacher probably will be showing you how to do things on a TI instead.
I love my 50G, but SAGE is more convenient and powerful for many tasks, so if I'm in front of a computer I'm probably using that. On my IBM model M, because input devices make a difference in input speed and correctness.
On a tangentally related note, if you're in the market for a non-graphing calculator, I was shocked at what you get for $15 these days with the Casio FX-115ES. Picked one up on a whim, and was fairly impressed.
Unfortunately, where IE 6 is still used (mostly large corporations) not having access to gmail and youtube would be considered a benefit, not a drawback..
Because publicly traded companies are reactionary.
Until Google stoop up and admitted to getting owned, businesses would say it was only worthwhile to defend against automated worms and viruses. That targeted attacks can get your company owned is not news to anyone in the security space, but justifying the monitoring and defensive measures to detect and respond to malicious attackers was tough without datapoints showing that attacks like that actually happen.
Exactly. Google wins if there's multiple high quality browsers.
Mozilla wins if there's multiple high quality browsers and Google keeps paying them.
Opera wins if companies continue to buy their browser engine for embedding, and Google keeps paying them.
That's 3 of the 5 major(if you can call Opera a major browser) projects that are almost entirely dependent on Google. Google ads fund the web.
Apple wins if the browsers on their platforms are good enough to allow you to leave Microsoft, and the web ecosystem allows you to not feel much pain. So they also win if there's multiple high quality browsers.
IE already won the last round. Now they have to keep from losing relevancy in the next. If people start seeing "the internets" as firefox or chrome vs IE, then people can much more easily leave Windows for Linux or Mac. The delay after IE 6 was an attempt to stall the web. They somewhat succeeded in delaying progress on the web, but lost the war, and now are scrambling to build a browser that doesn't suck.
That just goes to show how much you know. Pesticides had nothing to do with the creation of superweeds.
Please explain for the ignorant. Here's what the article you linked to has to say:
How has this happened? Farmers over-relied on Monsanto’s revolutionary and controversial combination of a single “round up” herbicide and a high-tech seed with a built-in resistance to glyphosate, scientists say.
Overusing a pesticide has bred pesticide resistant plants. That is normal. I have heard of no evidence of crossover of any kind. If you have studies that say elsewise, I'd love to see them.
You can argue that without GE, perhaps Round Up wouldn't be used as much, but that's orthogonal to whether or not GE is dangerous in general. GE is neutral. Our uses of it can be good or bad.
I said how the problem of people starving isn't from lack of food but because of other reasons.For instance Zimbabwe used to to the breadbasket of southern Africa but since Robert Mugabe came to power it has been a basket case. Politics reduced Zimbabwe from a food exporter to a nation that needs food donations.
But more importantly, there are many areas of the world where the problem isn't caloric, but nutritional. Golden rice is the poster child for this. Lack of vitamin A leads to blindness and death, so adding it to the rice in places where that is the staple diet can save many.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
Golden Cassava was developed (patent free, with grants from the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation)to solve similar problems in Africa. Before the Cassava blight it was starting to be used by World Vision in its aid work.
It is a good sign that the people who understand GM techniques are the least scared of GM food.
I disagree. Though no expert I understand GM techniques, and because I do I am scared of them. For instance I am afraid Monsanto's Roundup Ready crops are creating superweeds.
Pesticide use made that problem(if it turns out to be one), not GE. Without GE other pesticides would be used, and pesticide resistant plants would evolve.
I am afraid allergins will be introduced into food that does not contain it now.
So we made a gene transfer, did tests, and it did what we thought it would? What's the rest of the story? Is the resulting food being marketed?
And I am concerned about the unforeseen. Asbestos used to be called the miracle mineral because of its acid and heat resistance. Well now we know how deadly it is.
I am not calling for an end to genetic engineering, I applaud it's medical potential. What I am calling for is more thorough research being done before it's released into the wild, which is not being done.
Falcon
What research is being done now, how is it insufficient, and how would you change the level of research required?
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, please fetch me some.
