Indeed, with unlimited resources it would be interesting to see if microfractures develop due to small meteorite impact / radiation / day/night temperature cycle and such, but it would seem that these can be learned via separate means without the need of a dedicated rover mission.
NASA already explored this.
It was called the Long Duration Exposure Facility, or LDEF. It was a 10+ ton structure filled with 57 different experiments that the space shuttle carried to orbit in 1984 and retrieved from orbit in 1990.
You're also forgetting about the cold. I think that the lunar night is like -180 c or something. I think that would be a huge challenge for our material sciences to deal with. That is one of the challenges of a lunar base, if they can't put it in a spot with constant sunlight (they think they have found a couple) then the base has to deal with 2 weeks of 100c in the sunlight, followed by 2 weeks of darkness in the impossible cold. Also one of the reasons to go to Mars first. The environment is much more habitable and forgiving. Well, some anyway.
If lunar explorers are out in a rover, and say the axle breaks, if it takes them longer to walk back than their air supply of their suit lasts, they die. So you send a backup rover. it gets an electrial problem that fries it electronics. they die if there is not a third rescue mobile. Big negative for your exploration crews to die.
Now if you are moving your whole base around, if an axle breaks, you are now stuck in that spot until/if repairs are made, but you still have your food, water and air generating/recycling equipment with you. everyone lives. Big plus.
Actually, if you count the mass of the shuttle itself, over 10,000 tons has been lifted to orbit just in the space shuttle program alone. Kind of amazing.
Not that it makes any sense to want to orbit the shuttle's transporter, but I guess if we really wanted to we could, just in a 100 bite sized pieces, over the next 20 years or so.
What kind of SUV do you drive? The document that you link to lists the size of the rover at about 1.7 meters long by 2 meters wide by about a meter high - thats more like a Barbie battery powered toy SUV. I don't think that qualifies as a lunar base.
Trash. Here's a list of people that need to be stripped of their degree or PhD that have pissed off people:
I think you are missing the point. He wasn't stripped of the degree because he pissed someone(s) off through his fraud. He was stripped of his degree (pending his appeal) because he faked his data and that reflects badly on the institution that bestowed that degree, and by extension, cheapens others who have degrees from that institution. Not that I agree that its right, but that's the logic.
Actually the Enterprise was designed to be a viable spacecraft that theoretically would work in space. In some ways it is similar to modern designs for large interplanetary spacecraft, with separate sections for habitation, powerplants and propulsion units.
Only the scale models of the Enterprise that they built were 'designed to sit in a studio', the actual design itself was meant to work in space, even if they never thought that it actually would.
I can envision that at some point in the future when we have a space going society some multi-trillionaire having his space yacht built to look just like the original Enterprise. Now that would be cool.
A rocket uses pure thrust to lift stuff and takes a LOT of energy. An airplane can mostly use its wings to support its mass and only needs a fraction of the enery, and its reusable.
Think about the energy a wingless rocket would use to keep a 747 sized mass of cargo in the air for 5 hours, versus what a 747 manages to do it with.
Most animals do not live underwater, they live on land, with exception of beavers, and they already cut down trees.
Fish live in water, but they don't like to build nests in trees.
This is not the ocean where you get corals growing on artifical reefs, these are trees that are not meant to be underwater, and nothing natural utilizes them.
It is not petrified. Just think of it as wood that has been internally washed very very well.
I was once involved with a underwater logging operation recoving trees. All of the stress has been relieved in the wood and it dries perfectly straight and supposedly will never warp. That is one of its values and the reason that Japanese furniture makers treasured it.
We didn't have to use ballons to float the trees to the surface, ususally they floated up on their own. They had only been submerged about 40 years (hydro project). Some of them would jump up to 15 feet above the surface when they came up. It made it interesting to be in boat to say the least.
I looked at the results and figured, ok the Apple is faster, but the Opteron will be cheaper and faster on a per dollar basis. That's not what I found:
G5 server as configured for Apple's linpac test: dual g5, 1gb ram, dual 250gb sata $4799.00 at apple.com achieved 9 gigaflops in Apple's test $533/gigaflop (its worth noting that in Apple's tech paper (link below), they quote $333/gigaflop, but that in a footnote, #5, they base that on a MSRP of 2799 and 9 gigaflop performance. Now where they are getting that price from I don't know, and the math doesn't work out either, so I'm going with my numbers.)
