I'm not Canadian so my analysis may not be totally the same as it is in America but consider:
Why do people bother doing this kind of thing? Are these people who are rigging the phone systems or (allegedly) tampering with the voting machines getting richer? Are they, themselves the ones running for office (or working closely with those who are?)
By and large no. In our countries (unlike say India where rigging an election can bring you a great deal of personal advancement) they likely won't gain "materially" in a big way. So why do they risk fines and significant jail time (as well as probably being labelled as a felon) for ths kind of thing? It's only an election for Christ's sake!
Well that's exactly it, for (extremely?) religious people it IS for Christ's sake! I mean if you really, truly believe in God, there should be absolutely nothing, including strapping on a bomb vest and blowing up some infidels, that you shouldn't do for the good of God. (In fact, I must say, these Muslims seem to be the only religious people who take God seriously. Not that I'm encouraging you to.). So, tampering with the vote is literally nothing by comparison.
The only things that even come close to religion in motivating people are Family and Country. (I'm not a Bible expert but didn't God ask someone to kill his own kid? So religion is more powerful than Family). And Country is powerful enough as is; just ask Oliver North.
You're right! A quick search shows that there have been cases of voter fraud as you say. (My apologies).
However, an equally quick search checking a non-partisan site (http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/, second hit on Google) indicates that the republican response, not only far outweighs these violations but would not have served to correct them. In fact, as I said before, the only discernible reason for these measures were to disenfranchise voters who were poor and or minorities. These, of course, are in the Democratic demographic.
I said nothing about which party has historically oppressed minorities (but from the subliminal guilt in your response I'd be willing to make a large bet that you're white!). I am fully aware that the Republican party is the heir to Lincoln. However Lyndon B. Johnson knew what he was talking about when he passed the civil rights act that he'd "given the South to the Republicans for a generation". He could read between the lines. Can you?
Unfortunately, judging from the KIND of attacks on Obama it looks like its taking a lot longer than a single generation.
Unfortunately we, in the states (and many other countries?) have also seen this sort of thing.
The Ohio elections were tainted by claims of electronic voting irregularities (don't know what became of that) and I believe several republican operatives have been convicted of similar phone hacking activities. I could go on about the hypocrisy of republican claims of voter fraud (despite ANY actual verified proof) which their solutions have the well documented effect of disenfranchising the poor and minorities. (Notice how many times those who warn you not to trust anyone are, themselves, the ones you shouldn't trust?).
Still, it's evident that the root cause is their religious self-righteousness these people feel that allows them to justify blatantly illegal acts (to only themselves fortunately, we aren't Indonesia yet!). If you honestly believed that you, or your party is doing the work of God (unlike say Obama who Rick Sanctorum says follows a "false theology"), you'd also do ANYTHING to guide you, your family and your country into the arms of God. I suspect some of their moral "leaders" don't really believe this and are just using these issues for personal gain just like they hypocritically advocate economic policies which they know will hurt the average republican voter (but pays off handsomely for them; isn't that right Rush Limbaugh?)
Maybe that's why the founding fathers put such a clear line between Church and State (please read Jefferson's exact, specific, detailed words on the subject before claiming otherwise).
Of course what's really scary are the number of evangelicals who are HOPING that the end times are here and are willing, again, to do anything to bring it about. My American Jewish friend thinks that is the only explanation for the fact that the fate of Israel completely controls American foreign policy (in the last republican debate, all the candidates indicated defending it was of the highest national priority). He cannot imagine that the Jewish lobby, significant as it is, could possibly generate that level of support.
Our only hope, if we get another Republican into office, is that they are one of the hypocritical ones and they understand that blowing up the world won't automatically send them (and their families!) to Heaven. Fortunately, all these religious "leaders" all over the world seem to understand this; notice any high ranking Ayatollahs volunteering for suicide belt duty?
Anyone know if there's going to be a remake of "Fantastic Voyage"? Even though the Futurama spoof was more scientifically accurate (sentient worms?) I found it to be less emotionally thrilling because the characters lives weren't really at stake.
I actually believe this study (please see my post above about cataract surgery) but I was just thinking.
If this were true, wouldn't older people's eyes be more dilated? Because they're trying to get as much light as possible? Has anyone noticed this?
Of course maybe the mechanism that controls eye dilation senses a different frequency of light than what controls circadian rhythms. This might be an interesting topic to pursue further in a study!
How about this; NASA should equip the upcoming 8 BILLION DOLLAR JWST with an ion drive. And put a little extra xenon fuel in the tank!
