So from what I can tell, they have two apparatus separated by a distance. The orientation of the apparatus with the universe seems to be unimportant unless they are trying to detect waves from some particular source. The orientation of the two apparatus to each other seems critical. They both need to be oriented identically with the each other.
So, some of the issues I imagine they had to deal with are: * Localized disturbances (plate tectonics) * Temperature variation between the two locations * Tidal forces as the earth bulges? * ???
This must be a really difficult experiment.
They have to be extremely confident that everything has been taken into account to claim that no findings are a result.
It reminds me of the Simpsons quote (which is the only reason I wrote this comment:) ):
"Dear Lord: The gods have been good to me. For the first time in my life, everything is absolutely perfect just the way it is. So here's the deal: You freeze everything the way it is, and I won't ask for anything more. If that is OK, please give me absolutely no sign. OK, deal. In gratitude, I present you this offering of cookies and milk. If you want me to eat them for you, give me no sign. Thy will be done." - Homer Simpson
So your telling us that one set of evidence is better than the other. Maybe you just didn't consider the "It was Faked" evidence strongly enough.
It is possible that people will not consider fully any evidence that goes against their belief system.
In all of these topics, Im a moderate.. I actually believe we went to the moon. However the face on mars thing will never be settled. We have these pictures, and if you draw lines between the different "artifacts" they form these angles... And when you get better pictures, then features in the face show up, like pupils and eye brows, and teeth.. Maybe that is evidence... I know a PhD physisist that says that the chances of more facial features appearing just by chance is so astronomical, that when the facial features appeared with the most recent pictures he became conviced of the artificial origin. Im not convinced, but some smart people are convinced, and some dumb people are conviced.
It will never be settled.. Even if we could go touch these "monuments", we still wouldnt be able to decide. Case in point, check out these pictures: http://www.grahamhancock.com/gallery/underwater/yo naguni.htm
Are the objects depicted artificial or are they naturally occurring? There has been a lot of debate about it. We can go to these places and touch these things and we still can't decide unanimously.
I think we all need to realize that there "ARE" smart people on both sides of most issues. And to claim that we have the truth about something that is unknowable, and they are wrong is rediculous. In fact calling people names "pseudo-scientist" is the weakest form of argument, its name calling.
I dont believe the face is artificial. I do believe their is current microbial life producing methane on mars. I do believe that the site at Yanaguni Japan is man made. I do believe we went to the moon. I do believe that transpermia occurred.
Knuth has a standard policy that if he publishes something, The Art of Computer Programming, Tex, etc... and you find a bug, he will write you a check. Admittedly for only $2.56 US, but he puts his money on the line.. He will even write you a check if the issue you raise is that of clarity.
Some similar policy needs to occur in other software developers.
"Anyway, I'm waffling. This is a decision that the IT center needs to make on its own." -- Linus.
Point 1: When would any corporate software PR person ever admit "I'm waffling."
Point 2: When would any corporate software PR person ever encourage an IT center to make a decision on its own. They would tell you that you "must" upgrade a pay because newer is better.
I think -pre releases are a form of testing. Its not structured, but it finds the important bugs and gets them identified and fixed. Ohh and its free. Structured testing is VERY expensive (and/or time consuming).
Its all about getting to the proper answer the fastest and least costly (time or money) way.
I have heard that SCO is trying to claim that XFS and other file systems are "derivative" works... In the linux kernel, you can have proprietary (closed source) modules/drivers because Linus in his great wisdom decided that a module/driver was not a derivative work of linux. File systems can and are implemented as modules. I can remember when file systems werent implemented as modules.
So.. Has anyone heard of anything that SCO has claimed as infringing that isnt currently implemented as a module/driver?
Read/Copy/Update has been decided is owned by IBM. I am not trying to claim RCU is not owned by IBM... However for this example, assume the RCU ownership was unknown... I dont think RCU would be implemented as a module. So was RCU implemented inside the SysV kernel not as a module. Then would it not be considered a derivative work of SysV? Linus would say yes, it is derivative. (wouldnt he?)
