(I would like to see some actual report that says "we know this foam is not as good but we don't want to use CFC's".) (I belive the decision to use it was based on evidence that it worked as well or better than before)
so your argument is that the non CFC foam that falls off the tank is superior to the old CFC based foam that tended to stay on the tank.
interesting....
The point made by the parent poster here is that they were using a perfectly acceptable and proven foam, then switched to something environmentally friendly that didn't work as well.
Perhaps you are trying to claim that they did a poor job testing it.
I propose a different view for you. They should have left well enough alone. The damage caused to the enviroment by the freon based foam used in launches is peanuts to the safety and welfare of the crew and success of the mission.
It's blatantly obvious that they did not switch to the new foam because it outperformed the old foam. Switching foam to a "better preforming" product would definanitely imply testing. Testing would have certainly shown it having the cavataion and fracture problems that are occurring.
They switched to it based on environmental concerns. Whether these concerns came from internal or external sources makes no difference. Switching for such petty enviromental benefits is a substantially poor reason to jeopardize the lives of crew members, the success of missions and the overall view of NASA.
even the letters/numbers being sung in a song would be as efficient a deterrant as the method they're employing today.
the ocr obfustication used in most of these tests would be troublesome but quite possible for someone to break. The idea behind what they are using is that you can't just throw the image through a filter and then shove the output through over the counter ocr software to get the data. This form of protection provides them a reasonable buffer to keep every script kiddie out there from abusing their services.
They could do something as loosely protected from speach recognition.
If people are determined to crack the protection method they will. You created the protection using technology, it's going to be bypassed by technology eventually. It's all really just a matter of deterance.
How much you wanna bet the AT&T speach engine can sing bf389256 to the tune of innagoddadavida or other catchy tunes, maybe overlay that with ocean waves or random city noise in the background. Come to think of it that would be a really fun project and make great PR for ATT!
sure someone could figure out how to get past it, but the work to do so would be a bit prohibitative.
nail on the head my friend, i waited every day for the afternoon cartoons, they were always too short and left me hungry for more, saturday morning came, man I was out at that TV! Honestly I probably still would be, save i see hours of toons on the cartoon network whenever I want. (sure they are a bit lacking in quality and adult humor, but you make due with what you have.
since we've arrived at the conclusion that the first 'they' is referring to the group of researchers, let's take the part of the sentence pertaining to the second "they".
women were just as good as men at virtual navigation when they had a large computer display.
The second they refers to the word women. Taken in the context of the article I feel it's abundantly clear women refers to the (women) test subjects.
the article clearly states it main point
Wider screens and more realistic 3D animations, they say, will boost women's spatial orientation and 3D map-reading skills to match those of their male counterparts.
the article does imply
They discovered a phenomenon in a research study.
Collectively, the men in the group out performed women by a margin.
The women performed as well as the men, when provided with larger monitors.
the article does not imply
that groups of women were solely tested against groups of men
that some women did not out perform some/all men
that men are less cautious or careful than women or vice-versa
that the men did not improve performance with bigger screens as well.
that team of computer scientists from Carnegie Mellon University,
failed to execute a non biased research study.
The parent posters line of reasoning is to debunk the accuracy of study based on things that it neither implies or fails to state.
The performance of them men on larger screens being lesser, equal or greater is of no significance to the point of the article, and would provide no insight as to any bias of the study.
This article was covering the findings of a research study, it's not the research study itself and should not to be expected to contain the type of details to lead you to believe it's biased or not. If one wishes to find bias with the study, they need to find the research paper not the magazine article mentioning the study.
So led by Desney Tan from Carnegie Mellon, Czerwinski and her Microsoft colleague George Robertson ran tests on volunteers to see if they could improve this.
They found that women were just as good as men at virtual navigation when they had a large computer display. "The gender difference simply disappeared," says Czerwinski.'
Sentence one vividly associates 'they' with
"Czerwinski and her Microsoft colleague George Robertson"
Given, this 'tit for tat' behavior I suggest would in fact be childish and immoral. I'm just suggesting using the system against him. Just as the spam he sends is paid for by companies blindly in hopes that someone will buy something or give them money, companies exist out there trying to do the same thing throuh postal mail. Personally, I'm sleazy enough I'd like to see these two dark forces pitted against each other. I suspect there may be others out there.
I agree than that threatening phone calls are a problem here, but a little harassment is just what this calls for, after all he's harassing us to buy into his spam. Every piece of spam i recieve wastes my time a little, i have to fish my real mail out, open each one, unsubscribe (assuming it works). I feel he should be harassed at least as much as every person who's time he wasted. No I'm not saying he should be personally endangered, but if anyone that received spam from him was allowed to send him one catalog per piece or call him once per piece, I'd imagine that to be quite fair.