That way, if something should go wrong with the 8 BILLION DOLLAR spacecraft, there's at least a small chance we'd be able to bring it back to LEO where it could be fixed (like Hubble). We won't have man-rated capability to fix it where it is for probably for another decade.:(
Actually since it's probably way too late to add an ion drive and fuel tank to this thing, why not at least put on some "hard points" so that something could grapple with it without damaging it? We should also develop a space tug, like the one the Swiss (of all people) are doing to de-orbit space junk; but bigger, more powerful and able to go out into deep space (radiation hardened, big fuel tanks). That, combined with tele-operated robots could be very useful. Like when we want to upgrade this thing's optics or instruments (like was done on Hubble several times). I think it's safe to say that sensor technology will likely improve substantially during this thing's lifetime (if it hasn't already!)
These single, super expensive probes (Curiosity, I'm looking at you too!) might be the only way to push back the frontiers of science and technology but they are very scary from a risk management perspective. We're not as rich as we used to be.:(
I've actually been following ion powered (and all space flight) for a long time now and have wondered that ever since Deep Space 1 (no, not a TV series) "proved" the technology worked (that was one of its main jobs, it was a technology demonstrator) they didn't use ion engines on the space craft that used RTGs.
In particular New Horizons has travelled billions of miles coasting to Pluto, 99% of the time in hibernation despite the fact that its plutonium powered RTG is generating electricity whether used or not (it's not a reactor, it is always "on"). Considering the distance it has to travel, an ion drive could've really sped things up (or conversely allowed it to brake, and orbit Pluto!). Cassini might not have been such a good choice because maybe having the drive on doesn't allow good scientific observations (Cassini doesn't have its instruments on a scan tilt platform) and anyway the many delta - V changes might have required more thrust than the very weak ion drives can provide.
Actually, maybe ANY probe headed further than the moon or mars would find this useful. Juno, the Jupiter orbiter had huge solar panels which, during the cruise phase could have powered a decent ion engine. Messenger, the Mercury orbiter, although not going "far", had a huge delta-V requirement and had access to plenty of solar power.
Oh well, at least more and more probes like DAWN use this. I would presume when we return to the outer planets with any really ambitious probes (Europa lander/sub, Titan balloon/boat) they'll use this.
Someday, when we talk about sample return missions and the delta-V requirements at least double (and the fuel requirements go up geoemetrically!), ion drives (or their derivatives like the Vasimir drive) will be essential.
When it became known that the new passports used RFID chips, and people discussed ways that they could be surreptitiously read (and hacked) at a distance, I believe the government said the RFID chips couldn't be read if the passport was closed.
Does anyone know if that is true? Or was that just something said to placate the public? (I figure it might be ok to use passports if this were true, hopefully the only time you'd need to open your passport would be at a government controlled facility which would presumably reduce the chance a hacker would be able to operate unnoticed).
I believe the article mentions that cataract surgery will fix this problem, allowing the full amount of light (in the correct part of the spectrum) back in. (In fact, as a recent slashdot story mentioned, it sometimes allows you to see in the UV!).
I wonder if people will choose to have cataract surgery done even if they have no cataracts. My mom was recently evaluated for the surgery, evidently it's a (relatively) simple procedure; the patient goes home the same day and only has mild discomfort for a few days.
With all this remote sensing and especially with the now (more) common use of ACTIVE sensors, is there any way the average, non-James Bond citizen can know what exactly he's being scanned with?
Sort of like a radar detector for the 21st century; some sort of gadget that would tell you when some space-borne laser is strobing you or some military radar is illuminating you or you're walking through someone's microwave beam spillover? Or is that way beyond being practical now?
It might be interesting to know which (low earth orbit) satellites capable of hi-res imagery are passing overhead. Just so you can look up and wave (or put up a funny sign for google earth). Is there an App for that?
Remember the old "Star Wars" defense system that Reagan wanted a long long time ago? How could (anyone) dream that such a system could possibly work, given the far far inferior computers and sensors that they had (a typical machine had main memory measured in the MB, and processor speeds in MIPS). Even today, our best systems can only hope to knock down a few, primitive, warheads launched by Iran or N. Korea.
One BIG reason was because there was an invention that, had it been implemented, would've revolutionized space warfare (and ballistic missile defense); it was the nuclear bomb pumped X-Ray laser. Supposedly the (last?) brainchild of Edward (Dr. Strangelove) Teller, it was a completely new idea. It was perhaps the first time anyone figured out a plausible way to harness nuclear reactions (MILLIONS of times more powerful than any chemical reaction) into anything other than an explosion. (Remember that all the other fancy weapons; rockets, lasers, rail guns are probably using some sort of wimpy chemical or solar powered energy source. Even the nuclear powered ones have to store their energy in a battery before use; you'd have to store the energy from a nuclear reactor for YEARS before it would match what this released in literally a micro-second).