It would be sort of bothersome if we had to claim non driver/module source as not derivative. It would go against Linus's initial dilineation/stance.
Even though most pilot training centers will tell you that Flight Sim's are bad for learning how to fly. Using the keyboard has got to be a lot worse than a force feedback joystick...
They produce Flight Sim.. Do they really expect everyone to use the keybaord now?
Ohh.. I use an RF joypad for a remote control on my freevo box.
Xfree86 is not part of his usage.... From what I have heard he is in EMACS all the time. Never uses graphical environments... I read that he visited the KDE booth at gnu/linux world and played in the GUI a little while drinking tea...
This post is not meant to be funny.. It is meant to be true.
Im starting to get older and I've started feeling like my country (USA) was falling behind the rest of the world when it comes to policies on things like intellectual property, litigation, copyrights, patents, and legislation. But, now I reallize that the USA is again leading. Thank you EU for showing me that American legislation is just as stupid as the rest of the world.
A friend of mine had a unix geneology chart in his cube for some time.. I went and asked him for that and he pointed me to: http://www.levenez.com/unix/ -or- http://www.lev enez.com/unix/history.html
This seems very detailed and covers 1969-2003, but Im sure it can't be complete.. Anyway.. Check out how IBM and SCO were co-developing Monterey and in 1999/2000 they took something from Linux 2.2.13-2.2.16
Im sure its really a much older transgression like you stated with BSD...
Since Open Source software is.. evolutionary... Maybe what you are finding is how little the design tools are needed. Granted the people who work on Open Source software love to WRITE software, and not formally design it. The design evolves on its own, so why try and manage it closely. It will take care of itself. See Linus rants on this. He believes he makes design decisions by picking and choosing clumps of other peoples work.
Its not surprising to me that there are no "design" tools.. They just aren't that important or needed in writing Open Source software.
With all of the mystique/legend/myth of meterites being the seed of life, you should keep it and display it. It should remind you of your mortality and the nature of creation. If viewed properly its quite a religious AND scientific object.
I commented on this a few days ago: Here is a link, and an addition:
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3985 8& cid=4252532 ----------- Ohh... Art Bell has a guy on tonight "Christopher Dunn" Who predicts whats going to be behind the door..
His prediction is at:
http://www.gizapower.com/articles/door.html
Everyone has a theory... Can't wait till tonight..
Thank you to whomever reposted my comment from the previous story... I didnt notice this "re-posting" and didnt have a chance to get the petition link and the Gattenbrink link added....
The BEST place to get info about the shafts and the history is:
http://www.cheops.org/
It is a site constructed by Rudolph Gattenbrink and contains all of his findings in a very public way... AutoCAD drawings of how each block was cut to form the shaft, etc...
Zahi Hawass (The director of the Giza site) loves to take credit for anything and everything.. I true ego-maniac... I would love to see Rudolph Gattenbrink get the credit he deserves...
The shafts themselves were discover in 1840 or something..
The thing you saw was Rudolph Gattenbrink about 1992? He was commissioned to add ventilation fans to the shafts that actuall reach the outside surface. The tourists created too much humidity inside the pyramid and were causing damage.
Of the 4 shafts, only two make it out.
Now, Rudolph sent his robot up the other 2 shafts to see if they reach the surface. One of them bent in such a strange way, they couldnt get past one of the bends. One of them ended at this mysterious door that had polished stone leading up to it... (Polished stone was reserved for important areas of the pyramid.) The door also had some metal like handles. (Wasnt this stone age construction?)
His discovery of that door is what you saw on television.
So the question has been for 10 years, Whats behind the freaking door!
Rudolph has offerred many times to go back to the pyramid with his robot. But due to political issues, Egypt doesnt want him to work on that site. They dont like how he documented and revealed his first find.. Egyptology is more politics than science... Alot of people think that Rudolph is being robbed of credit. I noticed the CNN article mis-credits the discovery of the door.... Poor Rudolph and these pyramid games.