It goes on further than that too doesn't it? Who's paying for all this bandwidth? sure he pays an ISP to send the email, does he compensate me for the disk space used, how about my mail's bandwith caps? He's costing me money and I can't do anything about it? Questionable indeed!
Spam isn't like postal junk mail, that helps bring the costs down due to a single carrier and volume, spam does not hold to the same situation.
Modded Flaimbait? maybe just a little crass, but he makes a damn good point.
You may not be able to go to your local lumberyard and find the right stuff, but you should be able to get it in sufficient ammounts from a lumber mill. I would reccomend you find a nice out of the way place to live, near where these types of resources exist. buying a couple of tons of unprocessed raw lumber from a local mill may just be cheaper than buying pressure-treated from a lumberyard.
The same for bricks from a brickyard, bricks don't come from 10000 miles away (most of the time), chances are there is a brick manufacturer a couple hundred iles from where you end up. The places that make the bricks are the ones that put the additives in and probably have the ability to make them without, if it's really a dire issue, ask you local building supplier how to contact their suppliers, it shouldn't be all that difficult to track down a facility that can make you friendly materials.
As far as it goes for contractors, learn the trade, educate yourself in working with the raw materials, hire a contractor to instruct you on the basics on how to do it, certainly not fast, but you have to take a stake in your life.
So you're disabled, Learn to deal with your condition, pick up the necessary skills to make your life work for you, and work hard toward that goal. In the ammount of time he spent on the website he could have learned about carpentry, found distributers and started planning/collecting materials.
Only have pity for those who pity themselves. Pity them not for their woes, but for their inability to face them.
"In the handful of benighted jurisdictions where such techniques are prohibited by statute you have the right to fight for the repeal of those bad laws as well."(http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/3417/tr ap.html)
true not the best link to pick to make a case for yourself;)
very true, I switched schools half way throuh my 9th year. I head been picked on relentlessly from 6th through 9th. Now given, I hard a hard time getting acclimated to a new school and new people in 6th grade, and a couple of very popular people went out of their way to pick on me.(I was shy and lacked witty comebacks)
Then middle of the 9th grade I ended up transferring across town. I was quite careful to stay just quiet enough and avoid giving anyone anything bad to say about me. One day we were taking about some kind of a theory or something I felt strongly about in social studies. I opened up, shocked a bunch of classmates and made a bunch or loose knit friends.
Re:I'm more amazed....
on
Baked Apple
·
· Score: 1
prolly got so excited something out of the ordinary happened, they forgot at question why:)
If I say to you, (he/she)'s sailing, you know they're likely on some form or watercraft on some form of water. If you were told someone is flying, you'd expect to find them soaring along in the air (hopefully in some sort of flying maching, but not necessarily), if I told you I was navigating, I could be sailing, flying, driving, walking. I think someone will coin a more ubiquitous term. Then again maybe it will all just get lumped into flying...
No one has accurately coined what it's called when you navigate around outside the atmosphere to my knowledge. If you're on water your sailing, if you're on land your driving, if your in the air you're flying. You could say in space they're orbiting, but that's like a ship in the harbor docking, it really dosen't fit the bill for ocean travel, I'd imagine space travel will eventualy take up nautical terms, due to the numerous silularities. (and all the past star trek movies:) The term UFO was coined at the time when they saw something in the sky,(presumably flying to them) if these are the same kinds of things thay saw back in the day,(whatever they are) I guess you could accurately call them UFOs. I don't really buy in to all this stuff, but if you wanted to get down to it, supposedly these things don't use friction of the air to generate lift anyway so technically if they exist they probably don't 'fly' at all.
Re:Wouldn't it be easier to...
on
Lab-Grown Steak
·
· Score: 2
If they were setteling a full colony there, maybe, I'd imagine there would be enough to do without having to keep up an animal farm. Animals have to eat too. IF it were just down to that, they could probably suspend/freeze the meat for quite some time. but there's just nothing like fresh out da test tube:)
assuming that it's not the bad bits in the diet that we're accustomed to. then again, they could also probably thoroughly control the flavor through whatever they feed the meat.:)
umm.. replying to that second link, where it says we're made of 100% meat and stuff... it even says the "brain is meat". usually, "Meat" refers to "muscle tissue"... the only internal organs with muscles are the heart, stomach, and intestines. oh, i guess bones are made out of meat too.
