Look, I'm writing this on a G5, so I've got Nixon-goes-to-China credentials to say this:
Say whatever you want about Gates: call him a Borg, say his company writes sitty shoftware and is run by a bunch of thugs in white collars. But don't dis the guy's soul. He gave $1Billion to give inoculations to kids in 3rd world countries. Even $100M I could believe was just a publicity gimmick. But a BILLION?
Machine translation will be an issue for a long, long time. Several languages are growing in number of speakers. And even if only TWO languages still existed, it would still be a very tough AI problem to translate from one to the other.
The second comment is, no, it's a very tough AI problem. Solve that, and the translation problem is also solved.
Work on Xen is supported by UK EPSRC grant GR/S01894, Intel Research, and Microsoft Research.
Why do you think MS would be supporting this work financially if the only conceivable uses for it are one that are "exactly what Microsoft doesn't want?"
MS is one of their sponsors. How much you want to bet that MS licenses the technology and distributes it under their own logo? We already know from the VirtualPC purchase that this is a future direction for them.
GPL doesn't overthrow copyright: it simply uses copyright as a legal reality to underpin the enforcement of a license requiring those who use GPL code to release their modifications as GPL code. If copyright went away tommorrow, it would take GPL with it, and MS-style EULAs, and SCO's UNIX license, and everything would be public domain and free for all, as beer or speech or air.
Put it this way: if you accept SCO's claim that the GPL supplants coypright, then ALL software licenses supplant copyright, because they are all intended to limit what one can and cannot do with software code. The difference is that the average MS-style EULA limits what you can do to *less* than copyright explicitly permits, while the GPL "limits" you to *more* than copyright explicitly permits.
Kissinger is quite retired. North and Rumsfeld as far as I know had nothing to do with deciding upon the course of the events I specified (Vietnam, nuclear attacks, etc.), even if they might have participated in them at a lower level. Reread the post I responded to, and my own post.
What's the payload breakdown? Let's see: shuttle can bring 65,000 lbs to LEO. http://shuttlepayloads.jsc.nasa.gov/flying/accommo dations/payloadbay.htm At $600M, that's $10,000/lbs/LEO. How many pounds can one of the X-Prize ships bring up to LEO? 0. So what's the cost per pound to LEO? Infinity. Now if someone can point to a high-arc to LEO transfer vehicle that an X-Prize ship can use, then I'll be more impressed.
Look, the X-Prize is a great thing, but it's competing with 1960 NASA, not 2003 NASA. Give it time, and commercial space flight will push NASA out of the way for everything but the most experimental work. But don't imagine that the future is now.
Actually, no, the folks who gave us Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, CIA sponsored overthrows of South American governments, and the genocide of the Amerinds are all dead or retired; while one of the fellows who came up with the idea of the Tiananmen Square massacre is himself head honcho in China. Read the Tiananmen Papers, for god's sake.
4 years. I remember it being implemented before the XHTML recommendation was final. I remember it particularly because I've been using XHTML on my website since I converted it, then, in 1999, with HTML-Tidy.
But the Orion in 2001 shares only the name with its namesake, the Orion designed at General Atomics (but never built). Clarke and Kubrick thought about using that Orion, but decided that going from the ending of Dr. Strangelove to a launch in 2001 with an Orion "ticking away" at one nuclear explosion a second would convince everyone that Kubrick had really learned to love the bomb.
Instead, of course, you don't see the launch of the Orion at all; you see a space plane called an Orion that is seen whizzing by the orbital nuke platform that had just appeared in approximately the position on the frame that Moonwatcher's thrown bone had occupied a frame before.
Actually, no, the Orion is NOT an interstellar craft, it is an interplanetary colonization craft. The original design idea was to build it on the Earth - that's why it needed so much thrust. It couldn't manage enough thrust to make interstellar travel feasible, but it was plenty to get really really big payloads directly from the earth's surface to Mars or the Galileans.
Re:Once again here is a possible answer...
on
NASA's New Space Wheels
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
McDonnell Douglas is not listening. They were bought out by Boeing, and now Boeing is more interested in their own solutions than in SSTO. By the way, to say that the Delta Clipper was "flying throughout the 90s" is rather an exaggeration: the testing program was going well, and it did get off the ground, but never more than a low hover. It would take a hell of a lot longer than 6 months to go from that smaller-scale prototype to a flying production model, though.
There has never been an ISS crew with more than 3 people. When the shuttle is visiting, there is of course both the shuttle crew of up to 7 and the ISS crew of 3; but the ISS crew has never been more than 3. There were plans to build a separate habitation module and a new escape craft to enable a crew of 7, but those have been postponed/cut for budgetary reasons.
Slashdot Mirror
C'mon, if you're going to do that, you should at least do it in binary.
You don't understand that? You must be in the Slowness.
Who are you kidding? There're probably a dozen google-gurus laughing at this thread as we speak.
"Hey, guys, you know that bit of code we wrote to screw up the google whackers? Slashdot finally took notice!"
Actually, anyone under 15 would probably recognize him as the guy who replaced Ringo on Shining Time Station.
Hey, there's an idea for a brilliant Doctor: Ringo!!!
Oh, wait a minute, they'll just replace the OS on the shots of the screen with Windows screen shots. Never mind.