How it worked was like this. Take a small (100 kiloton size) nuke which output a lot of its energy as radiation (the exact opposite of the so-called "neutron bomb". Surround it with (many) long rods of a special crystalline material, dozens or more is ok. Then, aim each rod at a (presumably) distant target. Detonate the bomb.
The gamma radiation from the nuke will pump up the atoms in the crystalline material just like as in an ordinary laser the photo flash tubes pumps up the ruby crystal (but millions of times more intensely!). Then, in the nanoseconds before the shockwave arrives, the atoms will "lase" sending out an INCREDIBLY powerful x-ray beam down the axis (better make sure the other end isn't pointed at something you'd like to keep). Anything on the receiving end will receive a punch so powerful as to make any kind of defense or shielding irrelevant.
Accurate aiming, even at very distant targets wasn't going to be a problem because the beam spreads (as a function of the aspect ratio of the section of the rod). So, even if the target is moving, fast or evasively, you're still going to get it in the beam. Of course this spreading reduces the power of the beam but since it is so powerful to begin with, (it was powered by a NUKE) the range was tremendous.
When I first heard of this I dismissed the idea but then I remembered that Dr. Teller was one of the world experts in radiation pressure from nuclear weapons. He came up with the first practical (small enough for an airplane) design for an H-Bomb; by focusing the radiation pressure from a fissile bomb, it could be used to ignite a tritium-deuterium core. So his idea had some legs to it and became one of the primary pieces in Reagan's "Star Wars". As he proposed it, he'd put the X-ray nukes in missiles in submarines. Then, upon detection of launch by the enemy, these things would "pop up" and destroy the oncoming warheads with each blast. This solved two problems; first the U.S. wouldn't have to put any nukes (or any other weapons) in orbit which would violate the 1967 outer space treaty (amazing how Reagan, unlike Bush, respected treaties). Secondly, since each blast could take out dozens if not hundreds of enemy targets, it was an effective defense against MIRV's which (before Reagan negotiated the START treaties) was leading both sides to a very risky "first strike" scenario.
Well, as you know, "Star Wars" was never built, quite possibly because this idea was never practical. However, I never did find out if it was because the physics behind it didn't work out or because (as I said earlier) the computers and sensors of the day were not up to the battle management challenge. Consider playing a real-life real-time 3D missile command with tens of thousands of
You know, I would imagine every field biologist (and people like me who wish they were one;) would love these things once they get just a bit cheaper.
How cool would it be to find some plant or little creature and say, what is that? (Big animals it might not be safe to get a sample from!). Maybe if the results went to some central repository like 'The Encyclopedia of Life", it could really help biological studies (not necessarily by finding undiscovered species but helping to determine the range of existing ones. Also genetic drift and, gasp, evolution!)
Of course, if it's that good and cheap, there is all sorts of mischief that could be played. Want to embarrass someone who may have illegitimate children? (I read somewhere that in a little british village, they found 1/4 of the children didn't have the fathers they thought they did). Get a lock of hair from parent and child (maybe a fingerprint would do). Want to see if your favorite celebrity/politician was susceptible to alcoholism? I'm sure the new DNA paparazi will find out.
It'll be interesting to see what new privacy laws come out of this.
With Microsoft's stock not performing for the last few years (a decade?) maybe Apple should just buy Microsoft with it's gigantic amount of cash ($100B and soaring!).
Not only would it guarantee, forever, Microsoft products on Apple platforms but it would enable Apple to completely dictate the future of the PC industry. Even Android would probably crumble, what use is your smartphone if your competitor controls ALL the PCs that you'd likely use it with? As well as providing a viable alternative to Google search?
Maybe that's why Apple's been saving its pennies. Can you think of a better use for (in a few years) a couple hundred billion dollars?
(Ok, ok, I know the regulatory agencies in all over the world will likely have some anti-trust issues with this. But it's a useful fantasy to see what Apple's cash hoard could be used for.)
I think a moments thought will make someone realize that the possibilities for using these for terrorist (or assassination also known as "targeted killing") is real.
How hard would it be to attach a simple grenade to one of these things? Or a lightweight gun? Combined this a cell phone or GPS trigger (gives a new application for Geo-fencing) and you've got a device that can be triggered at distance.