The engineering problem is: How much helium would a reactor produce, with what inputs, capital costs for buildings, footprint in land, etc. Would this output be enough to fulfill our needs, and what would the costs to consumers be?
Those are the questions that need a serious answer if fusion is to be our helium supply.
And pray tell, how much helium can be reliably produced this way?
Personally, as a Christian I'd like to see the line that says the earth isn't ~4.5 billion years old, because I can't find it...
Young Earth Creationism (hence YEC) is a hyper-literalistic reading of the book of Genesis that has been always somewhat rare in Judaism, and not always supported by even those considered mainline Christian fathers.
For YEC to be true, pretty much everything we think we know about physics, astronomy, cosmology, molecular biology and genomics must be wrong.
The good news is that YEC is not the only, or even the best reading of Genesis. See this FAQ for a brief overview, this book for a much more complete overview, and this book if you want a really good, in-depth study of the book of Genesis from a conservative scholar. It's a bit dry, and doesn't give you conclusions as much as really dig into the text, but it's highly recommended if you're serious about approaching the issue rigorously.
I've read many books on the topic, and in my opinion these are the best of the lot. Especially Beyond The Firmament, which is fairly easy read and the best introduction to the issues I've seen.
Perhaps obviously, these books are geared more towards Christians and showing them how to deal with what we believe is an important book, and not towards convincing others that Christianity and the Bible are true. Except perhaps that they might show that not all Christians are (complete) loonies...
As others have said, yes, there are excellent maps for this in the US. The problem is most of the sorts of people mentioned in this article don't want to learn how to use a map and compas, over rely on their GPS and cell phones, and generally do things they're not equipped to do.
In my opinion, going hiking on anything larger then a few mile loop in a park without a map and compass and the skills to use them is almost criminal. (Most) people wouldn't go climbing without being properly trained, but somehow hiking seems overly accessible I guess, and too many people do put themselves in spots they shouldn't. Basic backcountry skills are easy to learn, even a few hours with a book like the Backpacker's Handbook will teach you what you really need to know.
This means very little. Anyone can make a subset of a language faster then a full implementation.
The Ruby world has been through this recently: Someone comes out with a fantastic runtime that supports 1/8 of the ruby language, and it's 10x faster then everything else!
There's lots of hype, but as development continues the other runtimes get 2x faster, and the new magic runtime gets 5x slower by actually supporting the whole language, and the new magic runtime is now the same speed as the rest of the field, with less compatibility and more memory usage.
So color me skeptical, until this runtime supports the whole language, including transparent overlays and all the stuff that the Adobe guys claim makes Flash slow.
Even the author of this article will tell you this. He recently added:
Update: Please do not think that this implementation is 30x faster than the Flash Player developed by Adobe. One(!) microbenchmark is never a number you should count on. I would like to make clear that I never said this.
That being said, If we're stuck with Flash for at least the near term, I'd like to see projects like this, Gordon, and Smokescreen take off and perhaps improve our choices in runtimes. I just don't expect magic.
Unless you want to program for Android, no. Even then, probably not, it's unlikely Google will kill the platform in whatever the outcome is.
OpenJDK is Free as in GPLv2, which has patent protection. They can't screw us over on that if they wanted to, except by stopping to support it. If they did that, others would continue to make bugfixes, but the Java runtime would stagnate or lose market share to other free runtimes. In effect, that's already happening, JDK 7 was supposed to be out years ago.
Basically, Java is too big to kill at theis point, they can grow the market or stagnate the market, but either way Java is the new Cobol. If they push the platform it could be something more also, but it won't be going away anytime soon.
Randi and the JREF are awesome. I didn't know they put up money for audiophiles as well as psychics. It seems the power of their skepticism is broader then I thought.
Yes, profit margin is public data. Here's one place to pick it up, with analysis: http://subsidyscope.com/transportation/amtrak/table/
Average of $40-65 dollars per ticket profit on Acela, depending on whether or not you factor in other non-operational costs, which aren't as easily available and broken down by line.