Look, I'm writing this on a G5, so I've got Nixon-goes-to-China credentials to say this:
Say whatever you want about Gates: call him a Borg, say his company writes sitty shoftware and is run by a bunch of thugs in white collars. But don't dis the guy's soul. He gave $1Billion to give inoculations to kids in 3rd world countries. Even $100M I could believe was just a publicity gimmick. But a BILLION?
'fraid not. The MS-killer merger would be IBM + Apple .
Machine translation will be an issue for a long, long time. Several languages are growing in number of speakers. And even if only TWO languages still existed, it would still be a very tough AI problem to translate from one to the other.
The second comment is, no, it's a very tough AI problem. Solve that, and the translation problem is also solved.
Not using contractions is a narrative convention to indicate objectivity. It's probably an inside joke at Paramount.
Work on Xen is supported by UK EPSRC grant GR/S01894, Intel Research, and Microsoft Research.
Why do you think MS would be supporting this work financially if the only conceivable uses for it are one that are "exactly what Microsoft doesn't want?"
Now we can see that it was intended more as a blueprint than a short story.
MS is one of their sponsors. How much you want to bet that MS licenses the technology and distributes it under their own logo? We already know from the VirtualPC purchase that this is a future direction for them.
Somebody feel like recommending a book on dark matter that can catch the rest of us up to about 1999 or so?
GPL doesn't overthrow copyright: it simply uses copyright as a legal reality to underpin the enforcement of a license requiring those who use GPL code to release their modifications as GPL code. If copyright went away tommorrow, it would take GPL with it, and MS-style EULAs, and SCO's UNIX license, and everything would be public domain and free for all, as beer or speech or air.
Put it this way: if you accept SCO's claim that the GPL supplants coypright, then ALL software licenses supplant copyright, because they are all intended to limit what one can and cannot do with software code. The difference is that the average MS-style EULA limits what you can do to *less* than copyright explicitly permits, while the GPL "limits" you to *more* than copyright explicitly permits.
Kissinger is quite retired. North and Rumsfeld as far as I know had nothing to do with deciding upon the course of the events I specified (Vietnam, nuclear attacks, etc.), even if they might have participated in them at a lower level. Reread the post I responded to, and my own post.
Someone want to explain to me what makes parent a troll? Grandparent was trolling, I was making a statement of fact.
What's the payload breakdown? Let's see: shuttle can bring 65,000 lbs to LEO. http://shuttlepayloads.jsc.nasa.gov/flying/accommo dations/payloadbay.htm At $600M, that's $10,000/lbs/LEO. How many pounds can one of the X-Prize ships bring up to LEO? 0. So what's the cost per pound to LEO? Infinity. Now if someone can point to a high-arc to LEO transfer vehicle that an X-Prize ship can use, then I'll be more impressed.
Look, the X-Prize is a great thing, but it's competing with 1960 NASA, not 2003 NASA. Give it time, and commercial space flight will push NASA out of the way for everything but the most experimental work. But don't imagine that the future is now.
Mod parent up insightful. Crowding LEO is something for them to worry about in 3003, not 2003.
Actually, no, the folks who gave us Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Vietnam, CIA sponsored overthrows of South American governments, and the genocide of the Amerinds are all dead or retired; while one of the fellows who came up with the idea of the Tiananmen Square massacre is himself head honcho in China. Read the Tiananmen Papers, for god's sake.
My source is Dyson, George, Project Orion: The True Story of the Atomic Spaceship.
4 years. I remember it being implemented before the XHTML recommendation was final. I remember it particularly because I've been using XHTML on my website since I converted it, then, in 1999, with HTML-Tidy.
But the Orion in 2001 shares only the name with its namesake, the Orion designed at General Atomics (but never built). Clarke and Kubrick thought about using that Orion, but decided that going from the ending of Dr. Strangelove to a launch in 2001 with an Orion "ticking away" at one nuclear explosion a second would convince everyone that Kubrick had really learned to love the bomb.
Instead, of course, you don't see the launch of the Orion at all; you see a space plane called an Orion that is seen whizzing by the orbital nuke platform that had just appeared in approximately the position on the frame that Moonwatcher's thrown bone had occupied a frame before.
Actually, no, the Orion is NOT an interstellar craft, it is an interplanetary colonization craft. The original design idea was to build it on the Earth - that's why it needed so much thrust. It couldn't manage enough thrust to make interstellar travel feasible, but it was plenty to get really really big payloads directly from the earth's surface to Mars or the Galileans.
McDonnell Douglas is not listening. They were bought out by Boeing, and now Boeing is more interested in their own solutions than in SSTO. By the way, to say that the Delta Clipper was "flying throughout the 90s" is rather an exaggeration: the testing program was going well, and it did get off the ground, but never more than a low hover. It would take a hell of a lot longer than 6 months to go from that smaller-scale prototype to a flying production model, though.
There has never been an ISS crew with more than 3 people. When the shuttle is visiting, there is of course both the shuttle crew of up to 7 and the ISS crew of 3; but the ISS crew has never been more than 3. There were plans to build a separate habitation module and a new escape craft to enable a crew of 7, but those have been postponed/cut for budgetary reasons.