I know that the "rules" will prohibit them fom being used out of sight of the controller but I imagine many slashdotters here could easily come up with a hack around that. Even if the "target" (presumably some important political event) uses counter-measures such as, perhaps, a local GPS jammer during an event (sure to upset the neighbors), you'd imagine that it would be (relatively) easy to put a video camera on the thing and fly it to the target by communicating with it via 3G or 4G. I doubt the authorities will shut THAT down every time there's a political rally! Who knows, with the power of the latest smartphones, maybe you could have the drone run "face recognition" software and track down your target without any ground control at all! (Maybe though politicians would put their faces on balloons at every event to deceive these systems; at least they've got plenty of hot air).
So will we be seeing political rallies/major gatherings guarded by tiny anti-aircraft batteries? (It would be kinda neat to see laser batteries being used). What other solutions are there which would still permit the widespread use of these toys I mean tools?
You know, speaking as an Apple Fanboi, I'll admit they made a goof with the antenna design. While maybe not "bad" (or worse than its competitors) there was clearly a design flaw and it could've been better.
That's (one of the reasons) why I waited for the 4S.
They fixed that problem and added some new features. I'm sure there will never again be an obvious antenna flaw on any Apple iProduct. Isn't that right Siri?
Good point (and yes I used my 30" Apple Cinema display for post with my big workstation).
I should emphasized portability, both for use with the camera for shots and with a portable (laptop) workstation. The power of the latest machines, with GPU acceleration makes them very useful in the field.
So the most commonly used format for digital cinema is 2048x1080 (4K is not widely used, yet). Notice that it is just a little bit wider than 1080p (128 pixels). So either cinematographers have had to scale down the outputs from their digital cameras/post production workstations to use "standard" HD displays (and suffer scaling artifacts), throw away the pixels on the side, or use very expensive professional equipment.
Could the iPad 3 display be used instead? If the iPad 3 has thunderbolt (now THAT would be interesting), could it be used as a (very) portable display?
I am such an Apple Fanboi you wouldn't believe but if Samsung came out with a tablet that, at the flip of a switch, coud be used as a portable, digital cinema ready display, I would buy it so fast it would make Steve Jobs spin. (hope that wasn't too morbid or disrespectful).
So submissions shoud be treated differently than comments? Never thought of that but that might explain why even when my submission was rejected, people seemed to enjoy the very same post as a comment. Here's an example:
I submitted this a few hours before this one. (That makes three for three recent submissions of mine that were in the/recent queue and just vanished!). I guess for this one they didn't like my alarmist tone. Anyway, these guys say the studies will stay secret but the New York Times link I provided says they will be releasing the full details (after a delay).
Here is my submission:
wisebabo writes "So they're going to release FULL details of how to make this? Time to whip up my bio-reactor!
Ok, so this easily transmissible human to human virus (as predicted by ferret models) *only* has a lethality of 50% but that should be enough to collapse civilization. At least it'll help cut down on global warming.
Still that doesn't compare with that (smallpox?) variant which had an almost 100% fatality rate. I remember the publication for that one was suppressed pretty fast. I guess they think this one isn't nearly as dangerous which i would agree with except for the fact that it is AIRBORNE TRANSMISSIBLE (it's based on the Flu!). Boy is sneezing going to be a real conversation killer!
Seems like we've solved the Fermi Paradox; once a species has figured out to make or modify self-replicating nano bots (like viruses), they'll inevitably make one that will in one way or another wipe them out.
Hey, let's see if we can get them to release this in time for 12/21/12!"
Actually, as I mentioned later in my other post "Stupid auto-correct", does the moon's 1/6th gravity help?
I mean does it give you six times longer to react so that the 2.5 seconds you point out "feels" more like.32 seconds?
Of course this only is true because of the moon's weaker gravity (and it won't help for any non-gravity related motion, like driving into a wall) but maybe that's good enough.
Sounds like a good research topic that could be easily(?) done in simulation!
Also the sub-poster makes a good point. While an astronaut in orbit around the MOON (not earth) would be much closer, he would still have to go through a lunar relay at least half the time. In any case, compared with the cost of just running it from a nice beach resort (okay lab) on earth, the 1-1/2 second time delay seems acceptable.
It's helped out by the moons 1/6 gee. So if you drop something, you have six times longer to react!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not Canadian so my analysis may not be totally the same as it is in America but consider:
Why do people bother doing this kind of thing? Are these people who are rigging the phone systems or (allegedly) tampering with the voting machines getting richer? Are they, themselves the ones running for office (or working closely with those who are?)