There are other lines that are profitable from an operating cost standpoint, but not very many.
And yes, I'm not saying the success of Acela means we need a nationwide rail network, just was pointing out to the poster that his example already existed and was profitable. That doesn't mean others would be. You can fly to or between airports by helicopter taxi in NY also for pretty darn cheap. That doesn't mean it would scale to other locations...
They tried this on acela, and canceled the low-stops line. I'm not quite sure why, but I guess people didn't prefer it enough to make it worthwhile.
You do know that NY-Washington already has high speed rail, right? It could be better, but it's the only one in the country at the moment, and it makes Amtrack money hand over fist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela_Express
Her current router is probably running Linux, with a similar rule for IPv4. Her new (router|firmware) will support IPv6 in the way that makes sense for IPv6. She has no idea how her current one does it, and she won't with her next one. She doesn't need to.
It's not a religious taboo, it's just you not knowing what the hell you're talking about (and this happens every damn time an IPv6 story on slashdot shows up).
Except NAT doesn't do that. PAT does that.
Did you read the article you linked to?
"PAT is a subset of NAT..."
Except NAT doesn't do that. A firewall does that.
Yes, a stateful firewall can have rules set up to do that. A restricted cone NAT is one of a few firewall policies that accomplish that goal.
You should not be doing any job involving networking with your current level of knowledge. If you don't even understand how current technology works how can you determine what is or isn't better for your customers.
Right back 'atcha.
Finally, someone who cites sources in their articles!
I hate having to hunt down articles in Google Scholar, PubMed, or other places just to check out if the reporter is completely saying the wrong thing about the study.
The especially irks me with online media, where there's no real space limits and hyperlinks are a feature of the platform.
So, bravo Science Daily, and thanks for the links!
Minor version updates are simple, just update the software.
Major version updates require a dump/restore, which is slightly annoying but easy for what is a major update. Major versions as old as 2003 are still supported.
If you can't stomach a backup and restore as part of a major software change, postgresql might not be for you.
This.
I think I learned more skills relevant to my career through side projects with friends then I did through coursework, but I learned through both.
The people around you is part of the point, and that's why I'm not sure I'd do the online option myself.
The only good transcription software still runs on wetware.
Luckily, humans are cheap and easily available.
Casting words is one of the cheapest ways get humans to transcribe your content.
http://castingwords.com/
If you'd like to save a few bucks by cutting out the middleman, see an even cheaper way here:
http://waxy.org/2008/09/audio_transcription_with_mechanical_turk/
The HP 50G is definitely a top flight calculator in terms of key action, processor, and programming. I definitely prefer it over any TI I've used, which is pretty much their whole line except the Nspire. Most people I've heard that have used both prefer the 50G, but I tend to hang around engineering nerds.
To me the keyboard is the biggest win, though I do prefer RPN. The main advantage of a hardware calculator is the dedicated keyboard, which is why using TIs crappy keyboards is such a drag. Though to be fair, the HP 49 series also had crappy keyboards. The 48 and 50 series are golden though.
The downside is the place where stand alone evaluators make the most sense, education, your teacher probably will be showing you how to do things on a TI instead.
I love my 50G, but SAGE is more convenient and powerful for many tasks, so if I'm in front of a computer I'm probably using that. On my IBM model M, because input devices make a difference in input speed and correctness.
On a tangentally related note, if you're in the market for a non-graphing calculator, I was shocked at what you get for $15 these days with the Casio FX-115ES. Picked one up on a whim, and was fairly impressed.
Unfortunately, where IE 6 is still used (mostly large corporations) not having access to gmail and youtube would be considered a benefit, not a drawback..
If you have a way to do this, we're all ears.
If you had a good way to rid the web of IE6, google among many others would throw money at you to implement it.
Because publicly traded companies are reactionary.
Until Google stoop up and admitted to getting owned, businesses would say it was only worthwhile to defend against automated worms and viruses. That targeted attacks can get your company owned is not news to anyone in the security space, but justifying the monitoring and defensive measures to detect and respond to malicious attackers was tough without datapoints showing that attacks like that actually happen.