Sooooo... The Egyptian authorities have allowed National Geographic to build its own robot. Thats what this is. They are going to try and determine whats behind the damn door.. Im sure they have already looked. In fact many believe there is a room behind the door that can be reached through a different passage that hasnt been revealed to the public. There have been reports of secret drilling in the pyramid in 1998? time frame. (They closed the pyramid to allow "renovations!" hahah!)
There have been rumours that an underground system of passages connect the pyramids with each other.. There have been rumours that a black dog/man (anubis?) statue is behind the door. There have been rumours and rumours and rumours. I guess this presentation on monday will actually probably only create more rumours. If its empty, did they remove stuff befhore hand. If there is something there, who knows what will happen.
Ive had numerous discussions with a friend about this topic, and believe it or not, there are people that think there will allways be security bugs. I tend to feel that as you fix bugs, the number of bugs approaches 0, but my friend disagrees.
I guess my point is this: If it didnt approach 0, and there were always security bugs, then it wouldnt matter how many you found/fixed, and the security would be equal.
I totally disagree with this viewpoint, but, there are people that hold that view.
Slashdot Mirror
So from what I can tell, they have two apparatus separated by a distance. The orientation of the apparatus with the universe seems to be unimportant unless they are trying to detect waves from some particular source. The orientation of the two apparatus to each other seems critical. They both need to be oriented identically with the each other.
So, some of the issues I imagine they had to deal with are:
* Localized disturbances (plate tectonics)
* Temperature variation between the two locations
* Tidal forces as the earth bulges?
* ???
This must be a really difficult experiment.
They have to be extremely confident that everything has been taken into account to claim that no findings are a result.
It reminds me of the Simpsons quote (which is the only reason I wrote this comment :) ) :
"Dear Lord: The gods have been good to me. For the first time in my life, everything is absolutely perfect just the way it is. So here's the deal: You freeze everything the way it is, and I won't ask for anything more. If that is OK, please give me absolutely no sign. OK, deal. In gratitude, I present you this offering of cookies and milk. If you want me to eat them for you, give me no sign. Thy will be done." - Homer Simpson
-- Legerde
Dude,
o naguni.htm
So your telling us that one set of evidence is better than the other. Maybe you just didn't consider the "It was Faked" evidence strongly enough.
It is possible that people will not consider fully any evidence that goes against their belief system.
In all of these topics, Im a moderate.. I actually believe we went to the moon. However the face on mars thing will never be settled. We have these pictures, and if you draw lines between the different "artifacts" they form these angles... And when you get better pictures, then features in the face show up, like pupils and eye brows, and teeth.. Maybe that is evidence... I know a PhD physisist that says that the chances of more facial features appearing just by chance is so astronomical, that when the facial features appeared with the most recent pictures he became conviced of the artificial origin. Im not convinced, but some smart people are convinced, and some dumb people are conviced.
It will never be settled.. Even if we could go touch these "monuments", we still wouldnt be able to decide. Case in point, check out these pictures: http://www.grahamhancock.com/gallery/underwater/y
Are the objects depicted artificial or are they naturally occurring? There has been a lot of debate about it. We can go to these places and touch these things and we still can't decide unanimously.
I think we all need to realize that there "ARE" smart people on both sides of most issues. And to claim that we have the truth about something that is unknowable, and they are wrong is rediculous. In fact calling people names "pseudo-scientist" is the weakest form of argument, its name calling.
I dont believe the face is artificial.
I do believe their is current microbial life producing methane on mars.
I do believe that the site at Yanaguni Japan is man made.
I do believe we went to the moon.
I do believe that transpermia occurred.
But there are smart people that disagree with me.