By and large no. In our countries (unlike say India where rigging an election can bring you a great deal of personal advancement) they likely won't gain "materially" in a big way. So why do they risk fines and significant jail time (as well as probably being labelled as a felon) for ths kind of thing? It's only an election for Christ's sake!
Well that's exactly it, for (extremely?) religious people it IS for Christ's sake! I mean if you really, truly believe in God, there should be absolutely nothing, including strapping on a bomb vest and blowing up some infidels, that you shouldn't do for the good of God. (In fact, I must say, these Muslims seem to be the only religious people who take God seriously. Not that I'm encouraging you to.). So, tampering with the vote is literally nothing by comparison.
The only things that even come close to religion in motivating people are Family and Country. (I'm not a Bible expert but didn't God ask someone to kill his own kid? So religion is more powerful than Family). And Country is powerful enough as is; just ask Oliver North.
You're right! A quick search shows that there have been cases of voter fraud as you say. (My apologies).
However, an equally quick search checking a non-partisan site (http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/, second hit on Google) indicates that the republican response, not only far outweighs these violations but would not have served to correct them. In fact, as I said before, the only discernible reason for these measures were to disenfranchise voters who were poor and or minorities. These, of course, are in the Democratic demographic.
I said nothing about which party has historically oppressed minorities (but from the subliminal guilt in your response I'd be willing to make a large bet that you're white!). I am fully aware that the Republican party is the heir to Lincoln. However Lyndon B. Johnson knew what he was talking about when he passed the civil rights act that he'd "given the South to the Republicans for a generation". He could read between the lines. Can you?
Unfortunately, judging from the KIND of attacks on Obama it looks like its taking a lot longer than a single generation.
Unfortunately we, in the states (and many other countries?) have also seen this sort of thing.
The Ohio elections were tainted by claims of electronic voting irregularities (don't know what became of that) and I believe several republican operatives have been convicted of similar phone hacking activities. I could go on about the hypocrisy of republican claims of voter fraud (despite ANY actual verified proof) which their solutions have the well documented effect of disenfranchising the poor and minorities. (Notice how many times those who warn you not to trust anyone are, themselves, the ones you shouldn't trust?).
Still, it's evident that the root cause is their religious self-righteousness these people feel that allows them to justify blatantly illegal acts (to only themselves fortunately, we aren't Indonesia yet!). If you honestly believed that you, or your party is doing the work of God (unlike say Obama who Rick Sanctorum says follows a "false theology"), you'd also do ANYTHING to guide you, your family and your country into the arms of God. I suspect some of their moral "leaders" don't really believe this and are just using these issues for personal gain just like they hypocritically advocate economic policies which they know will hurt the average republican voter (but pays off handsomely for them; isn't that right Rush Limbaugh?)
Maybe that's why the founding fathers put such a clear line between Church and State (please read Jefferson's exact, specific, detailed words on the subject before claiming otherwise).
Of course what's really scary are the number of evangelicals who are HOPING that the end times are here and are willing, again, to do anything to bring it about. My American Jewish friend thinks that is the only explanation for the fact that the fate of Israel completely controls American foreign policy (in the last republican debate, all the candidates indicated defending it was of the highest national priority). He cannot imagine that the Jewish lobby, significant as it is, could possibly generate that level of support.
Our only hope, if we get another Republican into office, is that they are one of the hypocritical ones and they understand that blowing up the world won't automatically send them (and their families!) to Heaven. Fortunately, all these religious "leaders" all over the world seem to understand this; notice any high ranking Ayatollahs volunteering for suicide belt duty?
... a tiny Raquel Welch?
Anyone know if there's going to be a remake of "Fantastic Voyage"? Even though the Futurama spoof was more scientifically accurate (sentient worms?) I found it to be less emotionally thrilling because the characters lives weren't really at stake.
*ducks* (get it? ;)
I actually believe this study (please see my post above about cataract surgery) but I was just thinking.
If this were true, wouldn't older people's eyes be more dilated? Because they're trying to get as much light as possible? Has anyone noticed this?
Of course maybe the mechanism that controls eye dilation senses a different frequency of light than what controls circadian rhythms. This might be an interesting topic to pursue further in a study!
How about this; NASA should equip the upcoming 8 BILLION DOLLAR JWST with an ion drive. And put a little extra xenon fuel in the tank!