well if you had to classify brain into a food group . ..
you have a solid point on bones tho, except for the marrow.
mmm, nope, I'm thinking the TV will broadcast commercials to your bluetooth enabled cellpone and bring up ads in your bluetooth enabled pda's pocket IE. Grab your location from your bluetooth GPS, and print coupons out for the local radioshack on your bluetooth enabled printer. The whole time while quietly whispering over your bluetooth headset "order pay-per-view order pay-per-view" ..
then again the christmas bonuses and parties probably had a lot to do with it:)
(*enter wavy dream sequence back to 1998*)
my first year there, they gave us each around $1000 (more for higher ups) we were exstatic to say the least. They threw this big catered affair at a posh place downtown for the 50 employees on hand at the time.
The second year, they gave us a bonus that rivaled out bi-weekly paychecks. (much more than the previous year, one guy was only there 2 weeks and he got something like $500.) They had us take everything in the office (er studio), move it to another floor, layed down a dance floor, hired professional swing dancers, a band, had free food (sushi, calamari and all things yummy) and put up three seperate fully stocked bars.
then the third year, big bada boom - the.crash, we recieved a $25 gift cert to the local steakhouse and a small party at a decent place for the remaining employees catered with apetizers and 1 hour of open bar.
at the time we were all pretty pissed/depressed, it's funny to look back at it all now. at least I still have my memories.
If anything, my current job will probably toss us a $15 Giant gift cert but I'm definately not counting on that.
I've been using Ehostsource.com in combination with Dyndns.org for DNS
DynDns for a $30 one time fee will set you up with a great little webapp you can use to configure almost anything in the DNS you want in real time (including DNS ttl)
Ehostsource is cheap, really cheap, Customer service and the (SUN) server are a little slow at times, but the service rocks for the price. They provide DNS but I prefer the Dyndns service by far.
EHostSource:
$5.75/month free setup 500 MB Hosting 50 GB Transfer Unlimited email 20 Sub-Domains FrontPage 98/00/02 PHP4/Perl webadmin app web/pop3 mail SSI/mySQL Daily Stats Daily Backup Web Control Panel FTP/SSH Access Shell Account 30 Day $$ back gaurantee
Slashdot Mirror
(I would like to see some actual report that says "we know this foam is not as good but we don't want to use CFC's".)
(I belive the decision to use it was based on evidence that it worked as well or better than before)
so your argument is that the non CFC foam that falls off the tank is superior to the old CFC based foam that tended to stay on the tank.
interesting....
The point made by the parent poster here is that they were using a perfectly acceptable and proven foam, then switched to something environmentally friendly that didn't work as well.
Perhaps you are trying to claim that they did a poor job testing it.
I propose a different view for you. They should have left well enough alone. The damage caused to the enviroment by the freon based foam used in launches is peanuts to the safety and welfare of the crew and success of the mission.
It's blatantly obvious that they did not switch to the new foam because it outperformed the old foam. Switching foam to a "better preforming" product would definanitely imply testing. Testing would have certainly shown it having the cavataion and fracture problems that are occurring.
They switched to it based on environmental concerns. Whether these concerns came from internal or external sources makes no difference. Switching for such petty enviromental benefits is a substantially poor reason to jeopardize the lives of crew members, the success of missions and the overall view of NASA.
You could fasshion several of these in front of eachother and get a 3D image could you not?
or possibly into a box shape if you had an assured angle of perspective.
seems like a wast on a cell phone but I'm glad they finally showed up
even the letters/numbers being sung in a song would be as efficient a deterrant as the method they're employing today.
the ocr obfustication used in most of these tests would be troublesome but quite possible for someone to break. The idea behind what they are using is that you can't just throw the image through a filter and then shove the output through over the counter ocr software to get the data. This form of protection provides them a reasonable buffer to keep every script kiddie out there from abusing their services.
They could do something as loosely protected from speach recognition.
If people are determined to crack the protection method they will. You created the protection using technology, it's going to be bypassed by technology eventually. It's all really just a matter of deterance.
How much you wanna bet the AT&T speach engine can sing bf389256 to the tune of innagoddadavida or other catchy tunes, maybe overlay that with ocean waves or random city noise in the background. Come to think of it that would be a really fun project and make great PR for ATT!
sure someone could figure out how to get past it, but the work to do so would be a bit prohibitative.
And you're qualified to make that determination? I see.