IBM e325 server as configured by Apple for linpac test: dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual scsi 15k 36gb (user installed linux os) $5191.00 at ibm.com achieved 5.9 in Apple's test $878/gigaflop
generic server with similar config as Apple used for IBM server for linpac test: dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual sata 7200 80gb preinstalled linux os $3126.00 at asaservers.com assuming 5.9 in Apple's test $529/gigaflop. (sure you could probably build something cheaper yourself, but this comes with a warranty and support.)
So, for this benchmark, Apple looks like the best performer, and at a good price/performance standpoint too. And to get similar performance, you would need more Opteron blades, which means more space, heat, juice, etc.
Yes, this still leaves a lot up in the air; it would be nice to see these tests run by an independent party, etc, using an AMD hardware configuration that was optimized for the test as the Apple surely was, etc. etc.
Apple's notes on test configurations and performance results for the xserve G5: http://a192.g.akamai.net/7/192/51/0c5b0d0ef0f 03b/w ww.apple.com/server/pdfs/L301323A_XserveG5_TO.pdf
Intermittent hardware errors are a bastard to try and find. Its not even a simple 'swap things out to see if that fixes the problem' like you can do when something is outright dead. You have to swap out a suspected component and the wait to see if the problem crops up, and if it doesn't, does that mean that you have fixed it, or does it mean that it just hasn't reared its intermittant head yet?
Also, not unknown is the prospect that more than one component is damaged and is contributing to the problem, where you get into a situation where you can swap out all of the components one at a time, and nothing ever fixes it.
The shop was being honest when the said it could be the power supply or the motherboard and they were just guessing. Thats all anyone can do in that case.
The cost for troubleshooting this will very quickly surpass the value of the machine. Its what, 3 or 4 years old or something? Consider yourself lucky that you didn't lose your data, and move on to a new machine while you can still copy your data over.
Re:Magnusson Moss Warranty Act
on
Hack Your Car
·
· Score: 1
Illegal? Immoral? What planet do you live on?
Come back to Earth yourself. The poster was just saying that if you killed your engine from hacking the ecu, that it would be illegal/immoral to then restore the orginal configuration and claim that it was a warranty failure and not your own fault.
Slashdot Mirror
NASA already explored this.
It was called the Long Duration Exposure Facility, or LDEF. It was a 10+ ton structure filled with 57 different experiments that the space shuttle carried to orbit in 1984 and retrieved from orbit in 1990.
LDEF link
You're also forgetting about the cold. I think that the lunar night is like -180 c or something. I think that would be a huge challenge for our material sciences to deal with. That is one of the challenges of a lunar base, if they can't put it in a spot with constant sunlight (they think they have found a couple) then the base has to deal with 2 weeks of 100c in the sunlight, followed by 2 weeks of darkness in the impossible cold. Also one of the reasons to go to Mars first. The environment is much more habitable and forgiving. Well, some anyway.
Now if you are moving your whole base around, if an axle breaks, you are now stuck in that spot until/if repairs are made, but you still have your food, water and air generating/recycling equipment with you. everyone lives. Big plus.
Not that it makes any sense to want to orbit the shuttle's transporter, but I guess if we really wanted to we could, just in a 100 bite sized pieces, over the next 20 years or so.
Link to data source
In Soviet Russia, all your base are belong to us!
MOBITAT
HABOT
I think you are missing the point. He wasn't stripped of the degree because he pissed someone(s) off through his fraud. He was stripped of his degree (pending his appeal) because he faked his data and that reflects badly on the institution that bestowed that degree, and by extension, cheapens others who have degrees from that institution. Not that I agree that its right, but that's the logic.
Actually the Enterprise was designed to be a viable spacecraft that theoretically would work in space. In some ways it is similar to modern designs for large interplanetary spacecraft, with separate sections for habitation, powerplants and propulsion units.
Only the scale models of the Enterprise that they built were 'designed to sit in a studio', the actual design itself was meant to work in space, even if they never thought that it actually would.
I can envision that at some point in the future when we have a space going society some multi-trillionaire having his space yacht built to look just like the original Enterprise. Now that would be cool.