That way, if something should go wrong with the 8 BILLION DOLLAR spacecraft, there's at least a small chance we'd be able to bring it back to LEO where it could be fixed (like Hubble). We won't have man-rated capability to fix it where it is for probably for another decade. :(
Actually since it's probably way too late to add an ion drive and fuel tank to this thing, why not at least put on some "hard points" so that something could grapple with it without damaging it? We should also develop a space tug, like the one the Swiss (of all people) are doing to de-orbit space junk; but bigger, more powerful and able to go out into deep space (radiation hardened, big fuel tanks). That, combined with tele-operated robots could be very useful. Like when we want to upgrade this thing's optics or instruments (like was done on Hubble several times). I think it's safe to say that sensor technology will likely improve substantially during this thing's lifetime (if it hasn't already!)
These single, super expensive probes (Curiosity, I'm looking at you too!) might be the only way to push back the frontiers of science and technology but they are very scary from a risk management perspective. We're not as rich as we used to be. :(
But if you do, maybe it coud sniff out the RFID data in passports:
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/21/1933213/damaged-us-passport-chip-strands-travelers
I've actually been following ion powered (and all space flight) for a long time now and have wondered that ever since Deep Space 1 (no, not a TV series) "proved" the technology worked (that was one of its main jobs, it was a technology demonstrator) they didn't use ion engines on the space craft that used RTGs.
In particular New Horizons has travelled billions of miles coasting to Pluto, 99% of the time in hibernation despite the fact that its plutonium powered RTG is generating electricity whether used or not (it's not a reactor, it is always "on"). Considering the distance it has to travel, an ion drive could've really sped things up (or conversely allowed it to brake, and orbit Pluto!). Cassini might not have been such a good choice because maybe having the drive on doesn't allow good scientific observations (Cassini doesn't have its instruments on a scan tilt platform) and anyway the many delta - V changes might have required more thrust than the very weak ion drives can provide.
Actually, maybe ANY probe headed further than the moon or mars would find this useful. Juno, the Jupiter orbiter had huge solar panels which, during the cruise phase could have powered a decent ion engine. Messenger, the Mercury orbiter, although not going "far", had a huge delta-V requirement and had access to plenty of solar power.
Oh well, at least more and more probes like DAWN use this. I would presume when we return to the outer planets with any really ambitious probes (Europa lander/sub, Titan balloon/boat) they'll use this.
Someday, when we talk about sample return missions and the delta-V requirements at least double (and the fuel requirements go up geoemetrically!), ion drives (or their derivatives like the Vasimir drive) will be essential.
That would've been even more impressive than his math abilities.
When it became known that the new passports used RFID chips, and people discussed ways that they could be surreptitiously read (and hacked) at a distance, I believe the government said the RFID chips couldn't be read if the passport was closed.
Does anyone know if that is true? Or was that just something said to placate the public? (I figure it might be ok to use passports if this were true, hopefully the only time you'd need to open your passport would be at a government controlled facility which would presumably reduce the chance a hacker would be able to operate unnoticed).
I believe the article mentions that cataract surgery will fix this problem, allowing the full amount of light (in the correct part of the spectrum) back in. (In fact, as a recent slashdot story mentioned, it sometimes allows you to see in the UV!).
I wonder if people will choose to have cataract surgery done even if they have no cataracts. My mom was recently evaluated for the surgery, evidently it's a (relatively) simple procedure; the patient goes home the same day and only has mild discomfort for a few days.
Hi Carl!
With all this remote sensing and especially with the now (more) common use of ACTIVE sensors, is there any way the average, non-James Bond citizen can know what exactly he's being scanned with?
Sort of like a radar detector for the 21st century; some sort of gadget that would tell you when some space-borne laser is strobing you or some military radar is illuminating you or you're walking through someone's microwave beam spillover? Or is that way beyond being practical now?
It might be interesting to know which (low earth orbit) satellites capable of hi-res imagery are passing overhead. Just so you can look up and wave (or put up a funny sign for google earth). Is there an App for that?
Remember the old "Star Wars" defense system that Reagan wanted a long long time ago? How could (anyone) dream that such a system could possibly work, given the far far inferior computers and sensors that they had (a typical machine had main memory measured in the MB, and processor speeds in MIPS). Even today, our best systems can only hope to knock down a few, primitive, warheads launched by Iran or N. Korea.
One BIG reason was because there was an invention that, had it been implemented, would've revolutionized space warfare (and ballistic missile defense); it was the nuclear bomb pumped X-Ray laser. Supposedly the (last?) brainchild of Edward (Dr. Strangelove) Teller, it was a completely new idea. It was perhaps the first time anyone figured out a plausible way to harness nuclear reactions (MILLIONS of times more powerful than any chemical reaction) into anything other than an explosion. (Remember that all the other fancy weapons; rockets, lasers, rail guns are probably using some sort of wimpy chemical or solar powered energy source. Even the nuclear powered ones have to store their energy in a battery before use; you'd have to store the energy from a nuclear reactor for YEARS before it would match what this released in literally a micro-second).