Linux geeks are centric? perhaps you missed the Mac geek comments here http://www.haxial.com/spls-soapbox/apple-powermac
that's all, thanks!
that would be a mighty effective spam filter!
nail on the head my friend, i waited every day for the afternoon cartoons, they were always too short and left me hungry for more, saturday morning came, man I was out at that TV! Honestly I probably still would be, save i see hours of toons on the cartoon network whenever I want. (sure they are a bit lacking in quality and adult humor, but you make due with what you have.
since we've arrived at the conclusion that the first 'they' is referring to the group of researchers, let's take the part of the sentence pertaining to the second "they".
The second they refers to the word women. Taken in the context of the article I feel it's abundantly clear women refers to the (women) test subjects.
the article clearly states it main point
the article does imply
They discovered a phenomenon in a research study.
Collectively, the men in the group out performed women by a margin.
The women performed as well as the men, when provided with larger monitors.
the article does not imply
that groups of women were solely tested against groups of men
that some women did not out perform some/all men
that men are less cautious or careful than women or vice-versa
that the men did not improve performance with bigger screens as well.
that team of computer scientists from Carnegie Mellon University,
failed to execute a non biased research study.
The parent posters line of reasoning is to debunk the accuracy of study based on things that it neither implies or fails to state.
The performance of them men on larger screens being lesser, equal or greater is of no significance to the point of the article, and would provide no insight as to any bias of the study.
This article was covering the findings of a research study, it's not the research study itself and should not to be expected to contain the type of details to lead you to believe it's biased or not. If one wishes to find bias with the study, they need to find the research paper not the magazine article mentioning the study.
Sentence one vividly associates 'they' with
"Czerwinski and her Microsoft colleague George Robertson"
Sentence two immediately references they.
how much clearer do you require it to be?
Given, this 'tit for tat' behavior I suggest would in fact be childish and immoral. I'm just suggesting using the system against him. Just as the spam he sends is paid for by companies blindly in hopes that someone will buy something or give them money, companies exist out there trying to do the same thing throuh postal mail. Personally, I'm sleazy enough I'd like to see these two dark forces pitted against each other. I suspect there may be others out there.
I agree than that threatening phone calls are a problem here, but a little harassment is just what this calls for, after all he's harassing us to buy into his spam. Every piece of spam i recieve wastes my time a little, i have to fish my real mail out, open each one, unsubscribe (assuming it works). I feel he should be harassed at least as much as every person who's time he wasted. No I'm not saying he should be personally endangered, but if anyone that received spam from him was allowed to send him one catalog per piece or call him once per piece, I'd imagine that to be quite fair.
It goes on further than that too doesn't it? Who's paying for all this bandwidth? sure he pays an ISP to send the email, does he compensate me for the disk space used, how about my mail's bandwith caps? He's costing me money and I can't do anything about it? Questionable indeed!
Spam isn't like postal junk mail, that helps bring the costs down due to a single carrier and volume, spam does not hold to the same situation.
Modded Flaimbait? maybe just a little crass, but he makes a damn good point.
You may not be able to go to your local lumberyard and find the right stuff, but you should be able to get it in sufficient ammounts from a lumber mill. I would reccomend you find a nice out of the way place to live, near where these types of resources exist. buying a couple of tons of unprocessed raw lumber from a local mill may just be cheaper than buying pressure-treated from a lumberyard.
The same for bricks from a brickyard, bricks don't come from 10000 miles away (most of the time), chances are there is a brick manufacturer a couple hundred iles from where you end up. The places that make the bricks are the ones that put the additives in and probably have the ability to make them without, if it's really a dire issue, ask you local building supplier how to contact their suppliers, it shouldn't be all that difficult to track down a facility that can make you friendly materials.
As far as it goes for contractors, learn the trade, educate yourself in working with the raw materials, hire a contractor to instruct you on the basics on how to do it, certainly not fast, but you have to take a stake in your life.
So you're disabled, Learn to deal with your condition, pick up the necessary skills to make your life work for you, and work hard toward that goal. In the ammount of time he spent on the website he could have learned about carpentry, found distributers and started planning/collecting materials.
Only have pity for those who pity themselves. Pity them not for their woes, but for their inability to face them.
perhaps they live
r ap.html)
;)
"In the handful of benighted jurisdictions where such techniques are prohibited by statute you have the right to fight for the repeal of those bad laws as well."(http://www.geocities.com/WallStreet/3417/t
true not the best link to pick to make a case for yourself
be happy there are weblogs, they could be posting to slashdot :)
very true, I switched schools half way throuh my 9th year. I head been picked on relentlessly from 6th through 9th. Now given, I hard a hard time getting acclimated to a new school and new people in 6th grade, and a couple of very popular people went out of their way to pick on me.(I was shy and lacked witty comebacks)
Then middle of the 9th grade I ended up transferring across town. I was quite careful to stay just quiet enough and avoid giving anyone anything bad to say about me. One day we were taking about some kind of a theory or something I felt strongly about in social studies. I opened up, shocked a bunch of classmates and made a bunch or loose knit friends.
prolly got so excited something out of the ordinary happened, they forgot at question why :)
not bad, however,
...
