--LED bulbs are going to render CFL bulbs a flash in the pan--
Maybe, but not for a while. Florescent bulbs surpassed incandescent lights back in the late 50's to early 60's. Of course most of this was due to offices. Now the mercury in a CFL is a tiny amount in comparison but not impossible to deal with. Commercially they have been being changed out for years. We just need some way to recycle the bulbs and reuse the mercury. I wouldn't be too overly concerned if one busted out of many thousands.
The one thing I don't like about CFL's is well the consumer wanted them to look like incandescent lights. Now they have made that happen at the expense of brightness. Of course you can still buy the ones that have a different color balance, but they cost more and it is real hard to make an LED with that color balance. In fact most LED's have a real narrow spectrum. If you use a filter to correct it, you loose brightness.
In short I don't believe CFL's are going to be a flash in the pan. In fact they are just now really taking off as LED's will in the future. For now though the expense doesn't justify the savings for LED's being used as a primary light source. As a secondary source LED's are already hot (flashlights).
It does seem like the Intel ones are still the ones to get for now and thanks for the interesting articles from Linus. I have over 300,000 files on my machine and do a lot of random read and write requests. Whenever the mains burn up, I might now be able to get what I want.
A great deal of their budget goes for aeronautics. In that part, there is a great deal that they have done that affects us but it's not publicized much at all.
What is really amazing is standing right next to the corner of it and looking up. It's one big giant box. It kicks in my fear of heights standing on the ground and looking up from the corner of it. And inside those guys in white suits look like ants up there and walk underneath of a rocket being assembled in stages. It IS amazing. It was a long time ago and I was just a kid and it was just a Saturn 1B but still it is an impressive piece of work, but I'm not amazed about how or why just that it IS.
We may see who is right tomorrow if Obama doesn't take another trip to Florida in the presidential yacht. It seemd to be scrubbed just because of that boat being to close.
Interesting. I wonder what kind of control the Ares would have? This would concern me more than oscillations. Liquid fuel has always been assumed to be safer but this may not still be the case.
The failure rate of the Russian program vs the US failure rate seem to be about equal. Now I think we do have and edge when it comes to deep space exploration, but we did have Russian help in the design of the Martian rovers. So I guess we will see if the launch will be a success or not.
I hear a lot hear about letting the commercial people do it (Space X). We'll fine. Do it just like the military. Write a specification. Send it for bid. Then let NASA test it to make sure that it will work. This is already being done mostly since before Apollo.
Different defense (and other) contractors built different parts for Apollo.I guess Thiokol got the original shuttle contract for the boosters and now it's whatever company absorbed them.
I think Space X would have a different goal than manned launches. I'm not sure why they would think they could make money doing that but there may be a possibility that they could launch commercial payloads and make a little money.
What I always wondered is how the direction of the burn is controlled? On the shuttle you have those little but powerful liquid fuel nozzles to control which way the thing will go. I would just like to see wht the plan is for using a shuttle booster as the main thing doing the steering? It might point it's way into the ground too if this hasn't been thought through.
--I've always wondered about that building. Why is it so much better to do the assembly vertically, rather than doing it horizontally and then raising the vehicle afterwards?--
For the same reason it is better to test rockets vertical. It may be cheaper the other way, but I think you have more failures that way too. Those SRB's were always tested horizontal (not good). Now once and for all we can get a vertical rocket test of the SRB. The same goes for the assembly. You don't have to design the rocket to take the stress of being raised sideways. This is even more important as the rocket weight and size gets larger.
I guess which is better depends upon the deign goal. Sideways is cheaper. Vertical is better. We already have sunk cost in the VAB, why not use it?
NASA had unlimited funds for Apollo. The funds are more limited in this case, so some "afro engineering", for lack of a more politically correct term, is bound to occur.
Yeah, I think they already are, by his statements. So if he fixed something there he should give back, but not the content because games are more like movies now I can understand his statements but I'm assuming that does give a little back, if nothing but his opinion here.
--I am pretty sure that IBM and the like aren't recommending Ubuntu for altruistic purposes, but because they can make money off support. I'm equally sure that the companies using Ubuntu aren't doing so for altruistic purposes, but because it's cheaper for them.--
You are so right, even though you hardly ever hear that mentioned here. A little guy just about has to close his stuff up if the market for what he is doing is like that or that is the market that you are going after.
--I think in many cases the decision to NOT switch is based on ignorance of the platform and fear of interoperability,--
I think this is a real issue on the client side if you have CAD applications and Small Business Accounting Software. Larger enterprises can break away, but it is more difficult for the small business to do so.
They already own the internet. And...just one guy owns it all. He lives under what used to be called area 51 in secret and collects alien technology. I think the last time they found something it said DALEK. No one knows what it means and it doesn't work anyhow.
We have an office where I don't think we have used any special templates or macros with MS Office. I'm not sure why it's that big of a deal either. Save as PDF. Internally who gives a rats ass? Externally, well if they want to edit a pdf, there are ways, but mainly we don't want that, so I do the same thing. Everything I send out is either plain text or a PDF.