A rocket uses pure thrust to lift stuff and takes a LOT of energy. An airplane can mostly use its wings to support its mass and only needs a fraction of the enery, and its reusable.
Think about the energy a wingless rocket would use to keep a 747 sized mass of cargo in the air for 5 hours, versus what a 747 manages to do it with.
Its not that previously it was cost-ineffective, but it was highly dangerous as well as being very difficult. I wish the robot luck.
This is in freshwater lakes, not the ocean.
Most animals do not live underwater, they live on land, with exception of beavers, and they already cut down trees.
Fish live in water, but they don't like to build nests in trees.
This is not the ocean where you get corals growing on artifical reefs, these are trees that are not meant to be underwater, and nothing natural utilizes them.
It is not petrified. Just think of it as wood that has been internally washed very very well.
I was once involved with a underwater logging operation recoving trees. All of the stress has been relieved in the wood and it dries perfectly straight and supposedly will never warp. That is one of its values and the reason that Japanese furniture makers treasured it.
We didn't have to use ballons to float the trees to the surface, ususally they floated up on their own. They had only been submerged about 40 years (hydro project). Some of them would jump up to 15 feet above the surface when they came up. It made it interesting to be in boat to say the least.
Every computer with a network card in it already has a globally unique id (GUID) in its hardware - the MAC address in the network card.
Apple's Xserve G5 Technology Overview
I looked at the results and figured, ok the Apple is faster, but the Opteron will be cheaper and faster on a per dollar basis. That's not what I found:
f 03b/w ww.apple.com/server/pdfs/L301323A_XserveG5_TO.pdf
G5 server as configured for Apple's linpac test:
dual g5, 1gb ram, dual 250gb sata
$4799.00 at apple.com
achieved 9 gigaflops in Apple's test
$533/gigaflop
(its worth noting that in Apple's tech paper (link below), they quote $333/gigaflop, but that in a footnote, #5, they base that on a MSRP of 2799 and 9 gigaflop performance. Now where they are getting that price from I don't know, and the math doesn't work out either, so I'm going with my numbers.)
IBM e325 server as configured by Apple for linpac test:
dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual scsi 15k 36gb
(user installed linux os)
$5191.00 at ibm.com
achieved 5.9 in Apple's test
$878/gigaflop
generic server with similar config as Apple used for IBM server for linpac test:
dual Opteron 246, 1gig 2700, dual sata 7200 80gb
preinstalled linux os
$3126.00 at asaservers.com
assuming 5.9 in Apple's test
$529/gigaflop.
(sure you could probably build something cheaper yourself, but this comes with a warranty and support.)
So, for this benchmark, Apple looks like the best performer, and at a good price/performance standpoint too. And to get similar performance, you would need more Opteron blades, which means more space, heat, juice, etc.
Yes, this still leaves a lot up in the air; it would be nice to see these tests run by an independent party, etc, using an AMD hardware configuration that was optimized for the test as the Apple surely was, etc. etc.
Apple's notes on test configurations and performance results for the xserve G5:
http://a192.g.akamai.net/7/192/51/0c5b0d0ef0
Intermittent hardware errors are a bastard to try and find. Its not even a simple 'swap things out to see if that fixes the problem' like you can do when something is outright dead. You have to swap out a suspected component and the wait to see if the problem crops up, and if it doesn't, does that mean that you have fixed it, or does it mean that it just hasn't reared its intermittant head yet?
Also, not unknown is the prospect that more than one component is damaged and is contributing to the problem, where you get into a situation where you can swap out all of the components one at a time, and nothing ever fixes it.
The shop was being honest when the said it could be the power supply or the motherboard and they were just guessing. Thats all anyone can do in that case.
The cost for troubleshooting this will very quickly surpass the value of the machine. Its what, 3 or 4 years old or something? Consider yourself lucky that you didn't lose your data, and move on to a new machine while you can still copy your data over.
Come back to Earth yourself. The poster was just saying that if you killed your engine from hacking the ecu, that it would be illegal/immoral to then restore the orginal configuration and claim that it was a warranty failure and not your own fault.
"Do not cheer on attacks on the SCO site." .. "Our community believes in freedom of speech, not silencing our opponent's speech through net attacks."
Evidently silencing 'our' communities' speech is ok though?
There has got to be a better argument for coercing people into silence than trumpeting freedom of speech.