Knuth has a standard policy that if he publishes something, The Art of Computer Programming, Tex, etc... and you find a bug, he will write you a check. Admittedly for only $2.56 US, but he puts his money on the line.. He will even write you a check if the issue you raise is that of clarity.
Some similar policy needs to occur in other software developers.
Don't you mean: (try to ask Sonny Bono)
"Anyway, I'm waffling. This is a decision that the IT center needs to make on its own." -- Linus.
Point 1: When would any corporate software PR person ever admit "I'm waffling."
Point 2: When would any corporate software PR person ever encourage an IT center to make a decision on its own. They would tell you that you "must" upgrade a pay because newer is better.
I think -pre releases are a form of testing. Its not structured, but it finds the important bugs and gets them identified and fixed. Ohh and its free. Structured testing is VERY expensive (and/or time consuming).
Its all about getting to the proper answer the fastest and least costly (time or money) way.
I have heard that SCO is trying to claim that XFS and other file systems are "derivative" works... In the linux kernel, you can have proprietary (closed source) modules/drivers because Linus in his great wisdom decided that a module/driver was not a derivative work of linux. File systems can and are implemented as modules. I can remember when file systems werent implemented as modules.
So.. Has anyone heard of anything that SCO has claimed as infringing that isnt currently implemented as a module/driver?
Read/Copy/Update has been decided is owned by IBM.
I am not trying to claim RCU is not owned by IBM... However for this example, assume the RCU ownership was unknown... I dont think RCU would be implemented as a module. So was RCU implemented inside the SysV kernel not as a module. Then would it not be considered a derivative work of SysV? Linus would say yes, it is derivative. (wouldnt he?)
It would be sort of bothersome if we had to claim non driver/module source as not derivative. It would go against Linus's initial dilineation/stance.
Even though most pilot training centers will tell you that Flight Sim's are bad for learning how to fly. Using the keyboard has got to be a lot worse than a force feedback joystick...
They produce Flight Sim.. Do they really expect everyone to use the keybaord now?
Ohh.. I use an RF joypad for a remote control on my freevo box.
Xfree86 is not part of his usage.... From what I have heard he is in EMACS all the time. Never uses graphical environments... I read that he visited the KDE booth at gnu/linux world and played in the GUI a little while drinking tea...
This post is not meant to be funny.. It is meant to be true.
Im starting to get older and I've started feeling like my country (USA) was falling behind the rest of the world when it comes to policies on things like intellectual property, litigation, copyrights, patents, and legislation. But, now I reallize that the USA is again leading. Thank you EU for showing me that American legislation is just as stupid as the rest of the world.
Ive seen this written multiple times...
v enez.com/unix/history.html
A friend of mine had a unix geneology chart in his cube for some time.. I went and asked him for that and he pointed me to: http://www.levenez.com/unix/
-or-
http://www.le
This seems very detailed and covers 1969-2003, but Im sure it can't be complete.. Anyway.. Check out how IBM and SCO were co-developing Monterey and in 1999/2000 they took something from Linux 2.2.13-2.2.16
Im sure its really a much older transgression like you stated with BSD...
This chart is so funny to look at..
Commercial software is better/safer because ignorance is bliss.
:(
If you can't see the illegal issues, then no one cares.
Since Open Source software is.. evolutionary... Maybe what you are finding is how little the design tools are needed. Granted the people who work on Open Source software love to WRITE software, and not formally design it. The design evolves on its own, so why try and manage it closely. It will take care of itself. See Linus rants on this. He believes he makes design decisions by picking and choosing clumps of other peoples work.
Its not surprising to me that there are no "design" tools.. They just aren't that important or needed in writing Open Source software.
Bowie J. Poag is my hero! Thanks for everything you have done!
Im no math wizard, but bc is a nice tool...
4 6946771846748599451815207469 92649396248644355553.000000
scale=6
((2^239)-1)/479
184430800081250973860
seems to be without a remainder, but this does not equal a proof.