How it worked was like this. Take a small (100 kiloton size) nuke which output a lot of its energy as radiation (the exact opposite of the so-called "neutron bomb". Surround it with (many) long rods of a special crystalline material, dozens or more is ok. Then, aim each rod at a (presumably) distant target. Detonate the bomb.
The gamma radiation from the nuke will pump up the atoms in the crystalline material just like as in an ordinary laser the photo flash tubes pumps up the ruby crystal (but millions of times more intensely!). Then, in the nanoseconds before the shockwave arrives, the atoms will "lase" sending out an INCREDIBLY powerful x-ray beam down the axis (better make sure the other end isn't pointed at something you'd like to keep). Anything on the receiving end will receive a punch so powerful as to make any kind of defense or shielding irrelevant.
Accurate aiming, even at very distant targets wasn't going to be a problem because the beam spreads (as a function of the aspect ratio of the section of the rod). So, even if the target is moving, fast or evasively, you're still going to get it in the beam. Of course this spreading reduces the power of the beam but since it is so powerful to begin with, (it was powered by a NUKE) the range was tremendous.
When I first heard of this I dismissed the idea but then I remembered that Dr. Teller was one of the world experts in radiation pressure from nuclear weapons. He came up with the first practical (small enough for an airplane) design for an H-Bomb; by focusing the radiation pressure from a fissile bomb, it could be used to ignite a tritium-deuterium core. So his idea had some legs to it and became one of the primary pieces in Reagan's "Star Wars". As he proposed it, he'd put the X-ray nukes in missiles in submarines. Then, upon detection of launch by the enemy, these things would "pop up" and destroy the oncoming warheads with each blast. This solved two problems; first the U.S. wouldn't have to put any nukes (or any other weapons) in orbit which would violate the 1967 outer space treaty (amazing how Reagan, unlike Bush, respected treaties). Secondly, since each blast could take out dozens if not hundreds of enemy targets, it was an effective defense against MIRV's which (before Reagan negotiated the START treaties) was leading both sides to a very risky "first strike" scenario.
Well, as you know, "Star Wars" was never built, quite possibly because this idea was never practical. However, I never did find out if it was because the physics behind it didn't work out or because (as I said earlier) the computers and sensors of the day were not up to the battle management challenge. Consider playing a real-life real-time 3D missile command with tens of thousands of
You know, I would imagine every field biologist (and people like me who wish they were one ;) would love these things once they get just a bit cheaper.
How cool would it be to find some plant or little creature and say, what is that? (Big animals it might not be safe to get a sample from!). Maybe if the results went to some central repository like 'The Encyclopedia of Life", it could really help biological studies (not necessarily by finding undiscovered species but helping to determine the range of existing ones. Also genetic drift and, gasp, evolution!)
Of course, if it's that good and cheap, there is all sorts of mischief that could be played. Want to embarrass someone who may have illegitimate children? (I read somewhere that in a little british village, they found 1/4 of the children didn't have the fathers they thought they did). Get a lock of hair from parent and child (maybe a fingerprint would do). Want to see if your favorite celebrity/politician was susceptible to alcoholism? I'm sure the new DNA paparazi will find out.
It'll be interesting to see what new privacy laws come out of this.
With Microsoft's stock not performing for the last few years (a decade?) maybe Apple should just buy Microsoft with it's gigantic amount of cash ($100B and soaring!).
Not only would it guarantee, forever, Microsoft products on Apple platforms but it would enable Apple to completely dictate the future of the PC industry. Even Android would probably crumble, what use is your smartphone if your competitor controls ALL the PCs that you'd likely use it with? As well as providing a viable alternative to Google search?
Maybe that's why Apple's been saving its pennies. Can you think of a better use for (in a few years) a couple hundred billion dollars?
(Ok, ok, I know the regulatory agencies in all over the world will likely have some anti-trust issues with this. But it's a useful fantasy to see what Apple's cash hoard could be used for.)
I think a moments thought will make someone realize that the possibilities for using these for terrorist (or assassination also known as "targeted killing") is real.
How hard would it be to attach a simple grenade to one of these things? Or a lightweight gun? Combined this a cell phone or GPS trigger (gives a new application for Geo-fencing) and you've got a device that can be triggered at distance.