So I really don't understand the collaboration issue. Outlook/Back Office is the only issue that I would need to resolve. We are on Office 2003 OEM's. I don't see a need to buy more licensing. I just install OO and away we go. I think the real problem is that business class machines tend to just come with this stuff from M$ pre-installed and it's not given any thought.
--The most ridiculous thing I get is from work where other departments advertising meetings and Christmas events email out Publisher files.--
OK, now you have made me mad. This is the very reason to keep as customers send us crap this way, so we have to have it too. If you could convince them to quit doing that stuff and many have after learning how easy it is just to create a pdf and be done, but in this economy you can't let even one fish get away. That's why I keep an arsenal of tools to open files that I am sent after they are scanned of course and then we hope for the best and pray we don't get compromised, which BTW is less possible with OO documents. I can send send all of the externals in pdf but what comes in thru the net (customers), who knows what they might send. Most of their machines are laden with spyware, rootkits, and viri.
--So, sorry, but the iPhone is not popular just because it's from Apple. It's popular because it works.--
I know I'm gonna get modded down for this but.....Unless you live in rural areas, specifically areas where the have acquired Alltel towers. They have done nothing to upgrade those period. GSM doesn't work out here. If you don't have a CDMA phone, forget it. It just wont work. Now Verizon doesn't have as many towers here as Alltel did, but they keep what they have up to date. I used to be able to get data service out here but had to cancel it when it slowed down to nothing for good.
We'll that's what Verizon claims is that their network is built out better than AT & T. Really it's down to just them now in the US and they operate on different networks which is most of the problem. Now in Europe, you have the iPhone. Don't you have to choose a provider with the hardware there now as well for the iPhone?
I agree with choice though. I would like to buy the device and NOT be locked in. There is no reason for this other than greed, and well the carriers don't even make as much money that way. It's the thousands of years old battle between technology and the bean counters (content providers). They go by many names.
Slashdot Mirror
--LED bulbs are going to render CFL bulbs a flash in the pan--
Maybe, but not for a while. Florescent bulbs surpassed incandescent lights back in the late 50's to early 60's. Of course most of this was due to offices. Now the mercury in a CFL is a tiny amount in comparison but not impossible to deal with. Commercially they have been being changed out for years. We just need some way to recycle the bulbs and reuse the mercury. I wouldn't be too overly concerned if one busted out of many thousands.
The one thing I don't like about CFL's is well the consumer wanted them to look like incandescent lights. Now they have made that happen at the expense of brightness. Of course you can still buy the ones that have a different color balance, but they cost more and it is real hard to make an LED with that color balance. In fact most LED's have a real narrow spectrum. If you use a filter to correct it, you loose brightness.
In short I don't believe CFL's are going to be a flash in the pan. In fact they are just now really taking off as LED's will in the future. For now though the expense doesn't justify the savings for LED's being used as a primary light source. As a secondary source LED's are already hot (flashlights).
It does seem like the Intel ones are still the ones to get for now and thanks for the interesting articles from Linus. I have over 300,000 files on my machine and do a lot of random read and write requests. Whenever the mains burn up, I might now be able to get what I want.
--It's starting to remind me of the claims about long-lifetime compact fluorescent light bulbs that, in reality, have turned out to be BS!"--
I don't know about the drives but have been using CFL's for years. Only one ever went bad after bout two solid years of continuous use.
A great deal of their budget goes for aeronautics. In that part, there is a great deal that they have done that affects us but it's not publicized much at all.
What is really amazing is standing right next to the corner of it and looking up. It's one big giant box. It kicks in my fear of heights standing on the ground and looking up from the corner of it. And inside those guys in white suits look like ants up there and walk underneath of a rocket being assembled in stages. It IS amazing. It was a long time ago and I was just a kid and it was just a Saturn 1B but still it is an impressive piece of work, but I'm not amazed about how or why just that it IS.
---Yea, think of all the coke the bankers could buy with handouts from half a billion dollars.---
If you think about that, your head will explode.
We may see who is right tomorrow if Obama doesn't take another trip to Florida in the presidential yacht. It seemd to be scrubbed just because of that boat being to close.
Interesting. I wonder what kind of control the Ares would have? This would concern me more than oscillations. Liquid fuel has always been assumed to be safer but this may not still be the case.
The failure rate of the Russian program vs the US failure rate seem to be about equal. Now I think we do have and edge when it comes to deep space exploration, but we did have Russian help in the design of the Martian rovers. So I guess we will see if the launch will be a success or not.
I hear a lot hear about letting the commercial people do it (Space X). We'll fine. Do it just like the military. Write a specification. Send it for bid. Then let NASA test it to make sure that it will work. This is already being done mostly since before Apollo.
Different defense (and other) contractors built different parts for Apollo.I guess Thiokol got the original shuttle contract for the boosters and now it's whatever company absorbed them.