If I say to you, (he/she)'s sailing, you know they're likely on some form or watercraft on some form of water. If you were told someone is flying, you'd expect to find them soaring along in the air (hopefully in some sort of flying maching, but not necessarily), if I told you I was navigating, I could be sailing, flying, driving, walking. I think someone will coin a more ubiquitous term. Then again maybe it will all just get lumped into flying
No one has accurately coined what it's called when you navigate around outside the atmosphere to my knowledge. If you're on water your sailing, if you're on land your driving, if your in the air you're flying. You could say in space they're orbiting, but that's like a ship in the harbor docking, it really dosen't fit the bill for ocean travel, I'd imagine space travel will eventualy take up nautical terms, due to the numerous silularities. (and all the past star trek movies :) The term UFO was coined at the time when they saw something in the sky,(presumably flying to them) if these are the same kinds of things thay saw back in the day,(whatever they are) I guess you could accurately call them UFOs. I don't really buy in to all this stuff, but if you wanted to get down to it, supposedly these things don't use friction of the air to generate lift anyway so technically if they exist they probably don't 'fly' at all.
If they were setteling a full colony there, maybe, I'd imagine there would be enough to do without having to keep up an animal farm. Animals have to eat too. IF it were just down to that, they could probably suspend/freeze the meat for quite some time. but there's just nothing like fresh out da test tube :)
assuming that it's not the bad bits in the diet that we're accustomed to. :)
then again, they could also probably thoroughly control the flavor through whatever they feed the meat.
well if you had to classify brain into a food group . .
you have a solid point on bones tho, except for the marrow.
I do this now, I have the IPAQ with wi-fi and bluetooth built in, they're a little pricey right now, but the cost is coming down.
I'd rather see less synching and more builtin pda capabilities, why have a host at all? they should be thinking peer.
mmm, nope, I'm thinking the TV will broadcast commercials to your bluetooth enabled cellpone and bring up ads in your bluetooth enabled pda's pocket IE. Grab your location from your bluetooth GPS, and print coupons out for the local radioshack on your bluetooth enabled printer. The whole time while quietly whispering over your bluetooth headset "order pay-per-view order pay-per-view" . .
heh bluetooth TV, good one!
*sniff
:)
.crash, we recieved a $25 gift cert to the local steakhouse and a small party at a decent place for the remaining employees catered with apetizers and 1 hour of open bar.
then again the christmas bonuses and parties probably had a lot to do with it
(*enter wavy dream sequence back to 1998*)
my first year there, they gave us each around $1000 (more for higher ups) we were exstatic to say the least. They threw this big catered affair at a posh place downtown for the 50 employees on hand at the time.
The second year, they gave us a bonus that rivaled out bi-weekly paychecks. (much more than the previous year, one guy was only there 2 weeks and he got something like $500.) They had us take everything in the office (er studio), move it to another floor, layed down a dance floor, hired professional swing dancers, a band, had free food (sushi, calamari and all things yummy) and put up three seperate fully stocked bars.
then the third year, big bada boom - the
at the time we were all pretty pissed/depressed, it's funny to look back at it all now. at least I still have my memories.
If anything, my current job will probably toss us a $15 Giant gift cert but I'm definately not counting on that.
I've been using Ehostsource.com in combination with Dyndns.org for DNS
DynDns for a $30 one time fee will set you up with a great little webapp you can use to configure almost anything in the DNS you want in real time (including DNS ttl)
Ehostsource is cheap, really cheap, Customer service and the (SUN) server are a little slow at times, but the service rocks for the price. They provide DNS but I prefer the Dyndns service by far.
EHostSource:
$5.75/month
free setup
500 MB Hosting
50 GB Transfer
Unlimited email
20 Sub-Domains
FrontPage 98/00/02
PHP4/Perl
webadmin app
web/pop3 mail
SSI/mySQL
Daily Stats
Daily Backup
Web Control Panel
FTP/SSH Access
Shell Account
30 Day $$ back gaurantee
For the price of the AOL subscription, I could get the hard-copies of the TW content several times over can I not?