I know that the "rules" will prohibit them fom being used out of sight of the controller but I imagine many slashdotters here could easily come up with a hack around that. Even if the "target" (presumably some important political event) uses counter-measures such as, perhaps, a local GPS jammer during an event (sure to upset the neighbors), you'd imagine that it would be (relatively) easy to put a video camera on the thing and fly it to the target by communicating with it via 3G or 4G. I doubt the authorities will shut THAT down every time there's a political rally! Who knows, with the power of the latest smartphones, maybe you could have the drone run "face recognition" software and track down your target without any ground control at all! (Maybe though politicians would put their faces on balloons at every event to deceive these systems; at least they've got plenty of hot air).
So will we be seeing political rallies/major gatherings guarded by tiny anti-aircraft batteries? (It would be kinda neat to see laser batteries being used). What other solutions are there which would still permit the widespread use of these toys I mean tools?
You know, speaking as an Apple Fanboi, I'll admit they made a goof with the antenna design. While maybe not "bad" (or worse than its competitors) there was clearly a design flaw and it could've been better.
That's (one of the reasons) why I waited for the 4S.
They fixed that problem and added some new features. I'm sure there will never again be an obvious antenna flaw on any Apple iProduct. Isn't that right Siri?
Good point (and yes I used my 30" Apple Cinema display for post with my big workstation).
I should emphasized portability, both for use with the camera for shots and with a portable (laptop) workstation. The power of the latest machines, with GPU acceleration makes them very useful in the field.
So the most commonly used format for digital cinema is 2048x1080 (4K is not widely used, yet). Notice that it is just a little bit wider than 1080p (128 pixels). So either cinematographers have had to scale down the outputs from their digital cameras/post production workstations to use "standard" HD displays (and suffer scaling artifacts), throw away the pixels on the side, or use very expensive professional equipment.
Could the iPad 3 display be used instead? If the iPad 3 has thunderbolt (now THAT would be interesting), could it be used as a (very) portable display?
I am such an Apple Fanboi you wouldn't believe but if Samsung came out with a tablet that, at the flip of a switch, coud be used as a portable, digital cinema ready display, I would buy it so fast it would make Steve Jobs spin. (hope that wasn't too morbid or disrespectful).
So submissions shoud be treated differently than comments? Never thought of that but that might explain why even when my submission was rejected, people seemed to enjoy the very same post as a comment. Here's an example:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2677993&cid=39078095
I submitted this a few hours before this one. (That makes three for three recent submissions of mine that were in the /recent queue and just vanished!). I guess for this one they didn't like my alarmist tone. Anyway, these guys say the studies will stay secret but the New York Times link I provided says they will be releasing the full details (after a delay).
Here is my submission:
wisebabo writes
"So they're going to release FULL details of how to make this? Time to whip up my bio-reactor!
Ok, so this easily transmissible human to human virus (as predicted by ferret models) *only* has a lethality of 50% but that should be enough to collapse civilization. At least it'll help cut down on global warming.
Still that doesn't compare with that (smallpox?) variant which had an almost 100% fatality rate. I remember the publication for that one was suppressed pretty fast. I guess they think this one isn't nearly as dangerous which i would agree with except for the fact that it is AIRBORNE TRANSMISSIBLE (it's based on the Flu!). Boy is sneezing going to be a real conversation killer!
Seems like we've solved the Fermi Paradox; once a species has figured out to make or modify self-replicating nano bots (like viruses), they'll inevitably make one that will in one way or another wipe them out.
Hey, let's see if we can get them to release this in time for 12/21/12!"
Link to Original Source
... even if she didn't (herself) know that she was pregnant! I thought maybe Target had pheromone/hormone sniffers or hidden ultra-sound scanners.
Now THAT would be creepy!
Actually, as I mentioned later in my other post "Stupid auto-correct", does the moon's 1/6th gravity help?
I mean does it give you six times longer to react so that the 2.5 seconds you point out "feels" more like .32 seconds?
Of course this only is true because of the moon's weaker gravity (and it won't help for any non-gravity related motion, like driving into a wall) but maybe that's good enough.
Sounds like a good research topic that could be easily(?) done in simulation!
I meant "telepresence" not television!
Also the sub-poster makes a good point. While an astronaut in orbit around the MOON (not earth) would be much closer, he would still have to go through a lunar relay at least half the time. In any case, compared with the cost of just running it from a nice beach resort (okay lab) on earth, the 1-1/2 second time delay seems acceptable.
It's helped out by the moons 1/6 gee. So if you drop something, you have six times longer to react!