I think Space X would have a different goal than manned launches. I'm not sure why they would think they could make money doing that but there may be a possibility that they could launch commercial payloads and make a little money.
Yeah, so there you go mentioning the ISS. Now it all makes sense. We will now have rings around this planet that will be visible soon. Space junk.
What I always wondered is how the direction of the burn is controlled? On the shuttle you have those little but powerful liquid fuel nozzles to control which way the thing will go. I would just like to see wht the plan is for using a shuttle booster as the main thing doing the steering? It might point it's way into the ground too if this hasn't been thought through.
--I've always wondered about that building. Why is it so much better to do the assembly vertically, rather than doing it horizontally and then raising the vehicle afterwards?--
For the same reason it is better to test rockets vertical. It may be cheaper the other way, but I think you have more failures that way too. Those SRB's were always tested horizontal (not good). Now once and for all we can get a vertical rocket test of the SRB. The same goes for the assembly. You don't have to design the rocket to take the stress of being raised sideways. This is even more important as the rocket weight and size gets larger.
I guess which is better depends upon the deign goal. Sideways is cheaper. Vertical is better. We already have sunk cost in the VAB, why not use it?
The point is it worked for us and was Mir a failure?
nn
not necessarily
NASA had unlimited funds for Apollo. The funds are more limited in this case, so some "afro engineering", for lack of a more politically correct term, is bound to occur.
You have that saying backwards.
"As the high approaches infinity the money approaches zero"
That's how it's really working now.
HAHAHA fire and accountant. You must be joking, he'll fire you, he will.
Yeah, I think they already are, by his statements. So if he fixed something there he should give back, but not the content because games are more like movies now I can understand his statements but I'm assuming that does give a little back, if nothing but his opinion here.
--I am pretty sure that IBM and the like aren't recommending Ubuntu for altruistic purposes, but because they can make money off support. I'm equally sure that the companies using Ubuntu aren't doing so for altruistic purposes, but because it's cheaper for them.--
You are so right, even though you hardly ever hear that mentioned here. A little guy just about has to close his stuff up if the market for what he is doing is like that or that is the market that you are going after.
--I think in many cases the decision to NOT switch is based on ignorance of the platform and fear of interoperability,--
I think this is a real issue on the client side if you have CAD applications and Small Business Accounting Software. Larger enterprises can break away, but it is more difficult for the small business to do so.
Bcs ts stp bckwrds nd tks lngr t mplmnt. F y sk m t cld ll b md smplr wth cnsnnts nl.
--Pretty soon, Google will BE the Internet.--
They already own the internet. And...just one guy owns it all. He lives under what used to be called area 51 in secret and collects alien technology. I think the last time they found something it said DALEK. No one knows what it means and it doesn't work anyhow.
We have an office where I don't think we have used any special templates or macros with MS Office. I'm not sure why it's that big of a deal either. Save as PDF. Internally who gives a rats ass? Externally, well if they want to edit a pdf, there are ways, but mainly we don't want that, so I do the same thing. Everything I send out is either plain text or a PDF.
So I really don't understand the collaboration issue. Outlook/Back Office is the only issue that I would need to resolve. We are on Office 2003 OEM's. I don't see a need to buy more licensing. I just install OO and away we go. I think the real problem is that business class machines tend to just come with this stuff from M$ pre-installed and it's not given any thought.
--The most ridiculous thing I get is from work where other departments advertising meetings and Christmas events email out Publisher files.--
OK, now you have made me mad. This is the very reason to keep as customers send us crap this way, so we have to have it too. If you could convince them to quit doing that stuff and many have after learning how easy it is just to create a pdf and be done, but in this economy you can't let even one fish get away. That's why I keep an arsenal of tools to open files that I am sent after they are scanned of course and then we hope for the best and pray we don't get compromised, which BTW is less possible with OO documents. I can send send all of the externals in pdf but what comes in thru the net (customers), who knows what they might send. Most of their machines are laden with spyware, rootkits, and viri.
They doo in fact grow faster but get cancer.
Yeah, there ought to be a law since it's really getting down to a monopoly now one way or another.
--So, sorry, but the iPhone is not popular just because it's from Apple. It's popular because it works.--
I know I'm gonna get modded down for this but.....Unless you live in rural areas, specifically areas where the have acquired Alltel towers. They have done nothing to upgrade those period. GSM doesn't work out here. If you don't have a CDMA phone, forget it. It just wont work. Now Verizon doesn't have as many towers here as Alltel did, but they keep what they have up to date. I used to be able to get data service out here but had to cancel it when it slowed down to nothing for good.
We'll that's what Verizon claims is that their network is built out better than AT & T. Really it's down to just them now in the US and they operate on different networks which is most of the problem. Now in Europe, you have the iPhone. Don't you have to choose a provider with the hardware there now as well for the iPhone?
I agree with choice though. I would like to buy the device and NOT be locked in. There is no reason for this other than greed, and well the carriers don't even make as much money that way. It's the thousands of years old battle between technology and the bean counters (content providers). They go by many names.