JPL should have used a steam engine. It has been around for centuries, and so must be the safest option. Actually, why didn't JPL send some horses to Mars? Now, that would really be a solution proven by milleniums of human history. One small step for a horse...
If the bill is written so that it can be enforced on the federal level, it can be enforced on the state level as well. Some states may prefer to tax gambling instead of prohibiting it. Why is a federal regulation needed?
Temperatures will grow, no matter what you do. Ice will melt. Everything will be flooded. Don't build anything in coast areas designed for more that 50 year - it will be under water by then. There will be more hurricanes. Sky will be constantly covered by clowds. Astronomy will be useless. We'll never see the sunshine. There will be no ozone in air. Then there will be no oxygen in any form other than CO2. Animals (except cockroaches) will die out. We'll run out of oil. Satellites will start falling down due to atmosphere expansion. The atmosphere will leak into space. We'll have no air to breathe and to protect us from UV radiation. Gulfstream will stop, and we'll freeze. And the polar bears will drown. And even if we stop driving and smoking tomorrow, the polar bears will die anyway.
Unfortunately, it can be enforced. From the proposed bill:
The operator of any interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish, maintain and enforce a policy to require any information content provider who posts written messages on a public forum website either to be identified by a legal name and address, or to register a legal name and address with the operator of the interactive computer service or the Internet service provider through which the information content provider gains access to the interactive computer service or Internet, as appropriate.
Basically, if you orerate a forum in New Jersey, your site must have data for your users, whether they are from New Jersey, New York or Papua New Guinea. If you don't have such data, you are in trouble, not your users. If the data is proven to be incorrect, you are also in trouble. Jurisdiction of the users doesn't matter, neigther does it matter whether the users have any legal right to be anonymous.
Then maybe the problem is with Opera, not with other browsers? Every time I try Opera I find it too distracting, even without ads. Browsing in Opera is somewhat like reading a long article using a funky font, such as "MS Comic Sans". Firefox, on the other hand, doesn't draw so much attention to itself. Sure, it can be configured to look weird, but the default is user friendly. MSIE is also quite modest by itself, but popups and security issues make it all but useless for most contents.
I'm assuming the relative speed of the object to be negligible compared to orbital velocity, so it's pretty much assured that the object will be burning as slowly as it can.
As for your argument regarding velocity, I have to disagree. Throwing the object back would result in vertical velocity futher due to the part of the Earth gravity that is not compensated by the orbital speed.
Throwing things down lowers the perigee and raises the apogee. Throwing things back lowers the perigee, keeps the apogee and increases velocity at the perigee. With the same perigee (I'm not sure it will be the same), objects with higher apogee will pass the perigee at the higher velocity, this increasing the drag. On the other hand, higher apogee means that the object will spend less time at lower altitudes. Finally, higher apogee will mean longer orbital period, but this is probably negligible.
Now I'm quite sure that the answer is "somewhere in between":-)
I wonder what's the optimal direction to throw stuff so that it reenters the atmosphere as soon as possible. Should it be straight down or horizontally in the direction opposite to the orbital movement of the station? Or maybe something in between?
As far as I know, Wine has never implemented the actual vulnerability, i.e. execution of the code included in the wmf file. The did implement SetAbortProc for screen rendering, and ripped it out when the Microsoft vulnerability came to light just to be on the safe side. From dlls/gdi/metafile.c history:
revision 1.12
date: 2006-01-06 20:52:46 +0000; author: julliard; state: Exp; lines: +7 -0
Marcus Meissner
gdi: Filter GETSCALINGFACTOR and SETABORTDOC proc in metafile
Escapes.
Actually, an ion engine would be great for slowing down. And since the RTG takes power from the radioactive decay that cannot be stopped when not in use, it would be better to use it for acceleration during the first half of the jorney and for deceleration during the approach.
Re:More like 0.2 than 2.0
on
Web 3.0
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Web 1.0: The Flash Menace Web 2.0: Attack of the AJAX Web 3.0: Revenge of the Blog Web 4.0: A New Dope Web 5.0: The E-commerce Strikes Back Web 6.0: Return of the Geek
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to play games with the phishers, you can as well seed their database with the real data and sue the suckers if they try to use it.