Unless you're Richard Bejtlich, who wrote the book on that. http://www.taosecurity.com/books.html
Here's a great overview article by him on APT.
http://searchsecurity.techtarget.com/magazinePrintFriendly/0,296905,sid14_gci1516312,00.html
Exactly. Google wins if there's multiple high quality browsers.
Mozilla wins if there's multiple high quality browsers and Google keeps paying them.
Opera wins if companies continue to buy their browser engine for embedding, and Google keeps paying them.
That's 3 of the 5 major(if you can call Opera a major browser) projects that are almost entirely dependent on Google. Google ads fund the web.
Apple wins if the browsers on their platforms are good enough to allow you to leave Microsoft, and the web ecosystem allows you to not feel much pain. So they also win if there's multiple high quality browsers.
IE already won the last round. Now they have to keep from losing relevancy in the next. If people start seeing "the internets" as firefox or chrome vs IE, then people can much more easily leave Windows for Linux or Mac. The delay after IE 6 was an attempt to stall the web. They somewhat succeeded in delaying progress on the web, but lost the war, and now are scrambling to build a browser that doesn't suck.
Flash has security controls that limit the impact. HTML5 would need to do this also.
See the security section here:
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/full_screen_mode.html
Did you ever use the original Atari 2600 controllers? Horrible crap.
Some of the rest of those were pretty good though ;-)
That just goes to show how much you know. Pesticides had nothing to do with the creation of superweeds.
Please explain for the ignorant. Here's what the article you linked to has to say:
How has this happened? Farmers over-relied on Monsanto’s revolutionary and controversial combination of a single “round up” herbicide and a high-tech seed with a built-in resistance to glyphosate, scientists say.
Overusing a pesticide has bred pesticide resistant plants. That is normal. I have heard of no evidence of crossover of any kind. If you have studies that say elsewise, I'd love to see them.
Note that herbicides are a subset of pesticides, if that's your quibble. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide
You can argue that without GE, perhaps Round Up wouldn't be used as much, but that's orthogonal to whether or not GE is dangerous in general.
GE is neutral. Our uses of it can be good or bad.
I said how the problem of people starving isn't from lack of food but because of other reasons.For instance Zimbabwe used to to the breadbasket of southern Africa but since Robert Mugabe came to power it has been a basket case. Politics reduced Zimbabwe from a food exporter to a nation that needs food donations.
GM crops with increased yield help no matter what the cause is. Famine though plant blight is common, and GE is the best way to get rid of it.
http://www.africanagricultureblog.com/2010/01/gates-foundation-to-fund-cassava.html
But more importantly, there are many areas of the world where the problem isn't caloric, but nutritional. Golden rice is the poster child for this. Lack of vitamin A leads to blindness and death, so adding it to the rice in places where that is the staple diet can save many.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
Golden Cassava was developed (patent free, with grants from the Bill and Malinda Gates Foundation)to solve similar problems in Africa. Before the Cassava blight it was starting to be used by World Vision in its aid work.
It is a good sign that the people who understand GM techniques are the least scared of GM food.
I disagree. Though no expert I understand GM techniques, and because I do I am scared of them. For instance I am afraid Monsanto's Roundup Ready crops are creating superweeds.
Pesticide use made that problem(if it turns out to be one), not GE. Without GE other pesticides would be used, and pesticide resistant plants would evolve.
I am afraid allergins will be introduced into food that does not contain it now.
So we made a gene transfer, did tests, and it did what we thought it would? What's the rest of the story? Is the resulting food being marketed?
And I am concerned about the unforeseen. Asbestos used to be called the miracle mineral because of its acid and heat resistance. Well now we know how deadly it is.
I am not calling for an end to genetic engineering, I applaud it's medical potential. What I am calling for is more thorough research being done before it's released into the wild, which is not being done.
Falcon
What research is being done now, how is it insufficient, and how would you change the level of research required?