With all of the mystique/legend/myth of meterites being the seed of life, you should keep it and display it. It should remind you of your mortality and the nature of creation. If viewed properly its quite a religious AND scientific object.
:)
How much do you want for it?
I commented on this a few days ago: Here is a link, and an addition:
5 8& cid=4252532
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=398
-----------
Ohh... Art Bell has a guy on tonight "Christopher Dunn" Who predicts whats going to be behind the door..
His prediction is at:
http://www.gizapower.com/articles/door.html
Everyone has a theory... Can't wait till tonight..
Like in basketball, you have to call your shot.
Ohh... Art Bell has a guy on tonight "Christopher Dunn" Who predicts whats going to be behind the door..
His prediction is at:
http://www.gizapower.com/articles/door.html
Everyone has a theory... Can't wait till tonight..
Thank you to whomever reposted my comment from the previous story... I didnt notice this "re-posting" and didnt have a chance to get the petition link and the Gattenbrink link added....
Anonymous Coward, I thank you...
The BEST place to get info about the shafts and the history is:
http://www.cheops.org/
It is a site constructed by Rudolph Gattenbrink and contains all of his findings in a very public way... AutoCAD drawings of how each block was cut to form the shaft, etc...
Zahi Hawass (The director of the Giza site) loves to take credit for anything and everything.. I true ego-maniac... I would love to see Rudolph Gattenbrink get the credit he deserves...
There is a petition located at:
http://www.dailygrail.com/petition/
I understand what you're saying...
Do you think these pyramids represent Egypts History, or civilizations history?
I realize they are located inside the border of the current government recognized as "Egypt".
But, I think these monuments represent something that is important to humanity, and personaly, I dont trust any governments (American or Egyptian).
So the politics play on, and I keep wondering about the conspiracy theories.
Heres the deal..
The shafts themselves were discover in 1840 or something..
The thing you saw was Rudolph Gattenbrink about 1992?
He was commissioned to add ventilation fans to the shafts that actuall reach the outside surface. The tourists created too much humidity inside the pyramid and were causing damage.
Of the 4 shafts, only two make it out.
Now, Rudolph sent his robot up the other 2 shafts to see if they reach the surface. One of them bent in such a strange way, they couldnt get past one of the bends. One of them ended at this mysterious door that had polished stone leading up to it... (Polished stone was reserved for important areas of the pyramid.) The door also had some metal like handles. (Wasnt this stone age construction?)
His discovery of that door is what you saw on television.
So the question has been for 10 years, Whats behind the freaking door!
Rudolph has offerred many times to go back to the pyramid with his robot. But due to political issues, Egypt doesnt want him to work on that site. They dont like how he documented and revealed his first find.. Egyptology is more politics than science... Alot of people think that Rudolph is being robbed of credit. I noticed the CNN article mis-credits the discovery of the door.... Poor Rudolph and these pyramid games.
Sooooo... The Egyptian authorities have allowed National Geographic to build its own robot. Thats what this is. They are going to try and determine whats behind the damn door.. Im sure they have already looked. In fact many believe there is a room behind the door that can be reached through a different passage that hasnt been revealed to the public. There have been reports of secret drilling in the pyramid in 1998? time frame. (They closed the pyramid to allow "renovations!" hahah!)
There have been rumours that an underground system of passages connect the pyramids with each other.. There have been rumours that a black dog/man (anubis?) statue is behind the door. There have been rumours and rumours and rumours. I guess this presentation on monday will actually probably only create more rumours. If its empty, did they remove stuff befhore hand. If there is something there, who knows what will happen.
I havent read the article, but......
Ive had numerous discussions with a friend about this topic, and believe it or not, there are people that think there will allways be security bugs. I tend to feel that as you fix bugs, the number of bugs approaches 0, but my friend disagrees.
I guess my point is this:
If it didnt approach 0, and there were always security bugs, then it wouldnt matter how many you found/fixed, and the security would be equal.
I totally disagree with this viewpoint, but, there are people that hold that view.