JPL should have used a steam engine. It has been around for centuries, and so must be the safest option. Actually, why didn't JPL send some horses to Mars? Now, that would really be a solution proven by milleniums of human history. One small step for a horse ...
tab no x
If the bill is written so that it can be enforced on the federal level, it can be enforced on the state level as well. Some states may prefer to tax gambling instead of prohibiting it. Why is a federal regulation needed?
What's that? Does is run on Linux? Does it play ogg? Does it lay eggs? Is it related to echidna?
Temperatures will grow, no matter what you do. Ice will melt. Everything will be flooded. Don't build anything in coast areas designed for more that 50 year - it will be under water by then. There will be more hurricanes. Sky will be constantly covered by clowds. Astronomy will be useless. We'll never see the sunshine. There will be no ozone in air. Then there will be no oxygen in any form other than CO2. Animals (except cockroaches) will die out. We'll run out of oil. Satellites will start falling down due to atmosphere expansion. The atmosphere will leak into space. We'll have no air to breathe and to protect us from UV radiation. Gulfstream will stop, and we'll freeze. And the polar bears will drown. And even if we stop driving and smoking tomorrow, the polar bears will die anyway.
I want a Christian Dior mouse, with pink floral ornament and letters "CD" on the belly.
You cannot guarantee that any e-mail you send will be received. Period.
Until the oceans flood Majorca. And that Walmart. And the gas station. And her house.
my gut feeling is telling me that Pentagon is more likely to succeed at making zombie sharks than NASA at launching three more shuttles this year.
Let me guess. Because it will include a vacuum cleaner, right?
The downside of being on the dark side is that you are likely to be eaten by a Grue.
... if a missile with GPLed binaries destroys your house, you can demand another one, with the sources.
Then maybe the problem is with Opera, not with other browsers? Every time I try Opera I find it too distracting, even without ads. Browsing in Opera is somewhat like reading a long article using a funky font, such as "MS Comic Sans". Firefox, on the other hand, doesn't draw so much attention to itself. Sure, it can be configured to look weird, but the default is user friendly. MSIE is also quite modest by itself, but popups and security issues make it all but useless for most contents.
As for your argument regarding velocity, I have to disagree. Throwing the object back would result in vertical velocity futher due to the part of the Earth gravity that is not compensated by the orbital speed.
Throwing things down lowers the perigee and raises the apogee. Throwing things back lowers the perigee, keeps the apogee and increases velocity at the perigee. With the same perigee (I'm not sure it will be the same), objects with higher apogee will pass the perigee at the higher velocity, this increasing the drag. On the other hand, higher apogee means that the object will spend less time at lower altitudes. Finally, higher apogee will mean longer orbital period, but this is probably negligible.
Now I'm quite sure that the answer is "somewhere in between" :-)
I wonder what's the optimal direction to throw stuff so that it reenters the atmosphere as soon as possible. Should it be straight down or horizontally in the direction opposite to the orbital movement of the station? Or maybe something in between?
Well, with Sony pushing DRM so hard, we'll soon see robotic judges, aka "digital rights managers" :-)
Honey, I tried many times, by my cellphone was slashdotted.
revision 1.12
date: 2006-01-06 20:52:46 +0000; author: julliard; state: Exp; lines: +7 -0
Marcus Meissner
gdi: Filter GETSCALINGFACTOR and SETABORTDOC proc in metafile
Escapes.
Actually, an ion engine would be great for slowing down. And since the RTG takes power from the radioactive decay that cannot be stopped when not in use, it would be better to use it for acceleration during the first half of the jorney and for deceleration during the approach.
Web 1.0: The Flash Menace
Web 2.0: Attack of the AJAX
Web 3.0: Revenge of the Blog
Web 4.0: A New Dope
Web 5.0: The E-commerce Strikes Back
Web 6.0: Return of the Geek
"plugins" probably assumed Flash, Realplayer and other non-free stuff.
Commit 88026842b0a760145aa71d69e74fbc9ec118ca44 only modifies EXTRAVERSION in Makefile.